What is your political ideology?

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 03:30 PM
Well, lets combine the best from all ideologies - Masloism

Communism/Totalitarianism - Scientific atheism in public schools? It would be very good subject in todays world still plagued by religious superstitions.
China-like population control for third world countries with exploding population (and maybe for welfare recipients with many children in first world), but without those late-term abortions and allow at least 2 children (and limit child welfare to first 2 children to discourage procreation for money)

Socialism and social democracy - Negative income tax based welfare system, government alternatives to basic services for the poor (education, healthcare and social insurances..), heavy government investments into infrastructure and public services and science and research, limiting and regulating mono/oligopolies, big corporations, too big to fail companies etc. Maybe some progressive taxation, but continuous, not income brackets.

Liberalism - extensive personal freedoms (except late-term abortions and unlimited procreation, I dont consider those two to be personal freedoms, because they affect another person). Legalize and tax soft drugs, but leave hard drugs illegal.

Conservatism - fiscal responsibility (in the sense of not making debt, but not conservative in the sense of very low taxation, because then we would not be able to afford the above state services without debt, we cant have both), severely limiting immigration (except for highly qualified individuals for which there is shortage on the market). Do not tolerate illegals. Limit bureaucracy, there is no reason for its existence in the age of computers and internet.

Libertarianism - abolishing central bank and returning the right of issuing debt-free currency only to the state. Extensive use of privateers for government services, to ensure efficiency. No minimum wage legislation (loses its meaning with NIT based welfare system).

Direct democracy, with elements of geniocracy/sofocracy/technocracy - with the Internet, this is the first time in history that direct democracy is practical on large scales.

edit on 15/4/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 06:49 PM
First off we need to get back to the original Constitutional principles in which the federal government has limited and specifically enumerated powers; allowing them to do fund nothing more and nothing less.

Further, I would remove all the unconstitutional “regulations” and the agencies that enforce them. Any restriction/entitlement should be only achieved through legislation making those who pass them subject to the will of the people. Appointed heads of bureaucracies can make “regulations” which allows the President who appoints them to make laws with no checks or balances and without being subject to the will of the people which is unconstitutional IMO.

The US Constitution is the supreme law of the land in the Unites States. The Federal Government has some enumerated powers. These powers include the power to levy taxes, borrow money and make laws for the following purposes:

For The General Welfare:

1. International and interstate commerce (trade)
2. Naturalization
3. Bankruptcy
4. Coin Money, establish its value
5. Weights and Measures
6. Punish counterfeiting
7. Postal Service
8. Issue patents and copyrights
9. Establish Federal Courts
10. Govern District of Columbia
11. Purchase real estate for necessary buildings

For the Common Defense:

1. Define and punish Maritime and international Crimes
2. Declare War
3. Make rules for, and fund Military Services

This list represents the sum total of the functions the federal government is constitutionally authorized to do. The limitation on Congress by the Constitution is further emphasized in Amendment Ten of the Bill of Rights.

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” ~Amendment 10, U.S. Constitution

There are no provisions for the funding or management of energy, education, charity (welfare, food stamps, unemployment, housing assistance, etc.) or many of the other nonsense departments and roles the government currently fills; when limited to the enumerated powers and the funding of them the relative tax burden would necessarily be very small.

Also, I would remove the “profession” of politics by having a new amendment to the Constitution of the US which limits individuals to 2 terms in the House of Representatives and 1 term in the Senate or two terms in the Senate in total.

Further, there would be no retirement benefits from these positions and their medical and dental benefits would be limited to those for active duty military with the caveat they get the same privileges as flag grade officers in treatment.

In addition the amendment would enact the 4th branch of government “The People” who would be a final check and balance on any issue relating to the funding, staffing and budgets relating to the conduct of the people’s business including those for the executive and legislative branches. Any increase in pay or benefits would have to be approved in a popular referendum. In no way should the members of the legislature be able to vote themselves into more benefits and or pay from the treasury without the consent of the governed.

Staff size would be limited to that necessary for the proper functioning of the government which would do away with all the appointing of “special staff” and other such nonsense for people who contributed to their campaigns who are them paid out of the treasury. Travel regulations would be identical to those for the military.

Finally, there would be restrictions on future employment specifically any job related to lobbying would be strictly prohibited.

