It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


does anyone else not fall into the left-right paradigm?

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:19 PM
ooppss, wrong key.
anyhow, to use myself as an example.
i am pro-choice, yet think the borders should be locked down.
i tend to look at issues individually and refuse to tow a part line.
i think this is a major issue that should be discussed.
i don't understand how an individual can basically not think for themselves and just fall into a category.
edit on 1-3-2011 by rubbertramp because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:29 PM
I agree, each issue should be judged individually. Though I am a strict Constitutionalist. I believe the Constitution is the law of the land and any laws that go against it are void. Any federal laws that exceed the powers allotted to the federal government are void. Abortion is murder. The borders need to be locked down. While I believe gay marriage is disgusting, I see no legal reason for the government to intervene in it. I do lean much more conservative than liberal, but that is because liberals tend to violate more parts of the Constitution than conservatives in general.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:34 PM
reply to post by sonofliberty1776

nicely said, but

Abortion is murder.

what shall the punishment be for a woman that has one?
life in prison, murder one, or would that only be regarding whomever performed it?
if a woman said she wanted one shall she be locked up till she gives birth?
wouldn't it be unconstitutional to create a law making abortion illegal without a penalty?

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:35 PM
Cant say i give a crap about either side, nor do i even ponder what side im on... im on the side of liberty, freedom, and choice... so whatever party that is, im all for it... but in reality i think all politicians are the same, and the rebublican/democrat labels, are horse ##. Just like jesse ventura once said, politics are alot like pro-wrestling... you put on a show in public, then behind the scenes your eating at the same places, doing the same things etc etc... all just nonsense to me IMO

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:37 PM
reply to post by morder1

true enough, my government is bought and paid for.
it's really not a left right issue as much as it is a lobbyist one.
he who has the most money wins.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:40 PM
what ive found is that folks who say they have "moved beyond the right/left paradigm" usually fail to realize that even if you have indeed gotten out of that mindset, the so-called "progressive" left has become so blatantly dangerous and pathological at this point in time that it makes sense to specifically challenge their fascist/statist practices and fight against them when necessary.

so, yeah. you can claim that you aren't doing the left/right thing. but we still need to be intellectually honest enough to fight against outright progressive fascism when we see it. it is too dangerous to do anything else.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:41 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

In my experience most people who claim a staunch party-line often are simply focusing on certain issues that are important to them and blindly following with the rest.

I've never claimed a party I seldom vote for elected officials (although I do read the literature and if one seems to actually be more good than bad I will get off my butt and vote but this is rare) and I will often vote for candidates outside of the 2 party system. It is quite possibly a wasted vote but to me it is a statement that the mainstream offerings are weak and I'd rather waste a vote than vote for one of the yahoos I've been presented.

I would love to see candidates all individually say exactly where they stand on all major issues and give a basic personal philosophy for issues that don't yet exist or aren't covered. This to me would be preferable than a right -left label that few people actually kow what it means outside of catchphrases and propaganda.

Finally I listen to liberal and conservative media and think they are both too narrow in their scope which makes them look like idiots in my opinion.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:42 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

I actually change affiliations at random intervals, republican one day, democrat the next etc. This way I get junk mail from both sides and confuse the hell out of the bean counters.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:45 PM
reply to post by MMPI2

point taken, but you expressed your opinion without an example for me to respond too.

for instance, lets take the wars.
we know who basically got us into the ones we are in.
we also know that most dems were foolish enough to think obama would get us out of them.
yea right, i knew better.
on many issues i do believe the endgame is the same no matter which side claims what.
action does speak louder than words.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:50 PM
Being only for the left, or only for the right cause everyone to go in circles, which is what they want. I don't go left. I don't go right. I go forward!

I've never been for the left or the right. With all due respect to the many and multitudes who are, I've always thought that people who are are lazy thinkers and need someone to think for them, tell them what to do, what to vote for and who to like and who to hate. In SOME respects, it's an immature mind.

The whole left / right concept was designed to keep the masses separated in countless ways, and soon what once was something you would vote for suddenly becomes something you wouldn't vote for in a million years because you're from one side or the other.

One of the main reasons for the problems in our society is because we're separated like that. Imagine ALL the obstacles that would not exist and all the roadblocks suddenly become free and clear!

When you're on one side or the other, the other side is treated like an enemy, or idiots, or now even terrorists.

Do you know how many people vote on party lines on all matters? They don't know the candidates, or the laws or pretty much anything. All they know is they MUST vote for republicans, or democrats because that's how they've always done it.

Why do we put others and ourselves in these social group prison cells? I’m not saying who’s fault it is, but he says it’s hers and she says it’s his.

Lets erase the chalk from the sides we drew and shake hands with the ones we knew.

In, Out. Left, Right. There should only be one crowd.

Being only for the left, or only for the right cause everyone to go in circles, which is what they want. We don't go left. We don't go right. We now go forward!

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:52 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

I think they should abolish the left and right and force compromise between the voters...silly as it sounds...they know what they are doing and isn't it amazing how both sides can have their own news far as the Tea Party goes can't say I fall into that category either and one huge reason is Sarah Palin...I can't handle her and it's nauseating to imagine her running for president...let's be clear I'm not happy with our POTUS and all the thugs and tax dodgers he tried to get in at the begining of his seemed like one scandle after another...and thanks Bush for the war in the middle east because that worked out great for everyone...let me just say that we will never get out of that war until this recession is over...there are simply no jobs for them to come back to and the unemployment numbers would take a sharp increase if that was to happen..Thanks OP for starting this post...

