Are you conservative, moderate, or liberal?

[Stattick]

Just wondering. Wait for the poll.

[Stattick]

Me, I'm an American moderate (in other words, I'd be called a conservative in Europe), with some liberal leanings.

[Mr Self Destruct]

I'm a conservative that leans toward the right.  But your poll choices are flawed, as they're limited to the European definition of these terms. 

We're American, aren't we?

I'm a conservative because I believe in Constitutionally limited government, the Bill of Rights, and freedom.  I utterly oppose big government and its fiscally unsound spending (in the form of Bailouts and foreign aid in the form of Fast and Furious) and the idea of my country being indebted to foreign countries that utterly hate our way of life.  One of these days, China is going to come calling on the substantial amount of money we've borrowed from them.  And when we can't pay...what then? 

[Stattick]

But your poll choices are flawed, as they're limited to the European definition of these terms. 

On the left side of the answers is what we call it in the US. In the parentheses, what most of the rest of the first world calls these positions. I included them so non-US members of E would be able to answer the poll if they wanted to, without getting confused by what we call things here in the US.

[Vanity Evolved]

Not sure how far I'd rate myself. You guys'd probably know a bit better than me - I'm guessing a rather hefty liberal (I'd legalize most, if not all drugs for private consumption and regulated by state, legalized prostitution, euthensia and a less stigmatized stance on suicide, completely open up homosexual marriage to all, stem cell research a massive green light, among other things).

[Ironwolf85]

thing is... not everyone on this site is american, about 70%-60% US on here.
most of the other 30-40% are european

Also dark clown China controls about 30% of our debt the other 45% is all privately owned, and the last 15% is owned by other countries. it does not hold all of it, it is only the biggest sole debtholder.

The chinese leadership also knows that their economy would collapse if they come calling on the US. what they use it for is leverage in trade relations and minor political concessions here and there in extange for forgiving chunks of debt.
For example there is a reason we haven't wrenched North korea out of existance yet, China likes the way things are on the Korean Pennsula.
They are also using it as leverage to keep us from putting a base in Tiwan I think, dispite how much they beg for it, and even offer to pay us for one.

[Stattick]

But your poll choices are flawed, as they're limited to the European definition of these terms. 

I edited the poll for you, so you can go vote now.

[Mr Self Destruct]

Based on the choices listed, I'd have to with Conservative (though the term 'radical' is rather misleading...everyone who feels strongly about something can be considered radical).

[Callie Del Noire]

thing is... not everyone on this site is american, about 70%-60% US on here.
most of the other 30-40% are european

Also dark clown China controls about 30% of our debt the other 45% is all privately owned, and the last 15% is owned by other countries. it does not hold all of it, it is only the biggest sole debtholder.

The chinese leadership also knows that their economy would collapse if they come calling on the US. what they use it for is leverage in trade relations and minor political concessions here and there in extange for forgiving chunks of debt.
For example there is a reason we haven't wrenched North korea out of existance yet, China likes the way things are on the Korean Pennsula.
They are also using it as leverage to keep us from putting a base in Tiwan I think, dispite how much they beg for it, and even offer to pay us for one.

They are holding it over our heads fr two specific reasons.

Korea like you said, they don't want a unified and empowered Korea. You can bet the Koreans took ALL sorts of notes with the German reunification. When, not if..when, North Korea finally implodes economically they want us to stay out of the pool and have first call on manipulating the newKorean state to THEIR liking

The second and more important one is this. Taiwan.  Within the next two decades, and I'd say in less time than that.. I'd say as soon as oh 8 years.. China WILL assert sovereignty over their 'Rogue Province'. They have spent the last 15+ years planning on how to deal with he Pacific fleet. The DAY they think they can handle it, will be the day Taiwan gets told their terms. Till then the debt is leverage and after then it is to be surety we don't get involved or take sanctions when the take Taiwan

After that? I think they will try to do their version of Japan's co-prosperity sphere and lock us out of Asia and make it ALL their playground.

[Ironwolf85]

Based on the choices listed, I'd have to with Conservative (though the term 'radical' is rather misleading...everyone who feels strongly about something can be considered radical).

Radical by European Standards.
I'd say I'd like to take a leaf out of modern german economics myself, concidering they are one of the major pillars propping up the EU economy while Spain, Greece, and Italy are crumbling.

Also we seem to be on the same page a lot Callie

[Callie Del Noire]

Radical by European Standards.
I'd say I'd like to take a leaf out of modern german economics myself, concidering they are one of the major pillars propping up the EU economy while Spain, Greece, and Italy are crumbling.

Also we seem to be on the same page a lot Callie

Some areas. I think we might vary on some issues but I have learn from you comments as well as others. I know my POV isn't the same as others. I try to see what problem others have with a policy.

Mostly I'm a Goldwater (modern) Conservative, though I disagree with his insistence on state level vs federal level on some issues but I have to admit I'm looking back in time over the gap of the civil rights era

[Ironwolf85]

Some areas. I think we might vary on some issues but I have learn from you comments as well as others. I know my POV isn't the same as others. I try to see what problem others have with a policy.

Mostly I'm a Goldwater (modern) Conservative, though I disagree with his insistence on state level vs federal level on some issues but I have to admit I'm looking back in time over the gap of the civil rights era

I don't know what I am really looking at the politi-space chart I'm somewhere between Clinton and Regan on the chart.
We'd probably have some stuff to disagree over, but the stuff that comes up lately we seem to be on the same side.

[Oniya]

What do the Europeans call the folks that we'd call 'radical conservatives'?  (Not that I think there are any here to worry about voting numbers.)

