Free Web Site - Free Web Space and Site Hosting - Web Hosting - Internet Store and Ecommerce Solution Provider - High Speed Internet
Search the Web

Question 15

What is your political philosophy - liberal, conservative, libertarian, socialist, green, etc.?

• Unrepentant liberal.. I marched for abortion rights, and civil rights, and against the vietnam war, I vote, always, and occasionally split my ticket but lately the conservatives have been taking over the other party and I have a harder time finding any republicans worth considering. (Suzane #62)

• My philosophy is to travel what the east calls the middle road. It's different to sitting on the fence. Thorough(sp?) wrote: "Two roads verged in the woods and I took the one less travelled by..". Why do you have to even choose a path though? Travelling the middle road is equivalent to taking neither path but instead taking the "middle road" between the two because it is better than the two options. What it means is that when you are presented with polarised options you should take the good from each and eliminate the bad from each. What you're left with is what (at least in your opinion) constitutes the middle road. Another way of saying it is to seek the truth not acceptance by a particular group. Politics is very superficial (in Australia anyway), to be honest there aren't many practical differences between our two main parties (Labour and Liberal) -

  however, they are somehow diametrically opposed to each other on any particular issue :)

  I'm against all grouping of thinking, all isms and any form of tribalism. So, in short my political philosophy is individual, I think capitalism, socialism and anarchy all have strengths and weaknesses but a combination of the three (or more) would be better than any by themselves. (NIN #868)

• I think I would classify myself as mostly libertarian with liberal leanings. I believe that government should stay out of our lives as much as possible, only inserting itself into the process where individual or group behaviors have tendencies to infringe on others' ability to exist and enjoy life. That includes future generations, not just ourselves.

  My personal philosophy is "Do no harm" and "You leave me along, I'll leave you alone". I do not believe in "Turn the other cheek."

  I would classify myself as an environmentalist, though not rabid about it. I consider pollution an infringement upon my individual rights and have no difficulty justifying draconic measures to remove it. I consider smoking in my presence an infringement upon my rights not to breath vile, disgusting, disease causing, malodorous, putrid pollutants, and I won't hesitate to do something about it. It's the old "your right to swing your fist ends where my nose begins." Your right to pollute ends where my right to breath begins. I have asthma and have enough trouble breathing on my own without anybody else stuffing crap into my lungs. I'm infuriated by the oil companies' monopoly over transportation technology and their deliberate suppression of alternative, non-polluting energy sources.

  I consider myself to be an ethical person. My wife complains occasionally about my unwillingness to bend 'my principles' in certain situations.

  My views on religion? Essentially, "leave me alone". If you believe something ridiculous, fine, but I don't want to hear about it. I've heard it all before and I don't care. In addition, don't even think about trying to direct my life and behavior based upon your particular religious dogma and don't ever try to indoctrinate my children about that crap in my taxpayer supported public schools. Religious groups should have no special status, such as they do today. I'm sick of supporting churches through their tax-exempt status; there's no difference between a church and a business, as far as I'm concerned. (Paul J. Koeck, #360)

• I'm a partly reconstructed socialist with Liberal leanings. (Paul Roberts #49)

• Well, somewhat libertarian, although I think that there are reasonable uses for a government. So I guess I'm a liberal libertarian who thinks that a government program may solve the problem, but it depends on the problem. (James A. Hulsey #551)

• I'm very liberal in all areas save capital punishment, which my very well-developed sense of vengeance makes me a proponent of. The members of my family range from agnostic to atheist and tend to lean to the left politically, as well. The exception being my brother, who, while atheist, is the Republican sheep of the family. (Alikhat #757)

• Card-carrying member of the Evil Socialist Hoarde of Canada (More commonly known as the New Democratic Party.) (Keith Brannen #713)

• The one I'm nearest to is 'liberal' - but not in the sense used today in the USA (mainly by republicans). 'Liberal' in Europe doesn't mean socialist in any sense. 'Liberal' is for freedom while also for equal rights to have freedom.

  My personal variant excludes group freedom; I think of rights as a momentuous compromise for ensuring equality when the wills of different people are opposed; and I'm worried most liberals are ignorant of the question 'who should have freedom' and take 'humans only' as default.

  I don't oppose regulation by state and law totally; but I would put much more weight on education instead. (Daneel #323)

• Moderate Republican. (Richard Trice #543)

• I'm a political moderate, By which I mean: I hold some views which could be defined as 'Conservative', but other views I hold could be defined as 'Liberal'. (pan #1432) Green Party. (Neal Stein #1984)

• Liberal independent. Not registered with any political party. (chib)

• I would describe myself as a progressive liberal (liberal progressive?). I dislike labels, because people tend to pigeonhole you. I usually find myself a bit left of center on most issues, but sometimes I find myself agreeing with liberatrians and conservatives. It depends on the issue. (John Hachmann#1782 )

• Economically, I'm on the left. Business should be regulated to protect the interests of the workers. I believe the unfettered free market concentrates wealth and increases poverty and inequality. I believe the state, if it's for anything, should be there to speak for the people against the independent power of capital, and not as currently in the UK and apparently elsewhere to subsidise already rich corporate interests and hand over public assets and services to them. It is much cheaper to provide, for example, free education out of taxes rather than, as is currently planned, to pay private companies to provide free education AND make a profit, and that's if the deal is honest and equitable, which none of them are.

  On social/personal issues and civil liberties, I'm libertarian. On foreign issues I'm anti-globalisation of capital and think the IMF, the WTO and the World Bank should be abolished, as their only purpose appears to be to prevent poor countries developing their economies in the interests of their own people and turn them into sweatshops for the rich west. The British foreign office should stop being the sales force for the arms industry and promote democracy and human rights instead - and that applies to the rest of the west as well. (Patrick Brown)

• *puts on flame-proof suit* Socialist

  You asked! ;0P (Nikitta #1759)

• I'm libertarian (with socialist tendencies) - I would really like to see the IRS building demolished (and then we could support the employees for a little while). (Alex #2007)