I voted libertarian, but I'd be much happier with authoritarian if I were the authority :^D This country would be a much different place if that were the case ;^)
Could you elaborate on what's inaccurate about them please? Your very definitions of the terms may say quite a bit about your politics, which is what this thread/poll is about.
That would be inappropriate to discuss on a snus-forum. Really!
To give a hint, every political direction seeks to ameliorate the life of everyone and every political party (in democratic countries at least) seeks to get a majority of the votes, meaning to provide substantial benefits to at least 50% of the population through their policy. Some of the definitions of political directions, who historically ruled all democratic countries around the world sound like the parties who identify with them would never have gotten more than 1% of the votes.
The descriptions of the different political directions aren't correct IMHO. They sound like an elementary-school-approach to define them. I won't participate on the poll.
Cheers!
Could you elaborate on what's inaccurate about them please? Your very definitions of the terms may say quite a bit about your politics, which is what this thread/poll is about.
No I gotta agree, the definitions dont go into how leftism is about redistribution of wealth, high taxes in return for social program handouts, and large gov. Also doesnt mention in Rightist definition that they believe in low taxes and small government, and traditional value such as no abortion etc.
libertarian is a wierd term to define because many different parties acll themselves libertarians but it generally refers to small government, strong observance of the constitution and very low taxes. Most emphasis being on a smaller government, since the constitution only allows the fed gov to handle about 20 things, and controlling banks and giving warranty's for cars is not one of them.
I was an anarchist activist at Berkeley. Was arrested 13 times in the mid, late 80's. I have mellowed with age, share certain social libertarian ideals but largely find today's current Republican party disgusting.
I was an anarchist activist at Berkeley. Was arrested 13 times in the mid, late 80's. I have mellowed with age, share certain social libertarian ideals but largely find today's current Republican party disgusting.
The descriptions of the different political directions aren't correct IMHO. They sound like an elementary-school-approach to define them. I won't participate on the poll.
Cheers!
Could you elaborate on what's inaccurate about them please? Your very definitions of the terms may say quite a bit about your politics, which is what this thread/poll is about.
No I gotta agree, the definitions dont go into how leftism is about redistribution of wealth, high taxes in return for social program handouts, and large gov.
Umm... "In politics, left-wing, leftist, and the Left are terms applied to positions that focus on gradual or radical progressivism and a more egalitarian (read as 'equal') distribution of wealth and privilege."
I think that pretty much covers leftism in a nut shell. Wealth redistribution requires a larger government, it's implied.
Also doesnt mention in Rightist definition that they believe in low taxes and small government, and traditional value such as no abortion etc.
Err... "Rightism: In politics, right-wing, rightist and the Right are terms applied to positions that focus on adherance and obedience to traditional values.... [In America] it is based on individualism and a capitalist view of economic competition...
It's not supposed to be a platform of issues. It doesn't list specific things like abortion because not every rightist is in favor of making abortion illegal, etc. How is it inaccurate?
No I gotta agree, the definitions dont go into how leftism is about redistribution of wealth
I've stayed out of this political stuff on here because I just don't want to get into arguments, and let me make clear that an argument is not what I'm looking for. That being said, sgreger1, do you think that we should have taxes at all? If you do, do you understand that the very nature of a tax of any sort is to redistribute wealth?
The taxes we pay, high or low, redistribute wealth for the purpose of doing such things as building roads, building schools that I assume you attended, unless you went to private school. Funding the military, etc... etc... The whole accusation of leftist/democrats/Obama being a socialist because they want to increase the highest tax bracket from 36% to 39% is a farce.
Taxes of any sort are redistribution of wealth by definition. Unless you want no taxes at all, you support redistribution of wealth, and that's a fact.
I don't believe in taxes whatsoever. Privatize everything but the police/ army/ other government security. I'm sure there are ways to fund these operations. Taxes are not the way to do it. And if taxes were to be used to fund these, they should not be used for other things-- ie. homeless shelters, food stamps, health care, etc. It's gone overboard. If you're saying it's not socialism, I suggest you take a step back and really look at how easy it is to live unemployed in this country. If you really try, you can just sit back and let taxpayers give you everything.
That's fair if you don't believe in taxes. I respectfully disagree. I'm just trying to get rid of this redistribution of wealth phrase getting thrown around as if it's a liberal idea only. Traditionally conservatives believe in taxes as well, which is redistribution of wealth. If you want to use that phrase and truly don't believe in taxes, fair. Just know that the roads you drive on daily are paid by taxes etc... You really rely on taxes more than you might realize.
Also, I'm coming off of being unemployed for 7 months, and It was far from easy. I received no gov't assistance as I wasn't eligible, and if I didn't have the luxury of parents to move back in with, I would have been on the streets.
I'm not judging or imposing on anybody's beliefs here, just trying to clarify the true definition of a phrase.
if you're 20 and not yet a liberal,you have no heart.
If you're 40 and not yet a conservative,you have no brain.
If you're 50 and have not yet realized that they're all lying self serving thieves in 3 pc suits who only ask if that is all you can do for them and their myriad agendas to further despoil your country,constitution,and ideals....You haven't been paying attention!
Comment