Where do *YOU* think *OTHER* War Room regulars sit on the U.S political spectrum?

Rational Poster said:
Your mother was a commie and she sucked all the dicks to keep things equal.
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
 
Trotsky said:
Although, "economically liberal" is kind of a misnomer. Economic liberalism, i.e. freedom from economic regulation and location of economic decisions to individual actors, is consistent with the GOP.
Click to expand...

I think there's a lot of confusion here (not necessarily from you) about what liberalism is. It's more of a way of thinking than a set of positions on issues, and it's consistent with a wide range of views. But I think Diogenes just meant "left-leaning" in the sense of supporting a strong safety net, protections for workers and consumers, and programs to increase opportunity for people of lower SES to climb the ladder and get more opportunity, if not even further-left preferences.
 
I'm a fiscal conservative/social moderate. Wherever that puts me.
 
Captain Davis said:
I'm a fiscal conservative/social moderate. Wherever that puts me.
Click to expand...

"Fiscal conservative" is another term that has been targeted by propagandists and has thus kind of lost its meaning. Used to just mean favoring lower deficits/debt. But now people who favor massive regressive tax *cuts* that would cause deficits to rise also call themselves "fiscal conservatives."
 
Jack V Savage said:
"Fiscal conservative" is another term that has been targeted by propagandists and has thus kind of lost its meaning. Used to just mean favoring lower deficits/debt. But now people who favor massive regressive tax *cuts* that would cause deficits to rise also call themselves "fiscal conservatives."
Click to expand...
I'm not sure then. Lower taxes, pro business, least amount of government intervention necessary. I'm close to a Libertarian, but not quite that extreme.
 
Captain Davis said:
I'm not sure then. Lower taxes, pro business, least amount of government intervention necessary. I'm close to a Libertarian, but not quite that extreme.
Click to expand...
You're principled and decent enough to be a moderate conservative, but gullible enough to become a fascist.
 
 
Captain Davis said:
I'm not sure then. Lower taxes, pro business, least amount of government intervention necessary. I'm close to a Libertarian, but not quite that extreme.
Click to expand...

Honestly, we can go down a rabbit hole on all of that ("pro business" can mean policy that benefits existing businesses at the expense of their workers, consumers, or other citizens; existing businesses at the expense of new businesses; new businesses at the expense of old ones; and more, for example). But that's probably a waste. I think I know what you mean. Weaker safety net, lower taxes on very high incomes/investment income, and fewer regulations, right?
 
KONE said:
Hey look it's the guy who is anti-free speech and defended pedophilia talking down to people again, all while winning 3rd worst poster on the entire forum
Click to expand...


That had a contest? How did i do?
 
Jack V Savage said:
I think there's a lot of confusion here (not necessarily from you) about what liberalism is. It's more of a way of thinking than a set of positions on issues, and it's consistent with a wide range of views. But I think Diogenes just meant "left-leaning" in the sense of supporting a strong safety net, protections for workers and consumers, and programs to increase opportunity for people of lower SES to climb the ladder and get more opportunity, if not even further-left preferences.
Click to expand...

It's a complicated topic, to be sure. And I knew what he meant. But there is a bubbling tension between the American concept of liberalism, and its political etymology, and the aims of leftists-- even pragmatic ones--who despise the "liberal" label and its connotation of privileged carefree-ness.

It swings largely on what policy characteristics Americans value and what ones they take for granted. For instance, by every indicator valued by the American liberal post-1980, burgeoning Democratic superstar Cory Booker is as "left" as they come: he opposes authoritarian domestic measures such as the war on drugs and is colorfully supportive of minority groups. However, his penchants for economic liberalization and hollow pro-capitalist rhetoric, land and public service privatization, and complete disregard of workers unions betray the fundamental aims of the left at cooperatively achieving greater levels of equality from the bottom up, not just the doctrinal possibility of it occurring from the top down. Truthfully, Carter, Clinton, and Obama's similar ambivalence on those matters, and especially their disregard for collective bargaining, strikes at the schism. American liberals, and economic liberalism in principle, is complicit with disparate ownership of resources on the basis of state compulsion of more egalitarian distributions of their dividends. The leftist realizes private capital will never willfully concede power, nor will it be distinct from the state.