I think I'm probably Liberal by American standards.

[Ironwolf85]

Americans?

[Stattick]

What do the Europeans call the folks that we'd call 'radical conservatives'?  (Not that I think there are any here to worry about voting numbers.)

I think they call them fascists.

[Lilias]

What do the Europeans call the folks that we'd call 'radical conservatives'?

Americans?

Or nutjobs. With some (or a lot, depending on the case) overlap. Some even use the terms interchangeably.

With my life experience in two European countries, I fall comfortably into the Liberal bracket by American standards.

[Stattick]

Woohoo! We have our first liberal.  XD

[Vekseid]

I'm a conservative that leans toward the right.  But your poll choices are flawed, as they're limited to the European definition of these terms. 

We're American, aren't we?

I'm a conservative because I believe in Constitutionally limited government, the Bill of Rights, and freedom.  I utterly oppose big government and its fiscally unsound spending (in the form of Bailouts and foreign aid in the form of Fast and Furious) and the idea of my country being indebted to foreign countries that utterly hate our way of life. 

Lots of people from outside the US here. I agree that it's a flawed poll, though.

One of these days, China is going to come calling on the substantial amount of money we've borrowed from them.  And when we can't pay...what then?

It does not work like that.

The US government finances debt through a number of means, but the primary two are via 1) Borrowing from the social security trust fund, and 2) Selling treasury bonds.

US cash outstanding is also quite a lot of money, but that's what the economy runs with.

The first is a concern mostly because of the 'Social Security is going Bankrupt!!!" trolls. The actual reason for Republican arguments to break social security benefits is so that that fund can continue to be raided for revenue.

The second is the treasury markets, which, along with cash reserves as a function of their own currency manipulation policies, make up the majority of US debt that China owns. Most (if not all) countries have these - the government in question auctions bonds of varying value, and the auction is won by the bidder who offers to pay the lowest interest rate. These can be traded on the open market.

When they are initially sold, they are sold with vary maturities - 1 year, 3 year, 5 year, 10 year, 30 year bonds, etc. You can sell them back beforehand, and the government can opt to buy them back beforehand, but China can't go to the US and just demand that we honor immature securities.

China has to dump them on the market to get rid of them, and they have to sell them at a price someone else in the world is willing to buy. They'd make a blip in the yield, sure. But China would lose hundreds of billions of dollars to spite the US for a few weeks. The US government would just hold off on selling new treasuries for a short while while the markets stabilized after China shot itself in the foot to spit in our face.

It'd be worse for China if they unloaded their cash reserves. The last thing China wants is a weak dollar. The Chinese people do - they want and deserve to be able to buy more goods. But that means more of those goods would have to come from outside China.

There's no 'doom!' here. There are issues with China, but China has no way to actually break the US, other than the way it already is - mass media influence (Which of the 'big four' has agreements with the Chinese Communist Party? Hint: It's the name of an animal), massive espionage operations, and of course its policy of economic manipulation to prevent free trade. But the Republicans point at the debt China holds (which they'll claim doesn't matter as soon as they hold the presidency) instead of any actual issues.

And somehow manages to convince people that China can just walk over to the Fed and demand a return on immature bonds.

[Callie Del Noire]

As usual Veks, you bring some interesting info to the table, thanks for clearing it up for me.

[Tamhansen]

There is an other way, although unlikely that China could break the US economy. Stop buying new bonds. Granted, it wouldn't be likely to ever happen, but if they did the US would have a serious problem.

Also, the poll is flawed in it's terminology as well as it's choices. You claim the European would call their far left liberal, while in fact in nearly all European countries liberal stands for proponents of the free market. Also, if we use purely conservative - liberal distinction, communists are conservatives, not liberals. I mean communism is the opposite of any form of liberalism, socially, economically or politically.

[gaggedLouise]

Radical liberal, perhaps even with a socialist streak by U.S. standards...as Katataban was on to.

[Tamhansen]

Okay. I live in a country with some 25 active political parties ranging from conservative Christian to libertarian to UFO nuts and even a pirate party, who unfortunately did not support my plan to let criminals be keelhauled.

It's impossible to make a category system in which everyone feels they can fit, unless you make a few billion categories. Now for certain paradox computer game I'm currently modding on I'm working on I'm making a cube like three axis divide: Economic, social/civil and political/governmental.

Now using these axis three very distinct oppositions arrive.
1 free market / planned economy ( with interventionism, state run capitalism, controlled market, being some of the steps in between)

2 social reactioranism / free choice (conservatives and progressives being in between these)

3 full state control / no government (with various yet unnamed steps in between)

Now even with these distinctions I have not captured all the issues but I believe most are confined within.

A few examples of political ideologies placed along these lines.

Communists (planned economy, social conservatism, full state control)
Socialists (state run capitalism, social progressive, heavy state control)
Social democrats/labour (interventionism, social progressive, medium State control)
Liberal democrats (guided free market, social progressive, limited state control.)
Religious democrats ( guided free market, social conservatism, heavy state control)
Liberals ( free market, social progressive, limited state control)
Anarcho liberals (free market, free choice, no state control)
Libertarians ( free market, social conservative, no state control)
Anarcho socialists (planned economy, social progressive, no state control)
Reactionaries (protectionism, social reactionarism, heavy state control)
Fascism (protectionism, social reactionarism, heavy state control)
National socialism (state capitalism, social reactionarism, full state control)
Theocratic (state run capitalism, social conservatism, full state control)
Neo populism (which ever get's votes, which ever get's votes, which ever get's votes)

And these are just the examples I've researched so far. Guessing there are a few more. I'm currently working out a four axis system, to include religious tolerance, but There's still no 4 dimensional display mechanism.

