Where do you stand politically

[Apech]

Just for Apech.....because I love cats

 

 

https://www.politicalcompass.org/yourpoliticalcompass?ec=0.0&soc=0.0

 

 

Bull's eye!

[Karl]

Bull's eye!

political darts.

[Karl]

Interesting pattern:

 

https://www.politicalcompass.org/crowdchart?Cloudhands=-6.13%2C-5.49&Blackstar=-7.5%2C-7.54&TheLerner=-2.0%2C-2.67&Apech=-1.63%2C-5.13&Brian=7.0%2C-4.97&AP%26P=-6.63%2C-1.03&name=Karl+(dubious)&ec=0&soc=0

 

Dubious ....moi ?

[roger]

I tend to lean towards socialism, as I feel that capitalism is a very unfair, dog-eat-dog world.

 

I just feel that the people, and government, have a responsibility to the individual, and should attempt to make life on earth as fair (just) and safe as possible for everyone.

 

I was happy to read recently that both Jean Paul Sartre and Helen Keller, two people whom I admire greatly, were socialistic in their economic pov.

 

I also believe in a one-world government, or at least that there should be a union among governments with the best interests of all people as its objective.

 

I don't believe that the USA should attempt to become socialistic- that would be virtually impossible given the current situation. But I do feel that it's a far more loving economic system than dog-eat-dog, competitive capitalism.

 

I'm also adamantly pro-choice and strongly against the death penalty.

Edited October 2, 2016 by roger

[liminal_luke]

(-3.25, -6)

[Marblehead]

(-3.25, -6)

With all that emptiness you must be Buddhist.

 

I always have to sit down when talking about politics.

[liminal_luke]

With all that emptiness you must be Buddhist.

 

I always have to sit down when talking about politics.

 

Nope, definitely not Buddhist.  The test must be skewed. 

[Karl]

I tend to lean towards socialism, as I feel that capitalism is a very unfair, dog-eat-dog world.

 

I just feel that the people, and government, have a responsibility to the individual, and should attempt to make life on earth as fair (just) and safe as possible for everyone.

 

I was happy to read recently that both Jean Paul Sartre and Helen Keller, two people whom I admire greatly, were socialistic in their economic pov.

 

I also believe in a one-world government, or at least that there should be a union among governments with the best interests of all people as its objective.

 

I don't believe that the USA should attempt to become socialistic- that would be virtually impossible given the current situation. But I do feel that it's a far more loving economic system than dog-eat-dog, competitive capitalism.

 

I'm also adamantly pro-choice and strongly against the death penalty.

Without delving into the reasons why capitalism is the only freedom choice, simple evidence is available to you in Europe. East and West Germany show the phenomenally different rates of growth and standard of living. Where as the GDR (held up by Soviet Russia as their Jewel in the crown) lagged enormously in all societal measures, it was also a country of serious oppression ruled by a secret service and a huge network of imformants. You should note that there was never any incidence of West Germans desperate to cross the wall to East Germany despite there being little to nothing to stop them making that particular attempt. Whilst, the East Germans made many attempts to cross to the West despite the risk and very often their deaths.

 

This instance alone should show that the more open capitalistic political system of the West was not only better for everyone's wealth and health, but it was many times more free and friendly as a society. In the GDR workers were given jobs, not according to potential, but as selected by the state, there was no loafing about getting welfare. If you weren't on the role call of political/nepotistic favouritism then even the most talented would find themselves doing the most degrading/dangerous jobs and living a very impoverished life. If you happened to show any signs of rebelliousness, or even connected to a family of a past dissident then you would be targeted for continued harassment and periods incarcerated.

 

To even suggest socialism is a better system is irrational given the overwhelming evidence from Mao in China, to the USSR, Vietnam under pol pot and today in the collapsing country of Venezuela. The body count alone for these countries should scare the living hell out of you even if you don't subscribe to the idea that property ownership, freedom and standard of living have any importance.

 

I'm afraid you are dangerously naive and idealistic, that is often the way with the young, but you should take a good hard look at the historical evidence - even those intellectuals that once were chief advocates for socialism have since rowed back having seen those results.

 

If you add in the technical economic arguments regarding price discovery at a minimum then it's clear that socialism is impossible.

[roger]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Karl.

 

You may be right.

[Karl]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Karl.

 

You may be right.

At least you should look into the available evidence. There is an essay by a fanatical communist that asked the question 'when did you know ?' . It asks the question of his Western intellectual colleagues about their blindness to the situation in Soviet Russia. A lot of intellectuals were wined and dined by the soviets, shown happy children, hospitals, housing projects, schools etc and came back to their countries expounding the benefits of socialism. At one time it was thought inevitable that Russia would overtake the West through the success of communist principles.

 

When the Soviet Union began to collapse-and it would have collapsed a lot earlier if the USA/Europe had refused to trade with it-then these intellectuals went very quiet. They refused to comment on the collapse and their previous enthusiasm for socialism-they wrote many persuasive articles (paid for with soviet rumbles) which found their way into all the major media papers and magazines of the day. The essay I refer to was intended as an admission of ignorance by the author, he decided to stand up and admit he had been badly wrong and to prompt his colleagues to join the condemnation of such a barbaric system.

