Poll: The Political Spectrum

[LawlessSquirrel]

Voted OTHER.

I'm an Anarchist, specifically of the 'Philosophical Anarchy' variety. In a nutshell, I feel modern governments are hideously outdated and inefficient, but that it was for a time a necessary evil. Not so any more.

Being forced to vote last election made me die a little inside.

 

[Plurralbles]

Fascist. Wikipedia:

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[14] They claim that culture is created by the collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus they reject individualism.[14] Viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, they see pluralism as a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[15][16]
They advocate the creation of a single-party state.[17] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement.[18] They identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[19]
Fascism rejects the concepts of egalitarianism, materialism, and rationalism in favour of action, discipline, hierarchy, spirit, and will.[20] They oppose liberalism (as a bourgeois movement) and Marxism (as a proletarian movement) for being exclusive economic class-based movements.[21

It just makes sense. One that didn't go off the deep end would be vastly superior.

 

[bobdonkey]

Libertarian I guess.

 

[EscapeGoat_v1legacy]

Warning: This post contains references to British politics

I'm socially conservative, as in I don't see why things should be changed arbitrarily, like New Labour have done. Introducing half-arsed policies designed to pander to the infestation of the so-called "politically correct", such as New Labour's diversity policies are, at worst, a waste of tax-payer's money and a nuisance to life at best. What's more, New Labour have been terribly lax in keeping order amongst their MPs. Despite that, I certainly don't support the Tories, seeing as how the current batch of them are of the New Right, which are, in my opinion, as bad as New Labour. No, my support lies with the Labour party of old, with a strong emphasis on social conservatism. For that matter, that view is at least partially shared by the paternalist, One Nation conservatives, again the older branch of the ideology, which I also share views with.

As for economics, I'm all for a mixed economy. You can't avoid capitalism - money makes the world go round, after all, and so some industries must be privatised in order for a country to make some money. But if some industries are nationalised - the new "commanding heights", so to speak - then I think its right that some of the country's money should go into and fund the industries which the taxpayer makes the most use of.

So in short, social conservatism, mixed economy.

Oh yeah. Sod things like "diversity", "environmental welfare" and "health and safety" until the main issues that actually matter are sorted out. After all, a country thrives by having a national identity, so diversity weakens it. Sure, having a diverse population is great, bringing commerce and foreign ideas into the country, but Britain should still be Britain. Envronmental welfare is another thing. Taking care of the environment is great. But, New Labour either didn't take it far enough, or took it to the wrong extreme. Same thing with the health-and-safety fascism that swept the country's governing classes. Too little that actually mattered, and too far with it as well.

So we can add authoritarian into the mix as well.

Overall then: socially conservative. Mixed economy, using some privitisation and some Keynesianism. Authoritarian. I guess that makes me either old Labour or traditional conservative, whichever you like.

 

[Fiz_The_Toaster]

Neutral, because both sides drive me crazy and I'd rather not associate myself with them. Mostly because I'm too cynical to be bothered by either.

 

[zHellas]

Hmm...

Not sure.

Which one supports a big government but isn't Fascism or Communism?

 

[Murderiser]

Social Democrat. BTW, having studied politics extensively, I can inform you that Socialism IS a political ideology. It just tend to get confused with Keynesian economics (which is different).

 

[VaderMan92]

Im a conservative as in I support the constitution. The US Constitution, that means that I am a proud supporter of freedom of speech, religion, states rights and the right to bear arms. And minimal government involvement in the lives of citizens.

 

[Tipsy Giant]

OT: I personally believe there is no such thing as a poor conservative, it's an oxymoron.

Hi. I am.

The fundamental idea of Conservatism is a small government and I'd rather pay for more things independently and pay less income tax.

But through tax we all share the financial burden and no-one has to be "poor" anymore.
why would you not want more tax for the rich? it's in your own interest

 

[katsumoto03]

Libertarian.

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

Minarchist, to be specific.

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

Yay, someone did it for me!

 

[thylasos]

Just call me "Throughoughly Modern Menshevik".

 

[RatRace123]

Neutral, I'd say. A bit more on the left, but I'm in no danger of falling off the wing, if you get my meaning.

 

[Nagisa94]

Socialist here

 

[Onyx Oblivion]

so I end up voting for whoever I disagree with least.

Ain't that what we all do?

 

[Berethond]

Apparently I hate the government.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/facebook/pcgraphpng.php?ec=6.12&soc=-6.97

 

[Mr Cwtchy]

Voted liberal. Specifically, I'm a social liberal with no knowledge of economics.

 

[daubie]

Socialism! Sadly it will never happen in America.

"I was aiming between their eyes, but I hit them in their stomachs." I don't know if that's the exact quote, but kudos to anyone who knows what it's about.

 

[Plurralbles]

Fascist. Wikipedia:

Fascists believe that a nation is an organic community that requires strong leadership, singular collective identity, and the will and ability to commit violence and wage war in order to keep the nation strong.[14] They claim that culture is created by the collective national society and its state, that cultural ideas are what give individuals identity, and thus they reject individualism.[14] Viewing the nation as an integrated collective community, they see pluralism as a dysfunctional aspect of society, and justify a totalitarian state as a means to represent the nation in its entirety.[15][16]
They advocate the creation of a single-party state.[17] Fascist governments forbid and suppress opposition to the fascist state and the fascist movement.[18] They identify violence and war as actions that create national regeneration, spirit and vitality.[19]
Fascism rejects the concepts of egalitarianism, materialism, and rationalism in favour of action, discipline, hierarchy, spirit, and will.[20] They oppose liberalism (as a bourgeois movement) and Marxism (as a proletarian movement) for being exclusive economic class-based movements.[21

It just makes sense. One that didn't go off the deep end would be vastly superior.

I cannot begin to describe how awful that system sounds. I guess I could start by saying that removing individuality removes a crucial aspect of the human experience and thus must be opposed. If I am to be absolved into a 'community' as some faceless being like the rest, what is the point of me being me? Removal of freedom (real freedom, none of this tea party "socialised healthcare removed freedom shit) is just not on.

Whilst lauding violence as a solution to everything is something that all humans do, this article describes it as something to be favoured. While humans wage war, those that experience it generally don't wish it upon themselves ever again. Violence certainly is a part of basic human nature, praising it on the level that this article seems to do is not.

Well... fascism is pretty damn awful when the country isn't scraping itself out of the gutter, but when it is in the gutter, nothing can give it an opportunity to get out faster.