[gaggedLouise]

What do the Europeans call the folks that we'd call 'radical conservatives'?  (Not that I think there are any here to worry about voting numbers.)

I think I'm probably Liberal by American standards.

Something like "far-right social conservatives" - "far-right" to distinguish them both from more ordinary paternalist thinking and, on the other hand, fascist ideas. The more colloquial word that's around would often be just "neo-cons" though that's not really precise. In actual politics, (U.S. style) neo-cons and radical social conservatives often seem to join forces.


By the way, some within the group that tried (and near succeeded) to assassinate Hitler in July 1944 came from a movement that (before Hitler had come to power)  had called itself radical conservatives. The July 20 group were anti-Nazi and generally not antisemite, or only marginally so, and wanted a quick peace with at least the Western allies, but they believed firmly in a conservative order. Though I think many of them did see democracy as a positive thing, unless it "went out of hand".

[Tamhansen]

In most countries they are called the religious right, I think. SGP in holland, Party for bible abiding Christians in Germany. To be honest, very few people take them seriously. In the Netherlands there are a few enclaves of 'throwbacks' as they are most commonly known here. Ultra conservative Christians, who refuse television, inoculations, women's rights, and make a strong case for pro life nonsense. They make up between 1and 1.5 percent of the voters, but their political push is a little bit bigger, because they all vote whereas national voting statistics are at 60%.

[Vekseid]

Okay. I live in a country with some 25 active political parties ranging from conservative Christian to libertarian to UFO nuts and even a pirate party, who unfortunately did not support my plan to let criminals be keelhauled.

It's impossible to make a category system in which everyone feels they can fit, unless you make a few billion categories. Now for certain paradox computer game I'm currently modding on I'm working on I'm making a cube like three axis divide: Economic, social/civil and political/governmental.

Europa Universalis addicts unite!

Though been preferring CKII lately >_>

Regarding constructing a better poll, I think we can make better categories, e.g.
Burke Conservatives
Paleoconservatives,
Neoconservatives,
Randian Libertarians
Libertarian Socialists
etc. to cover a broader base.

[Tamhansen]

Actually I was referring to Victoria 2, but yes I find myself playing too much CK2 these days. As well. As war of the roses, but that's a completely different experience.

As for that poll, you would end up with a lot of choices, plus you would have to explain a lot of them I reckon. Ah the blissful simplicity of a two party system. No tough choices, just red or blue, elephants or donkeys. [ /jest  ]

[Oniya]

And these are just the examples I've researched so far. Guessing there are a few more. I'm currently working out a four axis system, to include religious tolerance, but There's still no 4 dimensional display mechanism.

Color variants, plus the X/Y/Z system.  Beyond that you start requiring animation.

[Tamhansen]

Yeah, maybe color variation might work, but it'd be less clear. Still very few options in this 3d universe of ours.

[Avis habilis]

Beyond that you start requiring animation.

Or some kind of socio-political tesseract.

[Oniya]

Well, you're still projecting onto a two-dimensional retina.  Stereo vision allows us to see three dimensions with relative ease, but when you're dealing with irregular forms, four is pushing it.

(Regular forms like n-cubes can be interpreted quite a bit farther, I've found.  Ninth-grade geometry had some interesting 'slackers' in the back row.)

[Moraline]

This poll is flawed - what's defined in the poll is nothing like the definition of those parties that I've been raised with and I'm not so certain that many people in the UK would agree with those definitions either (but I'm just guessing.)

Also, why is there 3 versions of liberal and only 2 versions of conservatives? Don't conservatives have the same sets of extremes?

I think the terms, radical, crazed, and communism as well as socialism are being used in a context that's not being clearly defined either.

Especially since communism and socialism are philosophical concepts all their own. Trying to define something like communism is like trying to define democracy - many counties and people have their own ideas of how it should work and what it means to them. You can't just tag on a word like socialism for instance and expect it to be clear - where do you begin to say it's socialism? Is every act of social reform and support an act of socialism? Does conservatism contain no form of socialism within it at all?


... Although with an American Election looming.. why don't we just have a "Who are you voting for poll?"

[Oniya]

As I suggested in my earlier post (which may or may not line up with the poll-maker's thoughts), when you hit 'Crazy Conservative', you'd be more likely to want to burn E with fire than sign up.

Just my thoughts.

[OldSchoolGamer]

I'm a conservative that leans toward the right.  But your poll choices are flawed, as they're limited to the European definition of these terms. 

We're American, aren't we?

I'm a conservative because I believe in Constitutionally limited government, the Bill of Rights, and freedom.  I utterly oppose big government and its fiscally unsound spending (in the form of Bailouts and foreign aid in the form of Fast and Furious) and the idea of my country being indebted to foreign countries that utterly hate our way of life.  One of these days, China is going to come calling on the substantial amount of money we've borrowed from them.  And when we can't pay...what then?

Well, many people on this board are American.  Many are not.  So I find nothing unreasonable about phrasing a poll in a global context.

There's a saying in financial circles: If a deadbeat owes you $1,000, they have a problem.  If a deadbeat owes you $1 million, you have a problem.  Of course, with financial matters everything is relative, but you get the gist of it.  If the day arrives when we can't pay China, they're the ones with a problem.  They have no way to collect.  What are they going to do, muscle the United States of America?  We are the world's muscle.

[Cyrano Johnson]

As I suggested in my earlier post (which may or may not line up with the poll-maker's thoughts), when you hit 'Crazy Conservative', you'd be more likely to want to burn E with fire than sign up.