I’m sure I can think of more but these would be a good start.
edit on 15/4/2011 by Golf66 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 07:19 PM
It is disturbing to me, that there are two extreme opposing views on how the US should be. In the venacular of marriage and divorce, it's called "irreconcilable differences." In the venacular of dating, it's called, "a deal breaker." I hope and pray to God, I don't wind up living under a government that abolishes social safety nets for the most vulnerable. I hope and pray to God, I don't wind up living under a government that removes alot of regulation from polluters and finance. I hope and Pray to God, I don't wind up living under a government that is so small, as one Republican put it, "You could drown it in a bathtub" like Andrea Yates did to all her kids. I hope and Pray to God, I don't wind up living under a government which is the utopia of the Ayn Rand Libertarian.
edit on 15-4-2011 by simone50m because: spellx

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 07:46 PM
reply to post by PreownedMind

I'm not allowed to talk about ******** ********* here.

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 07:58 PM
I would like to see completely ALL of the US states have the exact same highest-stringent laws/punishments for animal cruelty and neglect. Bestiality would be treated -the same as- rape, incest, molestation, assault etcetera against human children.

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 08:31 PM

Originally posted by MasloDirect democracy, with elements of geniocracy/sofocracy/technocracy - with the Internet, this is the first time in history that direct democracy is practical on large scales.

I am pretty certain that any direct democracy in the US would quickly result in - an Idiocracy.


Idiocracy is a 2006 American satirical Science fiction comedy, directed by Mike Judge and starring Luke Wilson, Maya Rudolph and Dax Shepard.

The film tells the story of two ordinary people who are taken into a top-secret military hibernation experiment that goes awry, and awaken 500 years in the future. They discover that the world has degenerated into a dystopia where advertising, commercialism, and cultural anti-intellectualism run rampant and dysgenic pressure has resulted in a uniformly stupid human society devoid of individual responsibility or consequences.

That said let me now add to my previous post the voter's basic test that tests one's actual intellectual ability and knowledge of the facts relating to the issue for which one is voting. I have seen so many Obamabots who have no clue what the basic functions of government are that it is scary that they can vote. Likewise the religious right and their "right to life" BS scare the crap out of me.

The federal government was given very few powers IAW the constitution and over the years they have encroached on States rights to the point that there is no real difference in where one chooses to live.

posted on Apr, 15 2011 @ 08:39 PM
reply to post by Golf66

It is crappy to think that we live in a world that is so stone aged that we cannot have a direct democracy. It really really kills me to know that we cannot trust people with the decision making process and have no choice but to give it to crooks lairs cheats and greedy corporate shills.

I KNOW that you are right I know you are. I only recently learned about what a Direct Democracy is and it ENTHRALLED me! Then I read about why the founding fathers thought that a direct democracy was a horrid idea. Apparently they thought about making the U.S. a direct democracy but feared how badly the minority on any decision would be flattened and steamrolled over.

Maybe someday we will be advanced enough to have one.

posted on Apr, 16 2011 @ 03:12 AM
reply to post by Golf66

I agree with you, thats why I said "with the elements of geniocracy/sofocracy/technocracy." I envision it as such: All voters would propose laws and vote directly through the internet about the proposed laws submitted by other voters (kinda like internet forum with poll option), BUT the individual votes would not have the same weight - they would depend on the persons education, test results (both general knowledge, IQ and EQ), criminal record, expertise in the issue the law relates to, longterm uneployment would lower the weight, special achievements like Nobel prize would increase it, maybe it would even depend on income a bit etc ..

I too dont think direct democracy with all peoples votes weighted equally is a good idea. Peoples ability to analyze and correctly decide complex problems is very varied, no matter what pseudohumanists say, we are not all equal in abilities, and to correctly decide whether the law would be good or bad for the society IS an ability. The vote weight of an university professor of successfull enterpreneur should NOT have the same weight as the vote of some uneducated ghetto "nigga" (MODS: "nigga" refering to lifestyle, not race
). Of course everyone should have the right to vote, just so noone would feel unimportant, but vote weight should be different.

edit on 16/4/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 10:21 AM
I'm loving the knowledge, keep it coming. lol

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 10:29 AM
I'm a minarchist. Government should only enforce private contracts and provide for the general defense of the country.

Hard money and competing currencies should be brought back.

Very small flat tax.

Basically, everything that Ron Paul talks about.

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 10:47 AM
I personally believe anyone elected to a public office should pay the price for their performance. Their personal fortunes should be directly tied to the fortunes of this country. When the country does well, they get rewarded well. When it nose dives, as it is now, all politicians should leave D.C. with just the clothes on their backs and their assets go to pay off the mess of debt they created. Maybe if they sank with the rest of us, they'd show more concern. It might get rid of lobbyists too. Of course, we'd have to be willing to throw those who took bribes or tried to hide money under the prison. I have no issue with that.

