Mîtiu Ioan
Deity
I know that ideologies isn't exactly history, but is very close to this subject.
I read some posts here and I belive that there are many confusions related with this subject.
I will present my opinion related with this and wait your critics/comments.
Personnaly I belive that all ideologies is based on consideration on human nature and first question raised to a ideology is the next : "How is the human conditions?".
Here are two mainly answers :
1. Human nature are preponderently good
In this moment appear a new question : How to unleash the potential of this good human condition?
Here I see two possible answers - based mainly on two principles :
1.a) Principle of concurence
This is the fundament of liberal ideology. ( here I speak in european terms, I know that in U.S. the word "liberal" have a little different sense ).
Of course here exist nuances :
- Is the human condition good enough that only the promotion of this principle is enough? - If you choose to answer "yes" probably you're a libertarian or anarchical liberalism ( I put both term - in romanian books their sens is equivalent - but I don't know if this situation is general, and I want to be well-understood ).
If choose "no" then - as a logical consequence - appear the necesity of state-institutions to protect and implement policy for this principle. But even in this situation appear nuances :
- how far should applies this principle? In a moderate manner or a radical one? - If someone answer "moderate" - it's probably adept of welfare liberalism. If someone answer "radical" than it's probably a adept of neoclasical liberalism.
1.b. ) Principle of cooperation
This is fundament of socialist ideology.
Here also exist nuances :
- exactly as previous - there exist a anarhical or utopical socialism for a "yes" answer.
But the same answer "no" give us two nuances :
- if choose for a moderate manner than will result social-democracy[/b]. If choose a radical manner will result communism. I must tell here my opinion that so-called communist country wasn't communist in fact - they ( my contry always during 1947-1989 ) was "bolshevism" !! The only country which may be called "communist" was probably Yugoslavia.
Of course - there doesn't exist in real life a "pure" ideology applied - some elements are interconected of course - but this are IMHO ideatic constructs needed to analyse real-world society.
I stop myself here to see your opinions ...
P.S. : The used term wasn't inteded to make any offense or something like this ...
P.S.S. : Excuse-me my bad english ...
P.S.S.S. : I had to sustain a exam on this subject in two weeks - so I want to check my ideas and my clasification.
P.S.S.S.S. : I hope I don't say something wrong to close or delete this thread ...
I read some posts here and I belive that there are many confusions related with this subject.
I will present my opinion related with this and wait your critics/comments.
Personnaly I belive that all ideologies is based on consideration on human nature and first question raised to a ideology is the next : "How is the human conditions?".
Here are two mainly answers :
1. Human nature are preponderently good
In this moment appear a new question : How to unleash the potential of this good human condition?
Here I see two possible answers - based mainly on two principles :
1.a) Principle of concurence
This is the fundament of liberal ideology. ( here I speak in european terms, I know that in U.S. the word "liberal" have a little different sense ).
Of course here exist nuances :
- Is the human condition good enough that only the promotion of this principle is enough? - If you choose to answer "yes" probably you're a libertarian or anarchical liberalism ( I put both term - in romanian books their sens is equivalent - but I don't know if this situation is general, and I want to be well-understood ).
If choose "no" then - as a logical consequence - appear the necesity of state-institutions to protect and implement policy for this principle. But even in this situation appear nuances :
- how far should applies this principle? In a moderate manner or a radical one? - If someone answer "moderate" - it's probably adept of welfare liberalism. If someone answer "radical" than it's probably a adept of neoclasical liberalism.
1.b. ) Principle of cooperation
This is fundament of socialist ideology.
Here also exist nuances :
- exactly as previous - there exist a anarhical or utopical socialism for a "yes" answer.
But the same answer "no" give us two nuances :
- if choose for a moderate manner than will result social-democracy[/b]. If choose a radical manner will result communism. I must tell here my opinion that so-called communist country wasn't communist in fact - they ( my contry always during 1947-1989 ) was "bolshevism" !! The only country which may be called "communist" was probably Yugoslavia.
Of course - there doesn't exist in real life a "pure" ideology applied - some elements are interconected of course - but this are IMHO ideatic constructs needed to analyse real-world society.
I stop myself here to see your opinions ...
P.S. : The used term wasn't inteded to make any offense or something like this ...
P.S.S. : Excuse-me my bad english ...
P.S.S.S. : I had to sustain a exam on this subject in two weeks - so I want to check my ideas and my clasification.
P.S.S.S.S. : I hope I don't say something wrong to close or delete this thread ...