Libertarian Values

page: 7
44
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 01:12 PM
link   


What suprised me is that my positioning has barely changed since I last did the test couple of years ago. I've only grown ever so slightly more libertarian.

Even though I do not consider myself libertarian I welcome the growing popularity of those ideals. At least for me the thinking goes so, that while I might not agree with everything I do not disagree with them on moral grounds - however I worry that ecnomic freedom would quickly turn into fascism of monopolies.




posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 01:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gigantopithecus
Actually I was dumbfounded at my result
, but it does explain a lot of things. Why I feel politics is dirty yet I am a firm believer that a country cannot progress without some form of government. While I trust myself to a responsible person, I don't trust others to be the same, there bound to be lunatics out there. I believe in one rule applies all, but I recognise there are exceptions. I am pro life, I hate abortion, but I am willing to bend my believe in certain cases. I am pro death, heinous criminals have to hang, but don't let prisoners over 60 rot in jail.


To be honest, I think most people in this country, when they are natural and uninfluenced by propaganda, are kind of centrist. They take stuff from both sides.



While I am clear in my thoughts and I am confident of telling right from wrong, I am not willing to share much because I don't believe people want to or are capable of understanding. I have little faith in human beings, all I see is bickering over nothing most of the time. I am also weary and I have contempt for clowns out there who would twist your beliefs and opinions.
They are all around ATS!


People make much ado about nothing, I agree. But your complaining about complainers is included in that much ado about nothing





Seriously, go look at all your threads, you don't take sides. In fact, a lot of your threads are middle ground controversies, looking at things from another angle. You couldn't be doing it for points right?
I truly believe you are a true centrist yourself.


Thats just a typical personality trait. I like to be like air rather than stone. Stone is unmoving but strong and substantial. Air is forever shifting, looking at stuff from different angles, never fixed to one viewpoint. That has its advantages and disadvantages.



By the way, I thoroughly enjoy threads/posts, by Riley, Phage, Melatonin, AshleyD and of course yourself, to name a few.


That fits right in there with the whole Centrist thing. These are, mostly, level-headed people that never get too extreme.



I am a bit embarrass to say, I share 90% of your views in all your threads. It explains why both of us are down the middle of the Political Company analysis. Only different is I don't subscribe to your believe of more freedom (relative to mine). Like I said, I just don't trust everyone to be responsible human beings. Some people just need to be watch over, agree?


Well...no...and thats why I am 2-3 dots down the box from you. Amazing how accurate this box can sometimes be.



Anyway, everything is relative. From where you are, you probably think I am more authoritative. From where I am, you appear to be recklessly waving freedom at the expense security. In the end, I think the Political Compass is an accurate gauge. No right or wrong, or which is better, you value more on freedom, I want to balance everything.


Which is needed. I've said throughout this thread that even I would not trust a bunch of Libertarians to run the country...yet.



Score/Results are based on questions on political issues, so I reckon the more centre you are (square 1 to 4 from centre whichever way ) the more you subscribe to be the peace maker (whom usually no one listen too!!)
. As you move away from the centre (square 5 to 7 whichever way) you join the passionate people club. Good or bad, these are leaders who standby their belief and ideology. Square 8 to 10 whichever way from the centre are extremists, your ultimate saviour or doom bringer type.


That sounds pretty accurate.

Way at the top and all the way to the left you have the Soviet Union and way at the top to the Right you have Nazi-Germany. Way on the bottom to the left you have raging Anarchists and Way at the bottom to the Right you have Elitists.

And it seems they are all a necessary part of the full box. And someday we might start thinking outside the box. But for that to happen most have to acknowledge that there even is a box


[edit on 2-4-2009 by Skyfloating]



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
Thread Stats

Green: 12
Purple: 5
Center: 2
Blue: 1
Red: 1


Its no surprise to me that the Green-field would be the strongest on a site like ATS.

The difference between Green-Box and Purple-Box Libertarians is that left-libertarians are bit more fiercely anti-government and anti-authority while the right-wing-libertarians ramble on about the Constitution, Self-Responsibility, etc. ATS being an anti-establishment site its probably full of Dalai Lamas, Ghandis, Mandelas.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 02:25 PM
link   


I'm close to Nelson Mandela on the chart, but I'm not as Libertarian as the Dalai Lama! That's pretty good company to be in. At least I don't have to share a place with Gordon Brown and George W Bush!



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 02:43 PM
link   
Economic Left/Right: 0.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21

4 Blocks down and slightly purple.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 03:05 PM
link   
This is really a great thread!
I would post my results, but I don't need to..My dot is in the same place as yours, Sky.

Had I taken this test 3 years ago, My dot would be in a completely different spot. I should go back, and take the test again..Trying to answer with my opinions from that time..



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 03:19 PM
link   
Oh, never posted my results:

Economic Left/Right: -3.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.18

"Left libertarian" which I guess is about right...



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 03:31 PM
link   
Since there's been talk about how many consider Star Trek to show their utopian world I'd like to ask a question to the more anti-socialist people:


If there was no competition for resources ie. there was "enough for everyone" would you still be opposed to the socialist ideal of giving everyone according to their need?



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 04:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Toveri
If there was no competition for resources ie. there was "enough for everyone" would you still be opposed to the socialist ideal of giving everyone according to their need?


As an anti-socialist Libertarian allow me to respond with a big **YES***.