Just my thoughts.

I wonder about that. I have the impression the far right is plenty freaky behind closed doors.

[Tamhansen]

true, but then your outward demeanor might be crazy conservative, but your true nature would not be. So either you'd be lying to the world or to yourself.

[Hemingway]

I live in a left-leaning European country, and I find myself to the left of the government on many issues. I guess that makes me Crazy Liberal. Which I kind of like. It's like, I'm not just liberal, I'm craaazy liberal. Because freedom is so crazy!

On tests like the Political Compass, I consistently land close to the south-western corner, which is the Left Liberal neighborhood, right next to the social anarchists. I don't identify with any particular label, though. I suppose you might say that I'm an anarchist in principle, but I'm more pragmatic than that in practice.

[elone]

As far as the given choices go I would have to say radical liberal, although I think the communist part of it doesn't really fit.

I support abortion rights, same sex marriage (with full spousal benefits), legalization of most illegal drugs (what a tax boon that would be), national health, etc., etc.,

In other words, the right to life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

I also support a socialist agenda of nationalizing utilities, big oil, and negotiating with drug companies as a government.

I do recognize that the government is not the most effective management company, but maybe we could hire Milt Romney as the Secretary of Commerce to oversee this.

I would reduce our military spending and stop being the policeman of the world, then maybe we could afford to feed our hungry and take care of our own.

I would vote for Dennis Kucinich in a heartbeat.

I am sure there are a lot of arguments against some or all of this, but that is not what this topic is about.

[Grainne]

I just have to post here tonight.

I am Proudly, and unabashedly, a huge, knee-jerk, flaming Liberal..actually, I'd say I'm a Social Democrat, but we have no such party here in the States so I'm just a Democrat, who's a Liberal, who loves the Progressive Caucus, and thinks that Bernie Sanders rocks. :)

[Callie Del Noire]

I just have to post here tonight.

I am Proudly, and unabashedly, a huge, knee-jerk, flaming Liberal..actually, I'd say I'm a Social Democrat, but we have no such party here in the States so I'm just a Democrat, who's a Liberal, who loves the Progressive Caucus, and thinks that Bernie Sanders rocks. :)

While i don't agree with everything the Right Honarable Mr Sanders supports, I agree with his take against corporate personhood and respect his attitude and leadership. If we had more well spoken Leaders like him, we might actually get some stuff done.

[Tamhansen]

While i don't agree with everything the Right Honarable Mr Sanders supports, I agree with his take against corporate personhood and respect his attitude and leadership. If we had more well spoken Leaders like him, we might actually get some stuff done.

I dread the day the US government actually starts getting things done. They might just solve the energy crisis or alleviate world horror. Hell they might even legalise stem cell research which would lead to the extinction of hundreds of diseases and ailments. that'd mean I'd have to rethink my gloomy world view and i hate effort.

[Question Mark]

Threw my vote on the heap.  I'm moderate in a lot of ways, because I feel compromise should be the core of American democracy.  I'm very socially progressive, and support a mostly isolationist foreign policy where we keep our armies out of foreign nations.  I believe in a moderate safety net; small, efficient, temporary, perfect for getting people through some bad luck but unsustainable in the long run.  I think the government should regulate businesses, but it needs to be streamlined to prevent rober barons and mega-corps from dominating the market, but not cumbersome to small businesses.

I'm kind of halfway between Stein and Johnson, with a little of Obama (2008 edition) mixed in.  So, on this poll, I'm a moderate liberal.

[OldSchoolGamer]

I would call myself a pragmatic centrist.  Or, perhaps, a hard-boiled technocrat.  I'm in favor of things that work.  This means I support free enterprise and economic freedom, but I also believe there must be a "referee" to keep things fair, enforce standards, and guard against excessive disparities in wealth and corporate malfeasance.  I also think the free market is nearsighted, and that some government projects are necessary to fund things that don't provide a rate of return starting next quarter or next year (public education, pure science R&D, the space program, interstate highways and other infrastructure, etc.).  I also think there's a credible argument to be made in favor of adding at least some level of health care to the basic services government already provides or is at least substantially involved in (i.e., highways and roads, ATC, water and sewerage, national defense, Social Security, etc.) and I'd like a mature, fact-based national dialogue on this (not "ZOMG!!!!!1! BARACK HUSSEIN WANTS DEATH PANELS!!1!!").  But where the unfettered (or lightly fettered) free market can provide, I say let it do so and keep government interference to a minimum.

On social issues, I'd probably qualify as "center-left."  I support civil unions for homosexuals (I think the State should just butt out of marriage entirely).  On most things the Right bitches about, I say to each his or her own.  Don't like drugs?  Don't do them.  Don't like porn? Don't watch it.  Don't like cannabis?  Don't smoke it.  Don't like homosex?  Don't have it.  Don't like abortions?  Don't have one.  And so on.  On the other side of the coin, I support the death penalty (though I think in a well-run system, it would be uncommon), and hard prison time for violent crimes.

[WildCat]

Also, why is there 3 versions of liberal and only 2 versions of conservatives? Don't conservatives have the same sets of extremes?

Well, really there aren't. The poll has moderates and two degrees of conservative and liberal. Just that in America we call moderates "liberal", conservatives "moderate" and right-wing nutjobs "conservative". :)

Anyway, I'm the kind of American democrat that longs for Kucinich or Sanders but wants to win badly enough to vote for Edwards or Obama.

[Stattick]

Also, the poll only allowed a max of 5 options.

[Vekseid]

There should have been a button for adding more, the limit is supposed to be 20.

