View Full Version : How do you describe your self politically?
With reference to:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=158727
I wish I could add 'other', but I am limited to 10 options.
If you don't like to categorise your self (who does!) then go with what you think others most often think of you or don't vote.
Right (I'm from the USA)
Center Right (I'm from the USA)
Center (I'm from the USA)
Center Left (I'm from the USA)
Left (I'm from the USA)
Right (I'm NOT from the USA)
Center Right (I'm NOT from the USA)
Center (I'm NOT from the USA)
Center Left (I'm NOT from the USA)
Left (I'm NOT from the USA)
Platapus
12-02-09, 08:36 PM
Few people are "one" category across all aspects of society/governance.
I think there are a lot of people who are socially liberal but fiscally conservative.
And this does not include that right and left are not binary states, but are a spectrum between them.
Torplexed
12-02-09, 08:41 PM
I'm Right (from the Center) of the USA. :D
http://static.open.salon.com/files/us_in_daytime__copy1239841035.jpg
Yes, yes, I know.
It isn't meant to be a full, accurate or useful description of anyone's
political opinions, just the roughest of generalisations for GT as a whole.
YIt isn't meant to be a full, accurate or useful description of anyone's
political opinions
If you don't expect the result to be accurate or useful then what's the point of it?
If you don't expect the result to be accurate or useful then what's the point of it?
It isn't meant to be a full, accurate or useful description of anyone's
political opinions, just the roughest of generalisations for GT as a whole.
The number of umbrellas sold isn't a full, accurate or useful description
of the weather, but it gives you something to base a generalisation on.
It isn't meant to be a full, accurate or useful description of anyone's
political opinions, just the roughest of generalisations for GT as a whole.
The number of umbrellas sold isn't a full, accurate or useful description
of the weather, but it gives you something to base a generalisation on.
erm, ok. :doh:
Onkel Neal
12-02-09, 09:54 PM
You left out one catagory.
JACKASS = Letum :har:
C'mon, man :-?
Few people are "one" category across all aspects of society/governance..
No but you can sum yourself up overall, its not that hard to do.
"If you don't like to categorise your self (who does!) then go with what you think others most often think of you or don't vote."
I think there are a lot of people who are socially liberal but fiscally conservative..
So.. Center Right then...
And this does not include that right and left are not binary states, but are a spectrum between them.
Eh?? Yeah and its roughly catered for in the poll.
I voted center anyway, though Center left might have been better choice for me.. ah well.
From what I have read in the GT forums over the past week, My impression is that most are center Right...
CaptainHaplo
12-02-09, 10:44 PM
I know what your getting at. But ultimately I can be nothing but an "independant constitutionalist". As such - its not about "right or left", its about the merits of each issue, and what the constitution and common sense say about it.
For example - I have a personal opinion about homosexuality and gay marriage. While I have called people who are gay "friend", and meant it - I do not agree with the idea of gay marriage. However, what is more important is not my personal opinion - but rather the reality that no federal government has the legal authority to authorize or restrict gay marriage to its citizenry, without specific constitutional actions occuring. Specifically, because the Constitution does NOT empower the federal government to put its nose in the marriage business, it becomes a "States Rights" issue. As such, each State has (or at least is supposed to have) the authority to make its own laws about what it will or will not recognize among its own citizenry. Only if 33 of the 50 states by public referendum agree to ammend the federal constitution does the federal government really have the right to lay down a "blanket" policy. So regardless of what I or a federal politician things, its only up to the states. That stand doesn't put me on the "right" side of the issue, or on the "left". My personal opinion would be "to the right", but I could not in good conscience promote federal action based upon it. The stance also doesn't put me in "the center".
I like being outside the conventional political box - and judging by the ever increasing numbers of voters who are registering (or often changing their affiliations to) independant, alot of other folks like being outside the box too!
Bout time if ya ask me. Too many politicians looking in the box and trying to figure out what portion of its contents will vote for em just based on the letter beside their name.