I say this because I have always wondered why someone would spend hundreds of millions of dollars trying to get a job that pays only $400,000 (POTUS) or less a year. Doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

I'm conservative when it comes to gun control and immigration, with the exception that if they're already here, they are not going to go home so we should register them with a SSN so they have to pay taxes into the system they're using just like we have to. To me that's not amnesty, that's fair.

On social issues like abortion and gay rights, I am more to the left. Those things are intensely personal and I don't have the experience or the right to judge. As far as gay marriage, why not? It's not like marriage is that sanctified anymore. The divorce rate in the US is over 50%. Heterosexuals aren't taking it seriously either.

On social programs, I'm dead in the middle. They should be a hand up and not a hand out. Up until Obama took office, a person who went to job training or school to improve their jobs skills would lose their unemployment. That's ridiculous. The same is true with other programs. They punish those who try to improve their life. Programs like welfare and food stamps and medicaid will count student loans and grants for school as income even though the person does not see any of that money themselves. Financial aid usually goes straight to the school. In a time when a single mother would most need a safety net, she is cut off from those programs. This creates a cycle of poverty and generational welfare. I've seen it in my own family. I think if you're not trying to improve your lot, you should be cut off. But exactly the opposite happens all the darn time. It needs to be completely revamped and geared toward improving people, not keeping them down. But sometimes I think democrats want that so they can seem like the good guys and play the classes against each other.

posted on Apr, 18 2011 @ 11:25 AM
There are many things I'd like to see, and would do if I had the power.
I think as a nation(the USA) we need a standard of citizenry. I would use the IQ test, and only people who score a certain limit would be allowed to vote, and have children. I would work on population reduction, and along with IQ, I would have people who wish to breed meet mandatory standards of financial stability, and health.

I would build a giant iron wall across the southern border.
USA would be ENGLISH only.
I would halt job exports, and limit imports.
If a company willfully hired illegals, then the company would be taken over and nationalized.
I would give total freedom for gum ownership/carry of all types, but, all guns must be legally purchased and registered. There would be zero tolerance for gun crimes, anyone caught with an illegal gun would get 5 years hard labor camp. Anyone killing anyone with a gun not in self defence would get immediate death penalty. Anyone caught doing a crime with a gun like robbery, etc, would get 25yrs hard labor camp.
I would clear out the prisons in that if anyone did a crime so heinous they get life, they would immediatly get the death penality.
I would legalize recreational drugs.
I would have ONE age of adulthood, 18, at 18 you buy a beer, join the army, vote... etc
I would clean up welfare and public housing, with a time limit to live there, along with random inspections and drug dogs, and I would work to integrate them.
I would work to integrate neighborhoods, but having an incentive. Of course with the above in place, the standard of society would be much higher, so people would not feel it an unsafe gang hood.
I would also have zero tolerance for criminal gangs, and treat them as terrorists with hard labor camp.
There is more.... I would have freedom of religion, but a secular government, and freedom of religion means, you have the person right to believe what you want, as long as you give that right and respect to all others.
I would control the media, and have the trash TV and radio halted, no overt violent, or sexual TV shows, or music on TV and the radio of a vulgar style. BUT, I would have total freedom for anyone to buy whatever DVDs or CDs they wish, as well as cinema and concert freedoms.
I guess it's for now,
But the main ideas are SAFETY, SECURITY, UNITY, RESPECT, self suffecientcy. People need to have jobs, people need to feel safe, and people need personal freedoms. Things that harm those, harm the nation, and connot be tolerated.
Oh to add, I would not engage in military action unless the land of the nation was directly attacked, I would end involving in other nation's troubles, noninterventionism. I would also have a reguirement for all males at 18 to join the military for 3 years, and everyone must do it. I would also have state paid public transportation, and retirment age of 50, and state paid medical treatment for all. Everyone would be working, no crime, and it would not be hard to do it, but our system does not want to do it.
edit on 18-4-2011 by tom502 because: added stuff
edit on 18-4-2011 by tom502 because: more stuff

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 09:15 AM
reply to post by tom502

Some very good ideas there, maybe a bit too harsh. Except this:

I would also have a reguirement for all males at 18 to join the military for 3 years, and everyone must do it.

Such a pointless waste of resources, time and potential of young people that they could spent on far better things. And it does not make sense from military perspective too - small highly profesional army always trumps huge but amateur conscript army, especially in 21.st century.