[Stattick]

There should have been a button for adding more, the limit is supposed to be 20.

I looked and didn't find anything. Maybe scriptblock for Firefox screwed it up for me?

[Vekseid]

If you're blocking scripts from E you'll have problems with features like that, yes :-p

[Stattick]

If you're blocking scripts from E you'll have problems with features like that, yes :-p

Scripblock tells me that elliquiy's allowed, but google-analytics.com is not. I can always change that... turn it on temporarily or permanently. But I'm a paranoid sort, so I dislike turning on scripts for something that's used on multiple sites, worried that it could be used as a vector for malware.

[Vekseid]

Analytics isn't relevant.

When you click on 'New Poll', below the list of entry boxes there should be a link that says 'Add Option'

[Stattick]

Analytics isn't relevant.

When you click on 'New Poll', below the list of entry boxes there should be a link that says 'Add Option'

Ah, so there was.

[Skynet]

American liberal, who thinks that Obama's not liberal enough (I'm quite liberal).

[Ironwolf85]

American liberal, who thinks that Obama's not liberal enough (I'm quite liberal).

I kind of expected that, but you make your case better than many on the other side.

[ShadowFox89]

 I'm fiscally conservative but I'm against forcing your view on others and being too restrictive of what people can do.

So moderate I guess?

[Callie Del Noire]

I'm fiscally conservative but I'm against forcing your view on others and being too restrictive of what people can do.

So moderate I guess?

The term is 'Modern Conservative' versus what the Tea Party/GOP leadership which is Neo-conservative. Or a fringe segment.

[Tamhansen]

I think the tea party is more reactionary than conservative. Conservatives want to maintain what is. Reactionaries want to go back to what was.

[Bayushi]

I think the tea party is more reactionary than conservative. Conservatives want to maintain what is. Reactionaries want to go back to what was.

You're both wrong.

The TEA Party is concerned with taxes and spending issues. Social Conservatism in the TEA Party is on a Bring Your Own Lunch level.

If you see or hear crazy such rhetoric from TEA Party members, please note that they likely do not represent anyone but themselves, and not the rest of the TEA Party.

I consider myself aligned with the TEA Party on most things. Yet I am obviously not a Social Conservative?

[Callie Del Noire]

You're both wrong.

The TEA Party is concerned with taxes and spending issues. Social Conservatism in the TEA Party is on a Bring Your Own Lunch level.

If you see or hear crazy such rhetoric from TEA Party members, please note that they likely do not represent anyone but themselves, and not the rest of the TEA Party.

I consider myself aligned with the TEA Party on most things. Yet I am obviously not a Social Conservative?

So how do you like your outlook being hijacked.. you're right that the ORIGINAL type was 'bring your own lunch' for the Original Tea party appearences..then it seemed like.. all the folks who got voted in on the ticket are pushing for things like pulling down the 14th amendment and all this foolishness with birth control and other things.

Asking because I have felt the same way for losing control of my party starting around 1995 ish.

[WildCat]

You're both wrong.

The TEA Party is concerned with taxes and spending issues. Social Conservatism in the TEA Party is on a Bring Your Own Lunch level.

If you see or hear crazy such rhetoric from TEA Party members, please note that they likely do not represent anyone but themselves, and not the rest of the TEA Party.

I consider myself aligned with the TEA Party on most things. Yet I am obviously not a Social Conservative?

Yeah, early Tea Party was strongly fiscally focused. But about the time it grew into a major force its' major spokesfolk were every bit as vocal about the gamut of right-wing extremist issues.

[Ironwolf85]

part of the reason I'm anti-romney is because I believe his victory will simply make the far right fringe feel more "see we were right, and america agrees" or some nonsense.

I'm not ashqamed to say I supported the early branches of the tea party, fiscal responsibility is important. But when they became more rabidly anti-obama I backed away. If he wants to do something suddenly the tea party is up in arms to stop either him, or the make believe "socialist agenda"

[Stattick]

I thought Sarah Palin had a major hand in the origination of the Tea Party, and that lady's as rabidly social conservative as they come.

[Tamhansen]

I thought Sarah Palin had a major hand in the origination of the Tea Party, and that lady's as rabidly social conservative as they come.

Then how come she never taught her kids abstinence. After all Abstinence is the only way to prevent teen pregnancies or so she says. :P

[Oniya]

You can lead a teen to abstinence class, but you can't make them think.  ;D

[Callie Del Noire]

Then how come she never taught her kids abstinence. After all Abstinence is the only way to prevent teen pregnancies or so she says. :P

silly civilian.. don't you know the Elected don't abide the same rules as the hoi poloi? It's 'Do as I say, not as I do.., after all I'm better than you.. how dare you judge me! Forsooth!"

She shows some double-high authoritarian traits, one of which is the 'do as I not as I do.' as well as 'rules only apply to me when I need them too'.

[Skynet]

I'm fiscally conservative but I'm against forcing your view on others and being too restrictive of what people can do.

So moderate I guess?

From what it sounds like, you're closest to American Libertarianism.

[ShadowFox89]

From what it sounds like, you're closest to American Libertarianism.

Actually, going from the little quiz they've got on there, I appear to be centrist :P

[JuliusCaesar]

I consider myself to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal, which I understand can be contradictory when confronted with certain things, such as Medicaid. I'm big on individual freedoms, taking responsibilities for your actions, and a small federal government, thus adopting prominent libertarian views.

Basically it boils down to "do whatever you want as long as you don't hurt somebody else." Don't solicit me and don't tell someone else that their opinions are wrong just because they aren't the same as yours.

Moderate-ish.

[Astrofig]

You're both wrong.

