Board political breakdown.

[Cain]

Well, I do see a whole lot of BS in this thread, which is to be expected. How can we classify the Greens/Socialists as "socially conservative"??

And what does "fiscally liberal" mean, anyway? Could we call the current regime "fiscally liberal" since they spend money like mad while running up deficits? Or is conservative because they're taxing future generations and spending money on the military?

What if with socialized medicine we end up spending less on health care. Does that then make such a policy more fiscally conservative than the current system?

On the social side we have arguments over legitimate interference in our personal lives (homosexuality and abortion are the two major issues). Is that an appropriate role for government? Then there's the question about regulating business to protect the environment and workers, in addition to providing healthcare and education. Some people here will say these are illegitimate functions of government in principle, which puts them at odds with most of public (as well as the civilized world).

Now of course these are not entirely separate spheres. Economic regulations can be imposed for social reasons (think of blue laws), and social policy can have an economic dimension (gay rights as far as inheritance, taxes and medical coverage is concerned).

 

[slingblade]

If you did it in the name of excising all religious language in the public square, then yes you would be.

I've no desire to curtail all such speech in the public square. I won't tell you that you can't speak it, if you won't tell me I must listen. Deal?

If you did it in the name of curtailing "hate speech," then yes you would be.

I don't have the right to curtail it. I'd like to eliminate whatever's behind such speech, whatever causes it, but that's a pipe dream. In fact, I worry more when such folks get quiet. At least when they're talking, I know clearly where they stand.

If you did it in the name of banning certain protests, like those at abortion clinics, then yes you would be.

Honey, protest them all you like. Be loud, be proud; hell, be obnoxious if you like. Just don't bring bombs or guns and such stuff.

All of which goes to my assertion that the modern liberal is all for absolute freedom, as long as you don't question what the definition of freedom is.

As a liberal, I really hate being automatically included in your definintion.
I don't fit it, I'll wager some 4 points out of 7, say. Something like that.
Maybe more, maybe less.

Liberal policies often challenge reality, IMHO. Again, I'm talking about the modern liberal establishment, not the term as it was once used.

Oh, the philosophical debates we could have about "reality."
How's this: as a liberal, I cherish and espouse healthy, progressive change; things that attempt to make life more equitable, more "user-friendly," more healthy for mind and body. But I don't want to do it by taking away from others the rights I also cherish and espouse.

That's the kind of liberal I am. I doubt I'm alone.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Well, I do see a whole lot of BS in this thread, which is to be expected. How can we classify the Greens/Socialists as "socially conservative"??

And what does "fiscally liberal" mean, anyway? Could we call the current regime "fiscally liberal" since they spend money like mad while running up deficits? Or is conservative because they're taxing future generations and spending money on the military?

From the website I linked above.

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.

 

[Upchurch]

Is that supposed to be better?

No, simply more accurate, albeit cynical.

 

[DreadNiK]

On a forum I used to visit, someone posted one of those 'political' questionnaires that places you on a four sector graph, then they did up the graph with everyone's positions. I'm not sure how good the questionnaire was, but the results seemed fairly accurate, at least in an ordinal sense.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

On a forum I used to visit, someone posted one of those 'political' questionnaires that places you on a four sector graph, then they did up the graph with everyone's positions. I'm not sure how good the questionnaire was, but the results seemed fairly accurate, at least in an ordinal sense.

You mean like this one? www.politicalcompass.org

I think we should really stick to one comprehensive set of defintions to work from or the thread will go like this.

"I am pro-pick-up-truck, but anti-corn-fuel. I have given myself the political label of 'orange'."

"You fool! I was calling myself an orange while you were still an itch in your daddy's pants. I am pro-corn-fuel. Ergo, you are an apple!"

"You are both wrong, I am orange colored apple (fuji) and I am anti-everything! You are both doric columns."

"No, you are wrong. Fuji apples are yellow."

 

[Upchurch]

You mean like this one? www.poiliticalcompass.org

Your link isn't working for me.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Your link isn't working for me.