 

The terrible death toll in Russia alone, thoroughly outstripped any numbers from Nazi concentration camps. Unfortunately, though we accept that fascism is evil because of that butchery and genocide, the terror of Soviet concentration camps and mass murder has been largely forgotten because the Russians are seen as the good guys who helped stem the evil Nazi tide. Socialism should be related to murderous genocide and terrible barbarism in exactly the same way as the Nazi's, but instead, fools go around sporting Lenin/Che tee shirts as if it's cool. Yet these people would not dream of wearing a Hitler tee shirt despite the similarities.

 

If you have 20 minutes to read Eugene Genovese's essay 'the question' I think it might begin some more considered thinking on the issue.

 

 

http://www.dissentmagazine.org/wp-content/files_mf/1353953160genovesethequestion.pdf

Edited October 3, 2016 by Karl

[Apech]

Interesting pattern:

 

https://www.politicalcompass.org/crowdchart?Karl=0.0%2C0.0&Cloudhands=-6.13%2C-5.49&Blackstar=-7.5%2C-7.54&TheLerner=-2.0%2C-2.67&Apech=-1.63%2C-5.13&Brian=7.0%2C-4.97&AP%26P=-6.63%2C-1.03&name=LiminalLuke&ec=-3.25&soc=-6

 

**edit: tweaked the url to remove "(dubious)" from Karl and added LiminalLuke

 

 

So Brian .... when did it all start to go right?

[Kar3n]

Your Political Compass

 

Economic Left/Right: -2.38 
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.97

 

I do not think this is very accurate, but it was fun to do.

[Brian]

So Brian .... when did it all start to go right?

Oh, that's easy! I believe the individual is sovereign and should control his or her own energy and the fruits thereof.

[Karl]

Oh, that's easy! I believe the individual is sovereign and should control his or her own energy and the fruits thereof.

That's my Brian :-)

[CloudHands]

Oh, that's easy! I believe the individual is sovereign and should control his or her own energy and the fruits thereof.

 

Yes that's it. I now know what you are missing.

[Apech]

Oh, that's easy! I believe the individual is sovereign and should control his or her own energy and the fruits thereof.

 

 

I agree fruit control is essential.

 

... but so is dog balancing ...

 

[CloudHands]

Nobody was born sovereign...  I understand liberty as a gain of autonomy but certainly not something innate. Like plants it grows only under certain conditions.

 

It's obvious to me that you can't just come with what should be and stay wishing, you have to make it happen and it's not about forcing things... but playing our role as a member of a social specie.

 

I wish we could exchange our life's experiences -we should- but we can't.

 

I'm very glad you pointed that clearly the central element of the divergence between right and left.

 

The patsy will always be the one in the other side uh ?

 

and by the way, I'm neither a recent immigrant nor communist... but migrant, who can say he or his family hasn't be ? whatever the reason...

[Brian]

Nobody was born sovereign...

<snip>

Sure you were! Who taught you that?

[Brian]

I agree fruit control is essential.

 

... but so is dog balancing ...

 

Well, yes. Dog balancing goes without saying, as does coconut transportation...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited October 3, 2016 by Brian

[ralis]

Sure you were! Who taught you that?

 

Sovereign? With the illusion that one is living a disconnected existence with no effect on society? Keep on dreaming.

[CloudHands]

Sure you were! Who taught you that?

 

Nobody. If I put you in a cage then I say you are free, does it make you free ?

 

When I was born I was totally dependant on my direct environment (mainly family) with no means to act, I was never less free than when I was born.  All was up to develop.

 

Do you have kids ? Did you try to let them alone in the forest ?

Edited October 3, 2016 by CloudHands

[joeblast]

and up in the air, a plane flew by...

[Karl]

Nobody. If I put you in a cage then I say you are free, does it make you free ?

 

When I was born I was totally dependant on my direct environment (mainly family) with no means to act, I was never less free than when I was born.  All was up to develop.

 

Do you have kids ? Did you try to let them alone in the forest ?

You are equivocating on the word 'free'. However, Brian didn't even say 'free' he said sovereign.

We aren't free of gravity either, nor the need to eat, being a child is equivalent. We can change somethings and not others. Sovereign means being self contained and not being aggressed against by other men. Most children are loved and are not aggressed against, but are taught what is dangerous to them, without that love, support and tuition they would be vulnerable. This does not mean they aren't sovereign, nor free. If they wished they can leave any time they like. They choose not to.

[Karl]

Sovereign? With the illusion that one is living a disconnected existence with no effect on society? Keep on dreaming.

He didn't say 'disconnected'.

[ralis]

You are equivocating on the word 'free'. However, Brian didn't even say 'free' he said sovereign.

We aren't free of gravity either, nor the need to eat, being a child is equivalent. We can change somethings and not others. Sovereign means being self contained and not being aggressed against by other men. Most children are loved and are not aggressed against, but are taught what is dangerous to them, without that love, support and tuition they would be vulnerable. This does not mean they aren't sovereign, nor free. If they wished they can leave any time they like. They choose not to.

 

Prove self contained?