What are your political leanings?

[Theo]

For flip's sake man, I'm simply refering to the label on the bloody graph. If you've got a problem with that, vent your rage in the appropriate direction (i.e. the website) rather than impotently at me.

I'm not ashamed to be a socialist. I don't kill babies, trake (sic) drugs or crap like that. I'm not for being a slave. I am a socialist, and I'm not afraid of the word, because for me as a working-class kid it means freedom fighter.

You can be a socialist all you want. I'm glad you've confessed to being so anti-freedom.

I'm not sure who's freedom you're fighting for. Sounds more like you just have an emotional bond and loyalty with one segment of your country's population, and that trumps policies that will do the greatest good for the greatest number of people at home and across the world (especially in developing nations).

 

[HIM]

That's just another example of socialists trying to steal a nice word (like they did with the word "liberal" in the USA).

"liberal" is not a "nice word"; "socialist" is.

Just because the creators of this silly quiz call a box "left-libertarian" doesn't mean people in that box are for freedom.

... and arguing about who is "for freedom" in absolute terms is fairly pointless.

 

[down_in_albion]

You can be a socialist all you want. I'm glad you've confessed to being so anti-freedom.

I'm not sure who's freedom you're fighting for. Sounds more like you just have an emotional bond and loyalty with one segment of your country's population, and that trumps policies that will do the greatest good for the greatest number of people at home and across the world (especially in developing nations).

Define 'freedom'.

Define these 'policies'.

 

[Theo]

... and arguing about who is "for freedom" in absolute terms is fairly pointless.

I'm certainly less free if Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama take more of my money and they get to decide what to do with it rather than me. Oh, and I can't wait till Barack Obama starts telling me what to set my thermostat at, and starts telling me I have to cut down on junk food, and starts trying to ban incandescent lightbulbs........

 

[MunchyBrain]

Free trade is not freedom.

Anyone who can do research into the FTAA or NAFTA and still think that free trade is freedom needs to get their head checked...

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

there are alternatives to socialism
or the evil we have now
or the likely even more total domination of the world by corporations were libertarians to get what they only think they want?
that alternative is some form of:

Anarchism
i am partial to the American tradition in this regard which is the melding of a strongly individualist tradition and that of the european more 'collectivist' type
some day we shall defeat the forces of evil:
the super state, the super rich, and the mega-corporations now bent on destroying our world


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarchism_in_the_United_States

 

[Franzanna]

You can be a socialist all you want. I'm glad you've confessed to being so anti-freedom.

I'm not sure who's freedom you're fighting for. Sounds more like you just have an emotional bond and loyalty with one segment of your country's population, and that trumps policies that will do the greatest good for the greatest number of people at home and across the world (especially in developing nations).

Uhhh, that's what socialism is. To me, at any rate.

Look, I'll see what Mr. Longman, my trusty dictionary, says about socialism:
Socialism, n 1. An economic and political theory advocating, or a system based on, collective or state ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods. 2. A transitional stage of society in Marxist theory distinguished by unequal distribution of goods according to work done.

The socialism I keep refering to is the first definition, and collective as opposed to state ownership and administration. Nothing about ignoring the greater good, or killing babies, or anything else you've defined as socialist. On the contrary, it is supposed to be for the greater good with the 'collective distribution'.

 

[Theo]

Define 'freedom'.

Define these 'policies'.

Well, one policy example would be protectionism on certain industries. This is harmful and costly to most people, and keeps developing nations down, but it's done for votes from workers in certain industries.

 

[down_in_albion]

Well, one policy example would be protectionism on certain industries. This is harmful and costly to most people, and keeps developing nations down, but it's done for votes from workers in certain industries.

Name a political party who don't support some form of protectionism? The Republicans certainly do.

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

Name a political party who don't support some form of protectionism? The Republicans certainly do.

in a way, they want their corporate and super rich masters(you know their primary contributors)
these people want to be free to exploit anybody, anywhere, at anytime
regardless of their race, color or creed
quite progressive of them, huh?

 

[HIM]

I'm certainly less free if Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barack Obama take more of my money and they get to decide what to do with it rather than me.

i'm going to presume that you're a fervent supporter of capitalist democracy and - since the u.s.a. is "the land of 'the free'" etc. - that you accept that citizens' votes were "freely" cast in your recent presidential election. your citizens have, by extension, freely chosen to contribute financially to whatever programmes your new president, as the people's representative, wants to implement.

 

[Theo]

Name a political party who don't support some form of protectionism? The Republicans certainly do.

I didn't vote for the Republicans because McCain came out for the bailouts (*), which I feel will prolong and deepen the recession. I voted for Bob Barr as a protest vote. George W. Bush was terrible in these areas, as well. But now we've got a full-on socialist onslaught coming to the USA, so we'd better load up on guns and stand our ground.


*And also because Palin was too into aerial wolf hunting, which I oppose.

 

[down_in_albion]

I didn't vote for the Republicans because McCain came out for the bailouts (*), which I feel will prolong and deepen the recession. I voted for Bob Barr as a protest vote. George W. Bush was terrible in these areas, as well. But now we've got a full-on socialist onslaught coming to the USA, so we'd better load up on guns and stand our ground.


*And also because Palin was too into aerial wolf hunting, which I oppose.

Ah, so the LP. I must admit they actually walk the walk unlike the Republicans, but then again it is rather easy when you never get more than 1% of the vote.

 

[Deleted member 6305]

I hope everyone isn't too shocked but...

 

[Oh my god. it's Robby!]

I hope everyone isn't too shocked but...

Jesus might approve , but I don't think the Pope would

 

[Deleted member 6305]

Jesus might approve , but I don't think the Pope would

Economically I am pretty liberal. It's the social issues that I really care about.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/02/06/florida.abortion/index.html

This story, for example, is just horrible.

 

[troubleluvsme]

I don't really understand what you mean by trimming the fat. Is too much money being spent on welfare in the U.S.? And why else would a country be socialist these days if not to help people?

Oh dear.

I didn't vote for the Republicans because McCain came out for the bailouts (*), which I feel will prolong and deepen the recession.

If McCain was on the other side of the bailout issue, I believe we would have seen a different outcome.

But now we've got a full-on socialist onslaught coming to the USA, so we'd better load up on guns and stand our ground.

I'm ready to stand mine.

Ah, so the LP. I must admit they actually walk the walk unlike the Republicans, but then again it is rather easy when you never get more than 1% of the vote.

At this point, the Libertarians couldn't organize a dog show, let alone a political campaign. If they ever truly get serious, they could be a formidable party.

 

[HIM]

Oh dear.

thought-provoking.

 

[down_in_albion]

At this point, the Libertarians couldn't organize a dog show, let alone a political campaign. If they ever truly get serious, they could be a formidable party.

Apart from the fact the party is 90% kooks, their platform isn't supported by anybody but the hardline and that they are equally as locked into their ideology as anybody from the Communist Party. If they changed all that, they may get 5%.

 

[troubleluvsme]

thought-provoking.

Franzanna is a sweet girl but in my mind little naive. I am not going to argue the points of capitalism vs socialism with her.
It happens to kids over here all too often; they are being indoctrinated in Government-run schools.

Apart from the fact the party is 90% kooks, their platform isn't supported by anybody but the hardline and that they are equally as locked into their ideology as anybody from the Communist Party. If they changed all that, they may get 5%.

90% kooks, huh? How much do you know about what the more modern ones stand for? Limited Government, flat tax, etc...