The TEA Party is concerned with taxes and spending issues. Social Conservatism in the TEA Party is on a Bring Your Own Lunch level.

If you see or hear crazy such rhetoric from TEA Party members, please note that they likely do not represent anyone but themselves, and not the rest of the TEA Party.

I consider myself aligned with the TEA Party on most things. Yet I am obviously not a Social Conservative?

Do you agree with the following statements?

1. The entire wellfare system should be done away with or retooled and restricted because the vast majority of those on it abuse it.

2. Non-white immigration into the country is a serious threat to national security.

3. A woman should keep her legs closed if she doesn't want to get pregnant, and if a rape got her pregnant she obviously secretly wanted it.

4. Affirmative action is an example of 'political correctness gone haywire'.

5. Feminists need to shut their damn mouths and get back in the kitchen.

6. Education is not half so important as beefing up the military. America is constantly under threat, you see.

If you answered yes to any or all of these, congratulations! You're not only a Teatard, you're a terrible person!

[Question Mark]

Do you agree with the following statements?

1. The entire wellfare system should be done away with or retooled and restricted because the vast majority of those on it abuse it.

2. Non-white immigration into the country is a serious threat to national security.

3. A woman should keep her legs closed if she doesn't want to get pregnant, and if a rape got her pregnant she obviously secretly wanted it.

4. Affirmative action is an example of 'political correctness gone haywire'.

5. Feminists need to shut their damn mouths and get back in the kitchen.

6. Education is not half so important as beefing up the military. America is constantly under threat, you see.

If you answered yes to any or all of these, congratulations! You're not only a Teatard, you're a terrible person!

dat strawman

dem loaded questions

dat slur

dat ad hominem

[Tamhansen]

dat strawman

dem loaded questions

dat slur

dat ad hominem

Yup you are correct, unfortunately they're also statements by tea party members. So I'm sorry mate. Don't want your party getting a bad name, make sure it's run by people that could pass a third grade school test. Like knowing we're allied with South Korea not North korea, or that the Soviet Union is no longer a threat to the US.

[Question Mark]

Yup you are correct, unfortunately they're also statements by tea party members. So I'm sorry mate. Don't want your party getting a bad name, make sure it's run by people that could pass a third grade school test. Like knowing we're allied with South Korea not North korea, or that the Soviet Union is no longer a threat to the US.

You're implying that all Tea Partiers don't know SK from NK, or that they're all dumber than a fifth grader.  Don't label an entire political ideology by their vocal minority, or else you could just as easily call the Democrats corporate shills and the Republicans deranged bible thumpers.  That's what Astro was doing, so I called her out on it.  And now I'm calling you out on it.

Also, for clarity's sake, I'm not in the Tea Party, I'm a liberal independent; I couldn't be more opposed to their positions!

[Stattick]

Well, the sort of stuff that Astrofig was naming off, is EXACTLY the stuff I'm constantly hearing about tea party members. Hardly a day goes by that I don't hear of some new, terrible thing that one of them is spouting off. Like the tea partier who was spouting off that slavery wasn't so bad. Or the tea partier that was saying that women shouldn't have the right to vote, because women are too hormonal and mean.

Now, I'm not saying that every tea partier is crazy. But when you hear these stories constantly, it seems doubtful that it's just "a few bad apples" in the party. You know what they say about too many bad apples ruining the bunch.

[Question Mark]

Well, the sort of stuff that Astrofig was naming off, is EXACTLY the stuff I'm constantly hearing about tea party members. Hardly a day goes by that I don't hear of some new, terrible thing that one of them is spouting off. Like the tea partier who was spouting off that slavery wasn't so bad. Or the tea partier that was saying that women shouldn't have the right to vote, because women are too hormonal and mean.

Now, I'm not saying that every tea partier is crazy. But when you hear these stories constantly, it seems doubtful that it's just "a few bad apples" in the party. You know what they say about too many bad apples ruining the bunch.

*puts on lab coat and scientist hat*

Maybe that is the case, but all of that evidence is anecdotal, and so we must automatically assume it to be false when assessing the actual positions of the Tea Party (that's not to say I don't believe you, only that your anecdotes can't be proven or cited).  Instead, consult their actual positions.  The one's on their official website, for example.

Perhaps their vocal minority is rambling about revoking suffrage, or putting down minorities, or making a sham of their middle school geology teacher, but their actual positions, the ones they officially support and spread, do not include the stuff you just listed.  Those issues are not endorsed by the Tea Party.  And if that's the case, then logically the movement must be divided on these radical issues, and thus it is fallacious to say that the Tea Party endorses slavery, patriarchal suffrage, or anything else in that shit list.

Hate the crazies using the Tea Party to spout their bullshit.  Don't hate the Tea Party.

[Hemingway]

you could just as easily call the Democrats corporate shills

Well, that's easy because it's actually true. The rhetoric may suggest otherwise, but their actions don't.

[Question Mark]

Well, that's easy because it's actually true. The rhetoric may suggest otherwise, but their actions don't.

Most of our governmental officials are corporate shills, due to PACs, unlimited terms, and a lack of donation caps.

[Stattick]

*puts on lab coat and scientist hat*

Maybe that is the case, but all of that evidence is anecdotal, and so we must automatically assume it to be false when assessing the actual positions of the Tea Party (that's not to say I don't believe you, only that your anecdotes can't be proven or cited).  Instead, consult their actual positions.  The one's on their official website, for example.