I know what your getting at. But ultimately I can be nothing but an "independant constitutionalist". As such - its not about "right or left", its about the merits of each issue, and what the constitution and common sense say about it.
For example - I have a personal opinion about homosexuality and gay marriage. While I have called people who are gay "friend", and meant it - I do not agree with the idea of gay marriage. However, what is more important is not my personal opinion - but rather the reality that no federal government has the legal authority to authorize or restrict gay marriage to its citizenry, without specific constitutional actions occuring. Specifically, because the Constitution does NOT empower the federal government to put its nose in the marriage business, it becomes a "States Rights" issue. As such, each State has (or at least is supposed to have) the authority to make its own laws about what it will or will not recognize among its own citizenry. Only if 33 of the 50 states by public referendum agree to ammend the federal constitution does the federal government really have the right to lay down a "blanket" policy. So regardless of what I or a federal politician things, its only up to the states. That stand doesn't put me on the "right" side of the issue, or on the "left". My personal opinion would be "to the right", but I could not in good conscience promote federal action based upon it. The stance also doesn't put me in "the center".
I like being outside the conventional political box - and judging by the ever increasing numbers of voters who are registering (or often changing their affiliations to) independant, alot of other folks like being outside the box too!
Bout time if ya ask me. Too many politicians looking in the box and trying to figure out what portion of its contents will vote for em just based on the letter beside their name.
For me personally:
Abortion:
Its the woman body, her life and her business (and nobody elses tbh)
plus I dont think anyone can remember what it was like when they were a 3 month old feotous.
Gay marriage:
Again - none of my business, if homosexuals marry or not, it has zero impact on me.
but I see no reason to deny them the same freedoms as hetrosexuals.
(Sorry Christianity & Islam)
Gun Laws,
i live in the UK so its not really applicable, but I would not want thme legalized over here as the people who tend to actually want guns - tend to be the same people who have no intention of using them for the great of good. And plus we already have enough problems with Knife crime.
I guess its down to what ever you believe. applogies if my views offended anyone.
as the people who tend to actually want guns - tend to be the same people who have no intention of using them for the great of good.
I'm not offended but I'd sure be interested to hear your reasoning for this...
Edit: though it'd be better if it were in a more applicable thread!
Onkel Neal
12-02-09, 11:23 PM
I put Center-Right. The main thing that keeps me from being far right is I believe some regulatory oversight in critical markets is needed.
CaptainHaplo
12-02-09, 11:34 PM
JU 88 - I was not offended. Your entitled to your view.
On abortion - what if that is YOUR child - a son or daughter yet unborn, that a woman carries. Yes - its in her body, but its also part of YOU. Funny, its her choice alone, but the moment that child takes its first breath - it becomes YOUR responsibility primarily. 9 months < 18 years. See any "inequality" there? Thats a personal view, but my stance still stands in regards to the US - it should be a states rights issue.
Regarding guns, I have to ask - what makes you feel that legalized firearms represent a danger to the average citizenry? I view it this way - if someone is WILLING to go through the necessary steps to legally own a firearm - ie take any required safety courses, register the weapon, etc - they have shown a level of responsibility much higher than those who would get a firearm ILLEGALLY. Or as is often said in my area of the US - if you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have them. And as you noted regarding knife violence - what happens if you have a knife and are attacked by a outlaw with a firearm? Do you have any reasonable chance of self-defense or self-preservation? But again - your entitled to your view. I do need to make clear - in the US the right to own firearms is one that IS protected by our constitution - and thus is NOT a states rights question, but a already established right upon which the government has limited authority to control.
With reference to:
http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=158727
I wish I could add 'other', but I am limited to 10 options.
If you don't like to categorise your self (who does!) then go with what you think others most often think of you or don't vote.
Right (I'm from the USA)
Center Right (I'm from the USA)
Center (I'm from the USA)
Center Left (I'm from the USA)
Left (I'm from the USA)
Right (I'm NOT from the USA)
Center Right (I'm NOT from the USA)
Center (I'm NOT from the USA)
Center Left (I'm NOT from the USA)
Left (I'm NOT from the USA)
I give a vote....
