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

[Deleted member 457759]

Perhaps the OP isn't clear enough about what this project is about.

Let me clarify that for the confused folks who came in here to assess themselves rather than other WR regulars.

I don't follow enough war room posters to accurately assess them. And if you do for more than a hand full of people I'd say you need to get out more.

 

[Thames]

Serious question what political party do you vote for in Denmark.

And have you eaten at Noma? Saw it on Parts unknown.

Also, the current Governing coalition has only a 1 seat lead so how has governing been as of late? And how do you see the next election going, more right or left leaning?

Mostly I have voted for: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venstre_(Denmark): In both national and regional elections.

Last election the danish population was presented with a shit buffet, and I threw a desperation vote towards a new party called The Alternative: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Alternative_(Denmark)
http://www.thelocal.dk/20150616/the-locals-political-party-guide-the-alternative
Which I'm mildly regretting.

No I have not eaten at Noma (yet). But I cheer their succes on.

Governing is bad. Nothing radical, yet. But there has been some regression in terms of environmental policies, and our free speech is under fire (to satisfy the far right mouthbreathers).
Most parties are turning towards the right on immigration. That's the primary subject atm. A new party just emerged that has gotten a lot of attention, who are flat out suggesting we leave the UN refugee convention. So certainly to the right.
Nothing is cooking with regards to economic policies, I think the status quo will continue. Some on the right wants to tighten welfare a bit, some on the left wants to loosen it a bit. That's it.

 

[Gandhi]

Obviously my english failed me. I couldn't find a word to describe a state above "educated".

Another one and another one roflecopter

 

[Darkballs]

10+ years of posting and I don't merit a spot on the regular war room poster list? Guess I'll just have to start postwhoring a bit.

 

[Gandhi]

@Darkballs center left good poster

 

[Darkballs]

@Darkballs center left good poster

Bro-fist.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

@Darkballs center left good poster

If we're sub-categorizing, I'd say testy to the left.

 

[Anung Un Rama]

@Darkballs was a big miss.
Center-right.

 

[Thurisaz]

It doesn't matter. He has submitted a decent list of assessments of other WR posters, you didn't, therefore his words carry more weight than yours, unless your list turns out to be better than his.

What's the use or "weight" of his list, when he is an obvious liar?

Fascinating that you think lies are more important and useful than truth.

 

[Arkain2K]

10+ years of posting and I don't merit a spot on the regular war room poster list? Guess I'll just have to start postwhoring a bit.

Here's how:

Don't see your name on the list? You will be added as soon as you submit your votes!

 

[Byron Carter]

I think a better way to do this would be ask who is the most fitting poster for each category.

No one really wants to sort through that many plebs.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

I think a better way to do this would be ask who is the most fitting poster for each category.

No one really wants to sort through that many plebs.

More votes and less chit-chat give TS something to compile. More votes means more noticed means most fitting.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

It's early so help me out. What are you saying about Libertarians and police brutality? From their platform...

That they pay lip service to it around elections time and the rest of the time they're pretty quiet about it.

The anti-brutality movement is full of black liberals. The vast majority of libertarians don't give a shit (because they're really standard Republicans who want to escape the stigma of the low-intelligence Republican)

 

[Possum Jenkins]

What I said was that the compass is mixing up tactics and ideology (and doing it in a crude way--remember that the intention is to recruit for right-wing libertarians). So it has very similar ideologies grouped on opposite sides for no good reason.

I think the amount of state intervention is a very good reason.

And I looked up its origins and apparently it's linked to this charity-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_World_Action

Which was founded by this lady-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenys_Kinnock,_Baroness_Kinnock_of_Holyhead

Hardly a nefarious right-winger outfit. The baroness seems pretty decent as well, even though she's an aristocrat.

Just because libertarians like something doesn't mean it's automatically inaccurate or it's self-serving.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

That they pay lip service to it around elections time and the rest of the time they're pretty quiet about it.

Because they got elected to do something about it?

If the party to usually voted for has made things better in that regard for you then great.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Because they got elected to do something about it?

Them not ever getting elected hasn't stopped its followers to lead the charge in issues of privatization, anti-tax movements and decreasing or eliminating social services. They're even active on marijuana legalization.

But police brutality? Not so much. Free movement of labor across lines drawn by the oppressive state (aka, immigration)? LOL. Not at all.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I think the amount of state intervention is a very good reason.

And I looked up its origins and apparently it's linked to this charity-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One_World_Action

Which was founded by this lady-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenys_Kinnock,_Baroness_Kinnock_of_Holyhead

Hardly a nefarious right-winger outfit. The baroness seems pretty decent as well, even though she's an aristocrat.

Just because libertarians like something doesn't mean it's automatically inaccurate or it's self-serving.

I see that in Wiki, but it doesn't seem particularly credible.

Here's the website for the compass:

https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2

If we recognise that this is essentially an economic line it's fine, as far as it goes. We can show, for example, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot, with their commitment to a totally controlled economy, on the hard left. Socialists like Mahatma Gandhi and Robert Mugabe would occupy a less extreme leftist position. Margaret Thatcher would be well over to the right, but further right still would be someone like that ultimate free marketeer, General Pinochet.

That deals with economics, but the social dimension is also important in politics. That's the one that the mere left-right scale doesn't adequately address. So we've added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian.

Does that sound credible to you? The left wants more gov't control over the economy and the right wants less? And there's no social dimension to the standard spectrum (based on one's position on equality)?

 

[Fawlty]

I see that in Wiki, but it doesn't seem particularly credible.

Here's the website for the compass:

https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2



Does that sound credible to you? The left wants more gov't control over the economy and the right wants less? And there's no social dimension to the standard spectrum (based on one's position on equality)?

No model really captures that extra dimension of the direction of the wealth distribution. I prefer a broader model to that obvious piece of propaganda though. Social Freedom vs Imposed Order on the X, and Economic Intervention vs Freedom on the Y. That way you don't get Stalin in the upper left, you get Bernie Sanders. Stalin goes into the upper right where he belongs along with Hitler. It's still not particularly useful for questioning individuals, because the questions are always biased.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

I see that in Wiki, but it doesn't seem particularly credible.

Here's the website for the compass:

https://www.politicalcompass.org/analysis2



Does that sound credible to you? The left wants more gov't control over the economy and the right wants less? And there's no social dimension to the standard spectrum (based on one's position on equality)?

They could have said "more equality" and "less equality" but the notion's still the same. And the USSR certainly had more government control over the economy than Thatcherite Britain (obviously in both places the economy was "controlled", in the latter it was controlled by private hands). And yes, the "far left" has a bunch of totalitarians like Pol Pot and Mao.

But the libertarian left has no place here. Do you really think Anarchist Catalonia had any relationship with the Soviet Union? In the standard spectrum they do. They're right next to each other! They're far to the left of the standard labor parties in Europe or the Democrats in the US.

So in a standard spectrum, Anarchist Catalonia could turn into the USSR (or the other way around, depending on who you consider to be furthest left) with just a few minor changes. That just can't be accurate.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

Them not ever getting elected hasn't stopped its followers to lead the charge in issues of privatization, anti-tax movements and decreasing or eliminating social services. They're even active on marijuana legalization.

But police brutality? Not so much. Free movement of labor across lines drawn by the oppressive state (aka, immigration)? LOL. Not at all.

I don't see Libertarians leading any charge. But if they're out there trying to legalize weed then they're doing quite a bit to address disproportionate targeting/incarceration of blacks. The Libertarian philosophy clearly opposes police brutality. Sorry if not enough white people are rioting because a black dude got shot attacking a cop.