Also the retirement age at 50 is unreal, and even if real, suboptimal for the economy - with the modern medicine and standard of living, and the average lifespan approaching 80 years, less than 60 retirement age is waste of human potential,even worse, of experienced and skilled people.

edit on 22/4/11 by Maslo because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 22 2011 @ 09:25 AM
Well, it's just my fantasy, but I think if all the other parts were in place, those two would be good. I think a major problem in the US is the youth, and a total lack of discipline, values, and proper upbringing, a short stint in the military would be better for them, I believe, as well as the overall national health.

posted on Apr, 26 2011 @ 05:51 PM
If I had it my way and I had to revitalize this great nation first thing would have to be fixed is the economy.

The coorporations that want to operate on American soil are going to provide work for the American people. They get the tax cuts so we the people should get the jobs. Thier tax cuts will be reformulated to benefit America as well as them.
For example the more Americans they have working for them the more tax incentives and breaks they get. The more non-Americans they have working for them the more they are taxed. plain and simple "I scratch your back you scratch mine" type of legalisation would implemented to protect the American people from these greedy, money hungering, penny workrers that chew us up and spit us out after the countless billions we and this country has made some of these power house scum bags. Pay what you owe or get the "F" out.

Next I would further tackle this unemployment crisis and issue emergency funds to those seeking sound small business operations that would have low risk and a would remain stable and create as many jobs as possible. I would do this by cutting out any unnecessary government funding we could do without (Which is alot). We got about a 20% unemployment rate right. Well if we could get even 1% or 2% of those unemployed people to start a business and put funds out to help these small businesses. Which I might add are the back bone and always have been the back bone of this great nations economic fortitude. This would further fuel the engine for a more healthier economy.

Next I would regulate and target insurance and credit card companies. I haven't really come up with any solutions other then to get rid of them all together mainly the credit issue this country faces. So many people are feeling the strife of these wealth sucking magnetic monsters we call credit cards. Get rid of them and let the people pay off thier debt or greatly reduce the percentage they can rape from you and put a cap on the madness and educate people more. As for insurance companies I can see a benefit with them but thier seems to be to many instances of the companies hurting the wrong people with loop holes and misconceptions to save a few bucks. They need to be reformed to better benefit society.

While this was happening I look at our millitary and make any and all necessary cuts to fund this plan. If it means closing down certain bases and pulling out troops so be it. The main goal would be protect what we need to and scrap and move out anything that is not necessary to protect or to oversee. I think we must maintain a strong military but we need our military to maintain and safegaurd our people not others.

The banks lets not forget the banks let say they would be investigated and regulated and made to pay back what they owe. Thiers something wrong with that fact how they can loan you money and rob you with high interest rates that are paid upfront so you wind up paying 5 times what the sticker price of the house was over a thirty year period and most people don't see the thievery or just ignore it. While they take your money and basically hold it for you for free and lend it out to someone else and make huge profits on your hard earned dime and they give nothing in return.

NO MORE BAILOUTS if you fail your done thats how it goes nothing is to big to let fail. All these bailouts and still 20% unemployment. It seems to me the bailouts failed. Enough said!

Infrastructure and Production:

Once we get the above said and done we can really start the healing process of our country and slowly begin to become less dependent on foreign interests. I am not says trading, buying and selling from other countries is a bad thing, but we need to become less dependent on these other nations and start doing things for oursleves again. The main production goal would to be to produce and sell more going out to other countries rather then we are taking in and maintain a surplus of good going out and for us rather then us buying everyones elses crap.

This country can produce enough food for the world 5 times over. Why has the United States stopped selling these cash crops. An increase in food production an exports alone could revitalize our economy alone and this is just one focus point. We don't produce the quality goods we once did only decades ago. WHY!!!!!!

Infrastructure is a given fixing it up would cost money but if you refer to the above and if we start produceing and selling more we could create even more jobs and maybe eventually have a surplus of jobs and immigration would be welcomed again. Projects could be made to start scraping up old ineffiencient cities and we could start building cities of the future by starting fresh or even building right over top of existing cities.

Fixing the economy will fix alot of the other problems we face or at least give us the means to fix them. Also we need to redirect the wealth we have now to things that will better mankind like education and science. We need to think up a prime directive to benefit mankind instead on focusing on ways to destroy it. Once we fix the economy and people don't have to worry about the next time thier gonna eat or beable to pay that mortage payment. We can start to better ourselves as a civilization if we didnt have to waste our time with food, shelter, clothing, and energy.