Aramike
12-03-09, 12:41 AM
Oh man, I GOTTA bite: :O:Gay marriage:
Again - none of my business, if homosexuals marry or not, it has zero impact on me.
but I see no reason to deny them the same freedoms as hetrosexuals.A couple problems here.
First, is DOES impact everyone to create laws that impact the taxation of ANYONE.
Second, and more poignant, homosexuals and heterosexuals ALREADY HAVE THE SAME FREEDOMS. What most homosexuals want are SPECIAL freedoms recognizing their (extremely) minority position.
To be quite frank, I don't even see this as an issue, but I absolutely HATE how the one side of it presents it as an "equal rights" issue, when it is CLEARLY a "special rights" concern.
But, I *WILL* remain solidly opposed to gay "marriage" as I believe in respecting ones traditions, and in the US marriage is traditionally heterosexual. However, I'm am totally okay with "civil unions" which bestow the EXACT SAME RIGHTS, with the exception of adoption.
Most people would probably be okay with that - the problem is not that so-called "gay rights" activists want special rights recognizing their orientation. Rather, they want to legally ENFORCE a change on the very belief systems that oppose them.
The hell with them. I'll be in their corner when they lose the "bow before me" posture.
I'm not offended but I'd sure be interested to hear your reasoning for this...
I don't want to answer back for JU_88 but here's my point of view:
IMHO, lot of Americans (and the government too) seems to make the promotion of guns/weapons as way to resolve many social problems (even for ''personal security''), the result is inevitably a more violent society.
I consider myself lucky to live in my peaceful part of North America, there are no mass shootings or terrorist threat here.
Sailor Steve
12-03-09, 03:56 AM
I used to place myself on the right, but every time I take one of those silly tests I come out either square in the middle or just the tiniest bit to the left.
So I voted CENTER. I always place myself on the side of individual liberty, so I end up on the right of some issues and the left of others.
I'm more than glad to discuss any and all issues, but this was a poll about where you place yourself, not every single reason why. If we're going to start arguing the issues all over again, I vote for creating new threads. Otherwise this is going to bog down real fast.
antikristuseke
12-03-09, 04:29 AM
Depends on the issue, life is not black and white.
Schroeder
12-03-09, 06:20 AM
Depends on the issue, life is not black and white.
Agreed. Depending on the question I go from sometimes far left to far right. So centre would probably be my answer though I usually circle around it without hitting it (most of the time:D).
I wasnt refering to gun owners in the U.S.A, i was refering a hypothetical legilsation of guns here (If it happened) the first people to go out to try to obtain a fire arm would be the criminals and gang members.
....Followed by eveyone else, who would only be do it in order to defend themselves from 'those people' and feel safe.
In my view a good person is someone who really doesnt what to put a bullet in the head of a person who never did them any harm.
A bad person does - or doesnt care.
Back ground checks and training are NOT suffiecent to stop the wrong people from getting a gun. they will just get someone lese to buy it for them - or steal one.
In the UK, guns are outlawed and 99% of criminals do NOT have guns, and I am happy with it staying that way. Gun crime in the Uk has risen in the past few years, but its still uncommon.
As for abortion, I have been in a relationship where my partner had one.
(along time ago)
I am certainly not proud of it, nor do I feel indifference.
But - it was the right thing to do at the time, as we could not have provided a good or stable life for it.
That is very personal and I really dont wish talk about it any further.
Regardless I do not apply the same rights to an unborn feutus as I do to new born baby.
The Man does not go though Physical truma of Birth, so what he wants has to take second place
and thats just too bad.
Like I said, my views are just that, mine. They are what is right by me, but it doesnt mean i expect them to be right by everyone.
So other than the above, i dont wish to discuss or justify them any further.
- sorry.