The other reason is you can never get one side to admit their wrong and in their throws of denial they always try and point out some shortcomings of the other party...very frustrating to have a conversation with either side on politics...
edit on 1-3-2011 by chrismarco because: left something out...

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 08:56 PM
reply to post by OneNationUnder

love it. to use the old cliche', divide and conquer works and rarely benefits the citizens.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:03 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

point taken, but you expressed your opinion without an example for me to respond too.

the best example i can think of is the rampant refusal of the "progressive" left to address the porosity of the southern border. they know that to leave the US / mexican border unsecured will eventually result in a horrible catastrophic event(s) (i.e., some nut will be able to pack a suitcase nuke/weaponized anthrax across the rio grande) yet the majority of the progressive left in congress and the obama white house refuses to consider anything other than outright lies and denial. the protestations against taking action persist, even despite a clear constitutional basis for border security.

the "left" will own whatever disaster eventually result. until then, sane and logical thinking people need to provide a countervoice to the "progressive"/left insanity and childishness.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:26 PM
reply to post by MMPI2

sure, the border is a top issue with me.
let me ask though,
besides talk, what has the right done about the issue?
this is what i mean, the left wants the border open, and the right talks a bit tougher regarding the issue, yet nothing has been done.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:29 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

i am pro-choice, yet think the borders should be locked down.

Hey...I'm pro-life and think the borders should be wide open.

I think you are my evil twin ( are the evil one)

It's funny though, because I am participating in an abortion thread right now. And instead of addressing my arguments...the pro-choicers just call me a crazy conservative religous freak. Doesn't bother me's just fun to make them eat their words.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:36 PM
reply to post by rubbertramp

well, since the issue really started coming to a head in late 2009 & 2010, a "progressive" has held the mantle of "CNC" over the United States military, and has done little to nothing other than give lip service to "providing for the common defense" of the nations' security in this regard.

additionally, this very weak and obviously compromised president has been empowered by a legislative branch that has been comprised of a leftist do-nothing majority. since the border issue has really heated up, you have gang and guerrilla warfare leaking like sewage across the texas, arizona, california borders, and mexican paramilitary forces have made armed and fatal incursions into sovereign U. S. territory, trafficking high volume narcotics, killing on-duty, uniformed border patrolmen, and kidnapping and murdering American citizens.

so, in a sense, you are right. the so-called conservative "right" hasn't been able to do much substantive to address the issue other than at a very local level. progressive activist groups, the obama justice department and very liberal federal district judges have done essentially everything they can to defeat these local initiatives designed to do what the federal government refuses to do...all because of leftist/"progressive" mindset.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:46 PM
reply to post by morder1

i agree,

most people are left about some things and right about others, the left right thing is just another way to divide and conquer, a way to get people squabbling and fighting by choosing a side.

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 09:48 PM
This definition describes it better than I could.

Members of opposing political parties such as Republican and Democrat share common interests and goals, as a one body ruling authority over the masses. The two parties act to create divisiveness and influence the general population while keeping control of the political spectrum. The False Left-Right Paradigm theorizes that opposing political groups use their influence over media to dramatize party warfare distraction, in grand performances of bureaucratic rivalry meant to propagandize and divide the populace. Divisive issues are fed through media outlets to divert attention away from the ruling class's hidden agendas. By drawing attention to differences between two political systems, ideologies, races, and classes, the political groups obscure and divide unity among the masses. The tactic creates confusion and frustration among the population, enabling the global elite to increase and consolidate their wealth and power through maintaining an illusion of a two-party system of checks and balances.


I think another important part of it is human psychology. We want to be right. We want to prove others wrong. We want to feel superior.

Many people do not openly think these thoughts, but they are the underlying issue behind their fanatical political opinions. The emotions behind political passions are devoid of reason. Passion controls opinion instead of critical thought.

Worst of all people begin to intertwine self worth with political opinion. I believe this or that. This or that becomes part of my "self." If my opinion gets attacked I will respond like it is a personal attack. Reason, validity, or truth becomes inconsequential. You are attacking me so I must respond in turn.

Issues are excuses to expend emotional energy to aggrandize the "self." We become addicted to arguing with the other side. Judging the other side, and beating the other side. Right or wrong. Truth or lies. Self interest or not do not matter. It is about increasing righteous indignation, and the feeling of superiority. We create complicated stories, but they are masks for base emotional addictions.

The sad thing is that the political aristocracy use this to go against the self interest of all people regardless of political affiliation.

edit on 1-3-2011 by stephinrazin because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:03 PM
/self satire on

I have an idea!
Why don't we throw out political parties and make something better.
We better write it all down, of course, and lay out the new rules.
Say, divide all the power into three branches.
We'll call them the Legislative, Executive, and Judicial.
So people can register for one of those parties,
and the rules for warring amongst themselves
will be written out in our paper.

Maybe we should call it a constitution.

/self satire off

I'm a "Representative Anarchist",
and to me that means,
give me control of my Representative.
I care not who prints the money.

David Grouchy
edit on 1-3-2011 by davidgrouchy because: format

posted on Mar, 1 2011 @ 10:06 PM
reply to post by MindSpin

evil huh, well, i have been called worse.
ok, regarding the abortion issue, i'll ask you the same thing i already asked another.
to no response as of yet.
i do think abortion is wrong and should be avoided at almost all costs. barring the safty and life of the mother, yet
to quote myself.

what shall the punishment be for a woman that has one? life in prison, murder one, or would that only be regarding whomever performed it? if a woman said she wanted one shall she be locked up till she gives birth? wouldn't it be unconstitutional to create a law making abortion illegal without a penalty?

<<   2  3 >>

log in