That is because I cannot spell. It's www.politicalcompass.org

 

[Upchurch]

That is because I cannot spell. It's www.politicalcompass.org

Economic: -1.75
Social: -5.18

 

[ImaginalDisc]

Mine:

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.03

Edit: I took this test about six months ago, and got almost exactly the same score. Since then, it looks as though they have changed a few questions, probably to reflect the current political issues.

 

[davefoc]

...

And what does "fiscally liberal" mean, anyway? Could we call the current regime "fiscally liberal" since they spend money like mad while running up deficits? Or is conservative because they're taxing future generations and spending money on the military?

I wondered about this exact question when I was thinking about the poll.

I think that part of the answer is that the current administration and perhaps the national Republican party in general are driven more by corruption than ideology. Rewarding benefactors as a way to gain campaign contributions and even direct personal benefit has become the standard motivation behind Republican governance.

My suspicion is that corrupt legislative bodies are the norm, but at least in the American system, the idea is that the corruption of the legislative branch will be held in check by the executive branch. Bushco has stood this idea on its head. The US is now in desperate need of a legislature to provide oversight of the executive branch and so far the legislative branch has not shown any inclination to fulfill such a role.

 

[Meadmaker]

Economic -3.75
Social -3.33

 

[davefoc]

Thanks for the poll Upchurch. One of the questions that I get when I describe the forum to other people is what is the general nature of the political views of the participants.

Fair enough.

As of this writing, only one person has identified themselves as socially conservative, which surprises the heck out of me. I realize I probably need to give at least a day (and a week would be even better), but I'm still surprised.

As of this writing there have been about four people (3 % of the poll participants) that have identified themselves as social conservatives. I was surprised that the number was that high.

I was also surpised at how few social/fiscal liberals there were. Given the number of Walmart is evil threads that pop up around here I would have thought there would have been more fiscal liberal voters.

There seems to be an undercurrent of views that strongly favor unions around here another indicator (I would have thought) of fiscal liberalism.

 

[demonologist]

holy crap, i didn't think i would be with the majority here.

 

[Upchurch]

As of this writing there have been about four people (3 % of the poll participants) that have identified themselves as social conservatives. I was surprised that the number was that high.

Proportionally, that's the same amount as when I posted.

 

[Jimbo07]

Economic Left/Right: -4.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.44

I was socially liberal, fiscally moderate. Should I change my vote to socially moderate/fiscally liberal?

 

[Meadmaker]

I was also surpised at how few social/fiscal liberals there were. Given the number of Walmart is evil threads that pop up around here I would have thought there would have been more fiscal liberal voters.

I identified myself as a fiscal conservative, but if it had asked about an economic leaning, instead of a fiscal leaning, I would have identified myself as moderate to liberal. The compass put me in with economic liberals.

 

[ImaginalDisc]

I identified myself as a fiscal conservative, but if it had asked about an economic leaning, instead of a fiscal leaning, I would have identified myself as moderate to liberal. The compass put me in with economic liberals.

Read their analysis page, it explains some of the seeming contradictions.

 

[Genesius]

Economic Left/Right: -4.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08


Hmmm. . . looks like I'm more moderate than I thought.

Better get out there and start burning some flags, smoking some pot, and aborting some babies to get my numbers up.

 

[Deus Ex Machina]

I was rather surprised at the low conservative turn out in my Marriage Poll. I don't know if that was due to the subject matter was not of interest to conservatives, or if the board is just predominately moderate to liberal.

If you would, please take the time to click on one of the above choices that best fits your world view. I know it is a complex world out there and people can have both steriotypically liberal and conservative view points on different issues (or even the same issue, from time to time). What I'm asking for is, if you had to put yourself down as one or the other, which would it be?

The problem I have with your poll is - what the hell is "socially liberal"? I cannot get my understanding around the categories. What would "fiscally conservative" mean? Does it mean believes in less taxation or does it mean an idealistic belief in people paying their own way? Or does the difference lie in supported for graduated income tax? Socially I would describe myself as "private" which means I do not wish to interfere in the social lives of others if at all possible and I am prepared to be sociable polite and nice to anyone who reciprocates. Live and let live I guess. Fiscally I support flat tax, pure and simple. I think governments are usually the worst way to invest money in projects but sometimes I doubt there is a better alternative.