Skybird
12-03-09, 06:41 AM
Such labels are given not by the protagonist, but the audience observing him. I have had threads here wehre I was called a rightwinger, even a Nazi, at the same time somebody else some posts earlier or later called me a lefty or socialist.
It also depends the issue at question, on which I have formed an opinion. The same people that called me left on one issue, may see me as a rightwinger on another.
I personally do not care for how I sh/could label myself, or get seen by others. On issues that interest me, I form an opinion if I feel I have the minimum needed information and education to do so. Where I have not, I refuse to form an opinion, often. that I am able to bring my opinion into line with my conscience and can defend in argument why I am for this and am against that, is much more important, imo.
Conservatism to me means no content and message in itself, but a method, or a strategy: to stick whith something whose value has been shown in the past and has not been put in doubt in the present. chnage for no other reason than chnaging something, I do not like. But to chnage where it is needed and the old habits have turned out to be counterproductive - imo is not contradictory to conservatism.
On some issues I do not think inside the established standards of what goes and what not. Today'S "democracies" I put in doubt. I deny that democracy in all and every circumstance is the best of all possible models. To me it is very much depending on community size.
On controversial measures I often think in terms of "as little as possible but as much as needed". Often this are situations and issues where the acchieving of a defined effect has priority over preferences for or against certain types of measurements. It is a testing of the individual case. Public discussion often sees these things exactly the other way around, and sees needs as subordinate to measures that must be conducted or must be avoided at all cost, no matter what. However, I do not subscribe to a general argument of that the purpose always justifies the means - that is just a generalisation. I tend to think that good intentions alone mean not much if you lack the capability or willingness of bringing them to life. Indeed, the combination of weakness and good intentions often produces more bad than good.
Maybe I qualify for a description of an eclectic. No vote from me, obviously. I cannot identitfy myself with any of the categories.
TDK1044
12-03-09, 06:56 AM
I try and apply common sense to any political issue. Sometimes that puts me right of center and sometimes it puts me left of center. I think that being on the extreme right or left means that you are likely to be less objective about things in general.
UnderseaLcpl
12-03-09, 07:20 AM
I like the number of posts I'm seeing here wherein people identify themselves as independents. Refusal to identify with a political label is a good indicator of dissatisfaction with established parties and views - something we need badly at the moment. There are few things more harmful than an established and unrestricted power structure.
Speaking of established power structures, I would invite those of you giving Letum crap about this survey to consider the power structures that govern your own thoughts and actions, namely, your own brains. What right do you have to criticize Letum for attempting to collect data? Yeah, the survey isn't the best, but he has already pointed out why, and you should have known that it wasn't going to be a precise survey by virtue of the fact that it's a forum poll. :x:D
To answer your question, Letum, I will say that I hold socially liberal and fiscally conservative views of the American variety. More than anything, I believe that the violation of personal freedoms is both immoral and socially harmful. I recognize the need for a state to enforce protections of freedoms, but I see it as a necessary evil that must be limited as much as possible. I see fiscal and societal controls beyond an near-minimum as harmful. To put it briefly, I believe in free minds and free markets.
For the purposes of you survey, count me as one vote for American right and one vote for American left. If a label would be more helpful, call me a Libertarian.
I would invite those of you giving Letum crap about this survey to consider the power structures that govern your own thoughts and actions, namely, your own brains. What right do you have to criticize Letum for attempting to collect data? Yeah, the survey isn't the best, but he has already pointed out why, and you should have known that it wasn't going to be a precise survey by virtue of the fact that it's a forum poll. :x:D
Well I for one fail to see it's purpose. He said himself that the results wouldn't be useful or accurate so it leaves me wondering why he's doing it at all.
UnderseaLcpl
12-03-09, 08:39 AM
Well I for one fail to see it's purpose. He said himself that the results wouldn't be useful or accurate so it leaves me wondering why he's doing it at all.