First off, I personally dont actually believe there is a scarcity of resources. Secondly, I believe it is of benefit for everyone to learn skills during their lifetime and not become dependent on others welfare.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   


I guess I'm right around Mandella, Ghandi and the Dalai Lama.


I find it rather amusing that it's also the one with both negative X and Y coordinates (in the cartesian coordinate system) and a rather vacant quadrant in the comparison-of-leaders graphs.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by spacedoubt
I should go back, and take the test again..Trying to answer with my opinions from that time..


Where would it be? Just curious.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
First off, I personally dont actually believe there is a scarcity of resources. Secondly, I believe it is of benefit for everyone to learn skills during their lifetime and not become dependent on others welfare.


I agree about abundance but I also think it's incumbant upon us to help those without the means to get a start, get that start, mosly for the long-term good of everyone. I'd rather pay a little now than alot more later and get back in the nature of what I gave.

Many that would take it do not want to stay there. I have practical, real-life reasons for this view where anti-socialist idealism actually impeded people's path to becoming productive and thus paying the benefits back many-fold. In some cases they were long time payers into the system that were inequitably denied when they most needed what they paid for.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 


I would have figured thats your stance from looking at your box-results.

I´ll go along with you on "free-lunch" in terms of schooling and education...but not a step further



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
reply to post by EnlightenUp
 


I would have figured thats your stance from looking at your box-results.

I´ll go along with you on "free-lunch" in terms of schooling and education...but not a step further


From my box you look fascist!



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   


well said



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Female Libertarians are often more in the greenish square while its common for male Libertarians to be purple-ish. Something I find rather interesting.


This is indeed relevent. I probably would have been more purple-ish but I'd say that what pushes me left into the green is, even though I am male, personal experience with some women's situations (not because of intimate relationships). Secondly, minorities since my girlfriend is one. Thirdly, people need to have a means of balancing their interests with that of business interests with amplified level of influence. The government is supposed to act through the people on their behalf to preserve and defend their rights and freedoms. Whether government is a problem or a solution depends on the people see to that performs its proper function. This requires dicipline and not seeing a government of the people as being a tool that is meant to give the people the opportunity to play "king for a day".

Too extreme an emphasis on the individual may actually indicate a fascist tendency to control others by denying them life and liberty under social Darwinist ideals. Extremes meet.

I see the indications of there being quite a gulf between "leaders" and the people at large. One that has ambitions to lead quite logically has more fascist tendencies as opposed to one like Ghandi who can naturally attracts "followers" (I dislike that term in general) through respect rather than fear and lust for power. In the latter case, more lasting and truer power lies even though paradoxically the individual does not crave it.

In short, I prefer to not have another gilded era, Soviet Union or Nazi Germany and I look forward to the time when we're mature enough to not require any form of centralized goverment-- self-nations. Until we reach that point, a counterbalancing and stabilizing force must present itself so that things don't swing too far the oppose ways in reaction.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 09:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Skyfloating
 


I'm thinking I'd be in the lower center of the blue zone.
I'll take the test later this evening, and try to answer as the " person" I was just 3 or 4 years ago. I've changed my stance on a few issues since then.



posted on Apr, 2 2009 @ 10:13 PM
link   
I personally just joined the Libertarian Party myself. I used to say I was a 'conservative democrat', being a Black man raised with the misnomer that the Dems were always on our side. Then I joined the US Navy, which I know doesn't make me a Conservative, but I think it started me down the path of awakening. seeing the difference in just the military consciousness of Republicans and Democrats. Now, during the last year or so, as a truck driver, I have been all over the US, red and blue states, regions, etc. I think personally we should end the two-party rule in America. If we all thought not as Libertarians per say, but as citizens of this country and elected officials of the same mindset, we would be better off. No partisanship, just do whats legal and right for the country and ourselves. Thats what we need to get back to. We shouldn't have to worry that, oh no the (Dems/Reps/Liberals/Conservatives) control all three branches of govt so....blahzay, blah, blah. Just get in there and fix it the first time. No filibuster, no looking to see where such and such stands. Is it good? vote yea. Its not good? vote no. I know it won't happen and I guess its my own little happy place. But jeez. I am 38 years old. The nation isn't close to what it was when I was growing up(what I remember anyway). And thats before the false flag event across the river from where I grew up. I was excited that we finally 'elected' a Black man as puppet...I mean President. I felt it really was 'Change We Need' here. for a couple of days. Then I started seeing all of his failures up to now ALREADY. I immediately lost faith in the Democratic Party, and as for the Republicans? Let's just say I had 7 years, 364 days too much of them. I fly an upside down flag on my facebook page. I'm waiting for them to tell me to remove it.
The country is on the express escalator to Hades with this two-party system. Until we get real change in the District of Confusion, I'm at least going down with people I get.



posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 12:47 AM
link   


Economic Left/Right: 1.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.26

I was quite suprised. I was more much Authoritarian (right below the line) when I took this about a year before the Election. Ron Paul opened my eyes to believe in the Constitution. It is strange how most of the public doesn't even know about Libertarianism. I know I certainly didn't. I can safely say I lean as a Conservative Libertarian.

I think it would be beneficial to the general public to educate them on what Libertarian is, ect. (Not in a biased way.) I know more people would believe in personal responsibility then.

[edit on 4/3/2009 by FadeToBlack]



posted on Apr, 3 2009 @ 12:48 AM
link   
Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.03





Sort of Neutral, closest to Ghandi

Not too sure what the numbers mean though





new topics
top topics
 
44
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join