What is your political idealogy?

[ComradeDavo]

Political parties vary from a single group with the same aims to a broad coalition with competing intrests. So here's a poll based upon idealogy rather than party, to see how you define yourself idealogically rather than party wise. Will be intresting to see how people from different areas of the world vary, and to see the splits amongst supporters of the same parties.

If you are confused to what an idealogy means, I will happily provide an example of a party and/or politician that follows it.

Apparantly it's spelt 'ideology'. Opps.

 

[emzie]

Without seeing the poll options but wanting to get a reply in quickly, centre left.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Without seeing the poll options but wanting to get a reply in quickly, centre left.

I've made it more defined than that. Center Left ecompasses around 5-6 of the options

 

[civver_764]

Anarchism is the only viable political ideology.

 

[Joecoolyo]

Whoa, way to many to choose from... (half of these I don't even know). Can't there just be a "liberal" button? Cause that's what I am (I'm no more social than I am market, I'm just a liberal!).

 

[JohnRM]

Registered Republican. Don't vote. Free thinker/Independent by nature.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Anarchism is the only viable political ideology.

Intresting, as I often see it as an actual lack of idealogy all together. Care to eleborate?

 

[civver_764]

Intresting, as I often see it as an actual lack of idealogy all together. Care to eleborate?

Anarchism is the only way in which humans can be completely free of being abused by those superior to them in the chain of hierarchy(whether it be capitalists or politicians), and also the only way in which the distribution of resources can be fair.

Anarchy is actually more clearly defined as libertarian socialism(or anarcho-communism). It has a very specific ideology - to hell with capitalism and hierarchy. A lot of people take it to mean no laws at all, which is patently false. The only thing that there is an absence of is hierarchy amongst humans.

 

[Phrossack]

Anarchy is extremely vulnerable to foreign invasion or strongmen.

 

[civver_764]

Anarchy is extremely vulnerable to foreign invasion or strongmen.

Few ways around this:

1) We aren't in the age of Imperialism anymore. Countries aren't just going to expand because they want to, not to mention the UN would never allow it. And it's really hard to find a cassus belli for a stateless society.

2) Anarchy does not prevent community militias from rising.

 

[ParkCungHee]

Few ways around this:

1) We aren't in the age of Imperialism anymore. Countries aren't just going to expand because they want to, not to mention the UN would never allow it. And it's really hard to find a cassus belli for a stateless society.

...The first defense of Anarchy is the responce of the Standing Armies of powerful States acting within an international organization.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Social liberal.

 

[JohnRM]

Anarchism is the only way in which humans can be completely free of being abused by those superior to them in the chain of hierarchy(whether it be capitalists or politicians), and also the only way in which the distribution of resources can be fair.

Anarchy is actually more clearly defined as libertarian socialism(or anarcho-communism). It has a very specific ideology - to hell with capitalism and hierarchy. A lot of people take it to mean no laws at all, which is patently false. The only thing that there is an absence of is hierarchy amongst humans.

Would you be opposed to the kind of unofficial/unwritten tribal-style "governments" that exist within the various other cultural groups such as the Kreen Akrore of Brazil, the Gebusi of New Guinea, or past tribal groups such as the Plains Indians of North America?

 

[civver_764]

...The first defense of Anarchy is the responce of the Standing Armies of powerful States acting within an international organization.

What?

Would you be opposed to the kind of unofficial/unwritten tribal-style "governments" that exist within the various other cultural groups such as the Kreen Akrore of Brazil, the Gebusi of New Guinea, or past tribal groups such as the Plains Indians of North America?

Proto-communist societies, you mean? I wouldn't be opposed to them, but I don't think we should go back to the stone age, no.

 

[Phrossack]

The UN has done squat to stop Ethiopia in Somalia. And anarchist militias are usually no match for trained and organised armies.

 

[JohnRM]

What?

Proto-communist societies, you mean? I wouldn't be opposed to them, but I don't think we should go back to the stone age, no.

In case you misunderstood, the Kreen Akrore and the Gebusi still exist and their societies still function quite nicely in a way that works for everyone. Stone is as important to them as sand it to us. It would be wholly ignorant and unfair to call them stone-age peoples. What's more is that they don't have nearly the levels of crime that we do, they don't go to war every few years, they don't destroy their own environments, nor do they have any of the many other social ills that we've struggled to find solutions to for many decades and centuries.

I would, furthermore, say that they are not proto-communist societies. They built societies where they are all in it together.

 

[Ekolite]

I'm generally to the left, a supporter of the ''nanny state'' (very slightly authoritarian), and an EU Federalist. I support the labour party (UK).

 

[ParkCungHee]

What?

The first defense you thought of was "I'm sure the state(s) and the military will ensure our security."
This is profoundly ironic.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

What's the difference between social liberal and left liberal ?

Personally I think ideologies and people who strictly follow them are stupid and everything should be decided on a case by case basis with very few guiding principles.
Most of my political views would put me left from the center and I have to bundle them and align with the ideolgies in the poll it would be either social democrat or social/left liberal.

 

[Munch]

After some deliberation voted Socialist.

Anarchy is actually more clearly defined as libertarian socialism(or anarcho-communism). It has a very specific ideology - to hell with capitalism and hierarchy. A lot of people take it to mean no laws at all, which is patently false. The only thing that there is an absence of is hierarchy amongst humans.

Yes anarchism is a word with huge negative connotations and an array of falsely attributed meanings. While I think anarchist, anti-hierarchical sentiments can be modestly popular, few people I know think well of anarchism.