Why should you even care? Letum wants to do a survey for his own reasons, whatever they may be, and that is all there is to it. You can choose to respond or not, as you wish. Is it such a terrible imposition?
I also question the validity of whatever conclusion he arrives at, given the survey method, but since I don't know what that conclusion is really based upon, I can't judge that. Maybe he just wants to hear people's opinions.
When it comes down to it, this is just a guy we know asking a question. What's the harm in answering honestly, or not answering at all, as the case may be?
I've always considered myself as left, but as I've grown up I've drifted more towards center and now even occasionally drift center-right.
Although I suspect that in the real world thought most people would vote for the unwritten catagory which is 'apathetic'.
Is it such a terrible imposition?
Who said it was?
I also question the validity of whatever conclusion he arrives at, given the survey method, but since I don't know what that conclusion is really based upon, I can't judge that. Maybe he just wants to hear people's opinions.
When it comes down to it, this is just a guy we know asking a question. What's the harm in answering honestly, or not answering at all, as the case may be?
No harm at all. But on the other hand is there some kind of harm in asking why he's doing it?
onelifecrisis
12-03-09, 09:22 AM
FWIW I don't think Letum meant this thread as some sort of dig at the US. Aramike commented that the US is more right-wing than Europe, in a thread which asked why the American members of GT are right-wing. Letum's thread seems quite relevant to me. He's not saying what is good or bad he's just finding out where people place themselves politically. No need to get all pr!ckly about it. I'd be flattered if a US poster made the same thread about the UK...
UnderseaLcpl
12-03-09, 09:43 AM
No harm at all. But on the other hand is there some kind of harm in asking why he's doing it?
It might ruin the survey. Maybe its a single-blind experiment. :DL
Why I started the poll?
I thought that was self explanatory; to see if there was any truth in
some of the claims and counter claims in the other topic (LINK (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=158727)).
I certainly didn't start it to make a point of anything.
It should be taken at face value.
OneToughHerring
12-03-09, 10:38 AM
When I did that one test it said I was more left-liberal then Gandhi. The other test aimed at Americans said that I was something called a "neo-liberal". Now I've heard of neo-conservatives but what's a neo-liberal? :)
Actually, I think there was an explanation but I don't think it's fully accurate. The thing is, I live in a country where church and state are more or less one, there is mandatory military service/civilian service/you go to prison - thing for all healthy men. This kind of sets us apart from, say, Americans.
HunterICX
12-03-09, 10:52 AM
the way I see myself politically? - Center Right, Not American.
HunterICX
Torvald Von Mansee
12-03-09, 02:44 PM
I think I should reiterate that my original post in the other thread reflected my perceptions of how I saw American Subsimmers. There could be all sorts of errors in how I perceived things, or why those perceived things came to the fore in the first place.
Anyway, it looks like I sparked discussion!! Go, me!!! :rock:
lambda*sqrt(u*x)
12-03-09, 02:56 PM
Left/Not American
Though some would consider me to be a right-winger in Europe...
I stand for the right to bear arms, the right to abstain from war (except combat sims!!), the freedom of speech, being free from religious or ideological indoctrination; I'm anti-authoritarian, though pro welfare systems and contra the free market (that's not the freedom I'm free in). I'd vote in favor of traditions like good manners and gentlemanship, but my patriotism ends at my own fence.
I'm not anti-European, but I'm against the European Union and the Lisbon Treaty because I see no benefit in it except the profit of the global players. A propos - call me a nationalist, but I'm against economic globalization. Vienna had a tradition of cafés... I don't want to see it vanish under McCafés and Starbucks looking all the same wherever you are, be it in the harbour of Scapa Flow or in La Spezia ;)
Mind your own business, I guess William S. Burroughs brought it to that point.
EDIT: Typo
Jimbuna
12-03-09, 06:24 PM
Billy Connolly: "Don't vote, it only encourages the bas*ards."
Sailor Steve
12-04-09, 03:25 PM
I'm highly offended by all those who voted "Not American".