Perhaps their vocal minority is rambling about revoking suffrage, or putting down minorities, or making a sham of their middle school geology teacher, but their actual positions, the ones they officially support and spread, do not include the stuff you just listed.  Those issues are not endorsed by the Tea Party.  And if that's the case, then logically the movement must be divided on these radical issues, and thus it is fallacious to say that the Tea Party endorses slavery, patriarchal suffrage, or anything else in that shit list.

Hate the crazies using the Tea Party to spout their bullshit.  Don't hate the Tea Party.

Or one can take the many, many crazy things they spout as evidence of what they truly believe. I think that what they publicly endorse as their platform to the greater public is a smokescreen for a much more disturbed platform. Like The Constitution Party that has known and proven ties to the White Supremacy Movement, but publicly doesn't endorse any racist policies, I think the Tea Party privately endorses a far more radical platform than what they publicly admit. But you can give them the benefit of a doubt if you want.

[Skynet]

The Tea Party started out originally as a group solely concerned with lowering taxes and critics of President Obama's economic policies.  Their original slogan: "Taxed Enough Already Party."

Fox News, fundamentalist Christians, Birthers, and the Koch Brothers hijacked the movement to turn it into a far-right protest group.

[Question Mark]

The Tea Party started out originally as a group solely concerned with lowering taxes and critics of President Obama's economic policies.  Their original slogan: "Taxed Enough Already Party."

Fox News, fundamentalist Christians, Birthers, and the Koch Brothers hijacked the movement to turn it into a far-right protest group.

The irony of that original name is that Obama has almost universally lowered taxes on the middle and lower classes.  Just wanted to point that out.

[ShadowFox89]

The irony of that original name is that Obama has almost universally lowered taxes on the middle and lower classes.  Just wanted to point that out.

Don't tell the vocal Repubs that.

[consortium11]

The Tea Party started out originally as a group solely concerned with lowering taxes and critics of President Obama's economic policies.  Their original slogan: "Taxed Enough Already Party."

Fox News, fundamentalist Christians, Birthers, and the Koch Brothers hijacked the movement to turn it into a far-right protest group.

Indeed.

The "Tea Party" as it now exists is basically an unholy alliance of groups generally seen as being on the right who have managed to (just about) co-exist under one umbrella despite in reality agreeing about very little.

On one hand you have the genuine libertarians (extremely limited government in all spheres) who have become frustrated by the general unelectability and "shooting themselves in the foot" nature of the official Libertarian party.

You then have the constitutionalists such as Ron Paul who cross-over with the above in policies but for different reasons (to follow the Ron Paul example he bases most of his arguments at least partially on his fairly strict interpretation of the constitution).

Then you have the economic libertarians who care far less about social or foreign policy issues (and may actively argue for more government in certain areas) but want lower taxes and less government intervention in the economy in general.

Chuck in the less ideologically severe members who basically agree with the above but aren't quite as radical about it.

Follow them with, for lack of a better term, the exploiters... those who are using the language because it caught it. The perfect example is Palin. She presented herself (and was treated as) a Tea Party representative, hosting high profile events and the like. But look at her record; her time as governor was anything but true to the general Tea Party principles of lower taxes and less government inference. The bridge to nowhere she fought for (and held onto till the last minute) and the money Alaska gets as a psuedo-tax from oil companies run directly against what the Tea Party once stood for.

And then there are those who are simply on the band wagon rather than exploiting it. The people who not so long ago talked about the culture wars in America... but now are chanting "Don't tread on me".

Follow that up with another dozen political sub-cultures and the Tea Party as a set of ideals and (rough) policies disappeared a long time ago.

It is perhaps one of the Republican political machine's best assets; to co-opt into and then take over any political force that rises anywhere near the right, even if originally diametrically opposed to much of what mainstream GOP thought, opinion and policy has been.

[Oniya]

If anyone asks me during these next two weeks, I'm with the Coffee Party.  (At a minimum, it will confuse them.  At best, they might try to find out more.)

[Stattick]

If anyone asks me during these next two weeks, I'm with the Coffee Party.  (At a minimum, it will confuse them.  At best, they might try to find out more.)

Well, pretty obvious if someone takes a moment to think about it. You're against tea. You're for coffee. Nice, hot, black, coffee.... Hmmm..... coffeeeee. It makes me go, "Ohhhh... yeah."

[ShadowFox89]

Well, pretty obvious if someone takes a moment to think about it. You're against tea. You're for coffee. Nice, hot, black, coffee.... Hmmm..... coffeeeee. It makes me go, "Ohhhh... yeah."

New slogan for Democrats: We like our president like we like our coffee.

[Oniya]

Well, pretty obvious if someone takes a moment to think about it. You're against tea. You're for coffee. Nice, hot, black, coffee.... Hmmm..... coffeeeee. It makes me go, "Ohhhh... yeah."

Not entirely.  *sneaky grin*

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

[sixtiesthrowback]

Personally, I am a revolutionary socialist (Trotskyist).

Although I feel I might be in a minority here...

[SweetKnickers]

Erm... I'm more a Canadian Liberal/Green Party. But I also tend to have moderate/conservative leanings depending on what issues I'm being asked about. :-)

[Morganatic]

Personally, I am a revolutionary socialist (Trotskyist).

Although I feel I might be in a minority here...

trot trot trot

trot trot trot

Hehe, not really. I'm not necessarily a fan of all the ways that Trotskyism's developed over the past seventy years or so, but it's certainly one of the better Marxist strains.