I'm ranting and I'm sure that you already know all of this, but for anyone reading, this is why your local Marxist might flinch at being called a "liberal" or his views being equated to "liberalism".
 
Jack V Savage said:
Honestly, we can go down a rabbit hole on all of that ("pro business" can mean policy that benefits existing businesses at the expense of their workers, consumers, or other citizens; existing businesses at the expense of new businesses; new businesses at the expense of old ones; and more, for example). But that's probably a waste. I think I know what you mean. Weaker safety net, lower taxes on very high incomes/investment income, and fewer regulations, right?
Click to expand...
Pretty much
 
Fawlty said:
You're principled and decent enough to be a moderate conservative, but gullible enough to become a fascist.
Click to expand...
I could be a fascist if I believed in the message. I am a strong nationalist, so there's that.

Murica, fuck yeah!
 
Trotsky said:
It's a complicated topic, to be sure. And I knew what he meant. But there is a bubbling tension between the American concept of liberalism, and its political etymology, and the aims of leftists-- even pragmatic ones--who despise the "liberal" label and its connotation of privileged carefree-ness.

It swings largely on what policy characteristics Americans value and what ones they take for granted. For instance, by every indicator valued by the American liberal post-1980, burgeoning Democratic superstar Cory Booker is as "left" as they come: he opposes authoritarian domestic measures such as the war on drugs and is colorfully supportive of minority groups. However, his penchants for economic liberalization and hollow pro-capitalist rhetoric, land and public service privatization, and complete disregard of workers unions betray the fundamental aims of the left at cooperatively achieving greater levels of equality from the bottom up, not just the doctrinal possibility of it occurring from the top down. Truthfully, Carter, Clinton, and Obama's similar ambivalence on those matters, and especially their disregard for collective bargaining, strikes at the schism. American liberals, and economic liberalism in principle, is complicit with disparate ownership of resources on the basis of state compulsion of more egalitarian distributions of their dividends. The leftist realizes private capital will never willfully concede power, nor will it be distinct from the state.

I'm ranting and I'm sure that you already know all of this, but for anyone reading, this is why your local Marxist might flinch at being called a "liberal" or his views being equated to "liberalism".
Click to expand...

Good post overall, and there's definitely a fundamental difference between liberalism and Marxism or other far-left ideologies. I don't get the connotation you refer to in your first paragraph, though. It's precisely my appreciation for my own good fortune in being able to improve my circumstances over my life and my recognition for the difficulty that many have in that (for reasons both within and beyond their control) that leads me to support left liberalism, as opposed to both further left and further right alternatives.
 
Jack V Savage said:
Good post overall, and there's definitely a fundamental difference between liberalism and Marxism or other far-left ideologies. I don't get the connotation you refer to in your first paragraph, though. It's precisely my appreciation for my own good fortune in being able to improve my circumstances over my life and my recognition for the difficulty that many have in that (for reasons both within and beyond their control) that leads me to support left liberalism, as opposed to both further left and further right alternatives.
Click to expand...
Pretty interesting, that my experiences in life have made me more conservative.

It is interesting how there are different views and a lot of it is regional. I wonder how, say you and I, would be affected if we swapped locations for a couple of years?
 
panamaican said:
Yeah because the success or failure of a random internet vote is where my self-esteem come from...

Of course, since you felt the need to pretend that you accomplished something that you didn't, I guess it does matter to you.

It's okay, we can't all have real world accomplishments, a pretend win is just as good for some people. Hold this L:

3Rymq.gif
Click to expand...
Pipe down, #3. ;)
 
Captain Davis said:
Pretty interesting, that my experiences in life have made me more conservative.

It is interesting how there are different views and a lot of it is regional. I wonder how, say you and I, would be affected if we swapped locations for a couple of years.
Click to expand...

I moved here as a liberal, though, from Arizona. So probably not. But, man, looking at the housing costs in your area, that sounds like it might be fun to try anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,237,082
Messages
55,466,432
Members
174,786
Latest member
plasterby

Share this page

Back
Top