Why, it's just...just...UnAmerican!!!:rotfl2:
Sorry guys - couldn't resist.
I'm highly offended
Glad to meet ya Highly Offended. My name is Dave. :smug:
Torvald Von Mansee
12-05-09, 01:21 AM
Hmmm...I'm an odd bit on political views. Here are some things I'm for:
legalization of drugs, prostitution, etc.
guns!! guns!! guns!!!
population reduction (a LOT of people who have no business breeding breed like RATS)
recognition of religion as an obstacle to civilization/clear thought, and its hopeful elimination
the elimination of dynastic wealth/power
animal rights
Well, there's more, but that's all I feel like writing about, right now.
Shearwater
12-05-09, 04:38 AM
I'm highly offended by all those who voted "Not American".
Hilarious.
:rotfl2:
lambda*sqrt(u*x)
12-05-09, 06:15 AM
legalization of drugs, prostitution, etc.
guns!! guns!! guns!!!
population reduction (a LOT of people who have no business breeding breed like RATS)
recognition of religion as an obstacle to civilization/clear thought, and its hopeful elimination
the elimination of dynastic wealth/power
animal rights
I agree with you, Torvald von, on legalization of drugs, guns, animal rights and the elimination of dynastic wealth/power. Though - the latter of which I agree on, the elimination of dynastic wealth/power is something I don't believe will ever happen.
Even without a degree in social theories one can be sure that as soon as one dynasty or elite is thrown from its throne, the next one will follow, good or bad that is. That's how I see it. All your points I can agree on perfectly fit the "mind your own business" way of life...
As for religion... well... I wouldn't care if my neighbour worshipped Satan, Jehovah (don't stone me please!) or the Spaghetti Monster - as soon as he accepts to the same degree that I worship submarines, erm, nothing.
And the population reduction idea... well... I don't care. Though it's fascinating and a bit unsettling how many white trash youths you can see pushing their offspring through Viennese streets in strollers...
Well, 10/20, 50% of Americans that voted describe themselves as on the right.
1/14, 7% of Europeans that voted described them as Right.
Torvald Von Mansee asked "Why do American SubSimmers more often
than not....seem to be right of center, even far right of center,
politically?"
The poll would suggest that there isn't a significant majority of
Americans on the right; just more than there are Europeans on the right.
Those who questioned the premise of the linked thread have a good point.
I worship submarines,We need to flourish this into a fully fledged religion.
And so the Submarine cast its torpedoes into the waters of the universe and brought forth existence from the convoy of creation.
Sailor Steve
12-05-09, 02:15 PM
Glad to meet ya Highly Offended. My name is Dave. :smug:
Hi, Dave. My first name is Highly, but my friends usually call me Hi. So "Hi, Hi!" is often heard when I enter a room.
Hi, Dave. My first name is Highly, but my friends usually call me Hi. So "Hi, Hi!" is often heard when I enter a room.
:D :D
Torvald Von Mansee
12-06-09, 12:57 AM
I agree with you, Torvald von, on legalization of drugs, guns, animal rights and the elimination of dynastic wealth/power. Though - the latter of which I agree on, the elimination of dynastic wealth/power is something I don't believe will ever happen.
Even without a degree in social theories one can be sure that as soon as one dynasty or elite is thrown from its throne, the next one will follow, good or bad that is. That's how I see it. All your points I can agree on perfectly fit the "mind your own business" way of life...
As for religion... well... I wouldn't care if my neighbour worshipped Satan, Jehovah (don't stone me please!) or the Spaghetti Monster - as soon as he accepts to the same degree that I worship submarines, erm, nothing.
And the population reduction idea... well... I don't care. Though it's fascinating and a bit unsettling how many white trash youths you can see pushing their offspring through Viennese streets in strollers...
Well, one's ideal society will never come to pass, but you can still keep those ideals and pursue them as best you can.
The problem with religion is that the followers of religion inevitably, one way or another, try to tell me how to lead my own life. Some are worse than others!!
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.