After things were put into place I would call for a new admendment(s) to our constitution that will include a workers bill of rights further protecting the people from economic disasters such as this. More so an admendment that would make it so that politicians can't invest into anything while under employment of the American people. Its time we forced these people who say thier best interests are us and this great nation and hold them to it. They can invest before and after but not durning a position in office. We need to put up safegaurds to keep these people that want to make the decisions for us. Make it so that the honest and willing are the ones that step up to lead our nation. We need to take away these temptations that are all around them not take it anymore.

After all thats said and done we can find out if this war on terrorism is what it is said to be. If it is not the remaining troops will be brought home. The constitution would be again looked over to see what changes can be made to set a certain set of guide lines of what provokes this nation to go to war. It should be clear why we go to war and clear what the objective is and clear about how it going to affect the nation and its people. A little more honesty in the country would help alot.

I could rant for hours about other things but thats a good start. would be hard to do in 4 years even 8 IMO.

posted on Apr, 29 2011 @ 11:42 PM
Positive: America. Best country on earth, and that's it.

Negative: Politicization of the Federal Reserve. It needs to remain independent for the good of the nation.

Negative: Ron Paul. I value that he's a moral man, but I also consider him an idiot for one reason. (The above) He's trying to bully the Fed into stopping what needs to be done, because he believes that inflation is a bigger fear than unemployment. Guess who else thought that? The Federal Reserve Banks (since they were more regional at the time) during the Great Depression, which helped exacerbate the deflationary spiral. Basically, Ron Paul is a good man, but he needs to keep his noise of out of things he can't comprehend / shows no competence for (economics).

"NO MORE BAILOUTS if you fail your done thats how it goes nothing is to big to let fail. All these bailouts and still 20% unemployment. It seems to me the bailouts failed. Enough said!"

You do realize that it never reached 20%... So, you're saying that we should be like Ireland and Portugal and let our banks fail until it's too late. (From what I heard of Greece, not saying it's particularly correct or unbaised by their issue was more gov't structure.) Don't cite Germany, they are a export-based so when the general world-wide recession occurred (yes it was global) the subsequent fall in demand decreased their GDP. They didn't have a mortgage crisis like the US or aforementioned countries.
edit on 29-4-2011 by BuddhaC because: extra stuffs

"The banks lets not forget the banks let say they would be investigated and regulated and made to pay back what they owe. Thiers something wrong with that fact how they can loan you money and rob you with high interest rates that are paid upfront so you wind up paying 5 times what the sticker price of the house was over a thirty year period and most people don't see the thievery or just ignore it. While they take your money and basically hold it for you for free and lend it out to someone else and make huge profits on your hard earned dime and they give nothing in return."

Bankruptcy. Even if you let banks collapse there's no guarantee everyone who has their deposits in there will get money because of the B-word.
Alright, how about instead of borrowing from a bank you magical pull 200k out of your butt and buy a house. There's just really no other way to do it, unless you plan on living with mommy until you're well over 30 (go Japs, lol). They don't hold it 'for free', the hold it and are /paying/ you to loan it by giving you interest. They multiple the money supply, which causes a decrease in interest rates, which in turn are incentive for business to invest. In return for investing business have a higher ability to produce goods to be sold, but to produce these goods they need to higher workers. In return for their work, they are paid monies which is then used on goods produced by the same or other firms. Banks are nothing more than a Market for Borrows and Lenders.
edit on 29-4-2011 by BuddhaC because: extra, extra stuffs
extra DIV

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 04:00 AM
(Primitivsm/survivalism) Anarchist & nihilist

Nobody should have control over another... No laws, no rules, no governments/authority & no right or wrong bull# norms! And no stupid f*cking cops, the people can defend themselves!
Just live in peace & freedom with voluntary work, and learn to live with each other

posted on Apr, 30 2011 @ 06:43 AM
reply to post by PreownedMind

I'll just post what would end up there anyway.


posted on May, 26 2011 @ 09:01 PM
reply to post by grizzle2

That link is unavailable.

posted on May, 26 2011 @ 09:32 PM
With America, it's all these wars we went and implemented after World War II, the only legitimate war we ever got involved in. Just think of all the jiggazillions of our money that went down the drain, and all the thousands and thousands of beautiful young American men (and some women) and innocent civillians of other countries, who died. For what? All for nothing, prettymuch.
What would America's MONETARTY situation be right now, if Herbert Walker and son, were not obsessed with Saddam Hussein, like fatal attraction stalkers, who you need to take a restraining order out on?
(Bong, kookoo, bong, kookoo, it's time to lock down the WhiteHouse asylum tonight!)

new topics
top topics
<< 1    3 >>

log in