I think I'd describe myself as a radical leftist, both in the sense that I'd sneer at any attempts to call me a 'liberal' (this is the eleventh type), and also in the 'skateboarding and ripped jeans' sense of the word 'radical'. *does a grind off the concept of dialectics*

It's interesting looking at the political demographics of different sites - I'm honestly surprised at the political make-up of this thread. I wonder if it's Elliquiy in particular - do different adult roleplay sites attract different political ideologies - and, if so, why? What are the average political traits of the ERPer? Is there a Maoist Third Worldist version of Elliquiy out there somewhere?  :D

[Lux12]

I lean far to left. I am an anarchist and for those who don't know, we do not advocate for mass violence or any other such things.

[Skynet]

I lean far to left. I am an anarchist and for those who don't know, we do not advocate for mass violence or any other such things.

Are you an anarchist without label, or do you adhere to a specific subset of anarchism (anarcho-capitalism, anarcho-syndicalism, etc)?

[Lux12]

I often use the term communal anarchist to describe myself which is closer to the syndicalist and similar strains of anarchist political philosophy.

[Bayushi]

Do you agree with the following statements?

1. The entire wellfare system should be done away with or retooled and restricted because the vast majority of those on it abuse it.

2. Non-white immigration into the country is a serious threat to national security.

3. A woman should keep her legs closed if she doesn't want to get pregnant, and if a rape got her pregnant she obviously secretly wanted it.

4. Affirmative action is an example of 'political correctness gone haywire'.

5. Feminists need to shut their damn mouths and get back in the kitchen.

6. Education is not half so important as beefing up the military. America is constantly under threat, you see.

If you answered yes to any or all of these, congratulations! You're not only a Teatard, you're a terrible person!

I shouldn't bother answering any of the above contrived bull shit, but what the hell.

1. Done away with? No. (A term that Callie will recognize) Waste Fraud & Abuse needs to be squashed, however. The abusers make it more difficult for those of us truly in need (I am permanently disabled, and constantly have to deal with bureaucratic bull shit because of the rampant abuse of the system).

2. I don't think non-whites (immigrant or not) are serious threats to national security simply for their ethnicity. I resent your assertion, given that I am non-white myself, asshole. My mother is an immigrant (married an American).  /spit

3. What's stopping you from buying your own fucking birth control? $9 at Wal Mart! Condoms aren't that expensive! I won't comment on Mr Akin's retarded comment(s).

4. Affirmative action is indeed an example of 'political correctness gone haywire'. I didn't need it, as a 'woman of color'. What's everyone else's excuse? Lazy? Stupid? All of the above? I worked my fucking ass off to get through school, and I did well until I became disabled. Grow up.

5. Yes, Feminists do need to shut their damned mouths and get back in the kitchen. Notice I said 'Feminists', not 'women'. "Modern" Feminists are quite often female supremacists and/or eugenicists. Go have a look at RadFemHub (Google it). Those bitches be crazy.

6. As someone who grew up with the US Military, and served in a foreign nation's Defense force (Dual-citizen, US/Japan), I understand the military and why it's needed. You apparently do not understand. The world isn't a happy fun place with unicorns rainbows and puppies. Constant war is not the objective, while national defense is. Pro Tip: The Federal Government has ONE (1) enumerated power, which is to provide for national defense.

[Vekseid]

I shouldn't bother answering any of the above contrived bull shit, but what the hell.

You really should not have.

2. I don't think non-whites (immigrant or not) are serious threats to national security simply for their ethnicity. I resent your assertion, given that I am non-white myself, asshole. My mother is an immigrant (married an American).  /spit

3. What's stopping you from buying your own fucking birth control? $9 at Wal Mart! Condoms aren't that expensive! I won't comment on Mr Akin's retarded comment(s).

4. Affirmative action is indeed an example of 'political correctness gone haywire'. I didn't need it, as a 'woman of color'. What's everyone else's excuse? Lazy? Stupid? All of the above? I worked my fucking ass off to get through school, and I did well until I became disabled. Grow up.

5. Yes, Feminists do need to shut their damned mouths and get back in the kitchen. Notice I said 'Feminists', not 'women'. "Modern" Feminists are quite often female supremacists and/or eugenicists. Go have a look at RadFemHub (Google it). Those bitches be crazy.

6. As someone who grew up with the US Military, and served in a foreign nation's Defense force (Dual-citizen, US/Japan), I understand the military and why it's needed. You apparently do not understand. The world isn't a happy fun place with unicorns rainbows and puppies. Constant war is not the objective, while national defense is. Pro Tip: The Federal Government has ONE (1) enumerated power, which is to provide for national defense.

...pretend to be Japanese on the Internet when you are not... fine. Whatever. Might help to know Japanese, first, especially after going through a phase pretending to be really bad at English.

...pretend to be female on the Internet when you are not... fine. Whatever. Might help to learn something about female contraception, first. Protip: Female contraception is not 'condoms', is used for far more than just preventing pregnancies, and often involves something you might have heard of called a prescription. You might - shock horror - try asking what women go through to get birth control, and get a response that you might learn from.

I don't know whether or not you actually served in the JSDF, or actually hold dual citizenship, but considering your IP address faithfully traced to the West Coast of the United States when you claimed to be in Japan, and you were asking me about guns like you'd never touched one before in your entire life after Obama's first election, let me find a grain of salt for you.

Whatever fantasy version of yourself you want to pretend to be, fine. I bit my lip for years, because, you know, whatever.

As long as you did not use your fake identity to try to manipulate, I saw no reason to create drama over the matter.



And you chose to cross that line.

I don't know what the hell made you think doing so was a good idea.

As for your own incivility, whatever. If you choose to continue to be a part of this community after this, I hope you have learned a lesson, and perhaps decide to act, in the future, with a bit more self-reflection, and when discussing reality, focus on reality, and leave fantasy to role-playing.