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.


Where do you stand politically and why?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 06:32 PM
Do not discount the media. They have to turn a profit too. Clinton was great for them. Bush less so, but don't you see the Dem's trying to pull the infidelity thing with Kerry. Carter did it to. The news media is free advertising, use it, especially in an election year.

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 06:41 PM
I dont think I can put myself into just one of those categories. I think Im leaning towards libertarian democrat?

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 06:56 PM
I don't use the french-style, Left-Center-Right description of ideals. I perfer the "political compass".

And myself, you guessed it, im a Libertarian.

Social Policy: slightly to the Libertarian right

Economically: Lessaize Faire Libertarian

Foreign Policy: Extreme Libertarian stance

God bless my liberties/rights you gave me at birth, and punish those who wish to suppress them.

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 07:07 PM
Them, I don't think anyone could put it better.

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 08:47 PM
BeingWatchedByThem, thats a cool site, thanx

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 09:05 PM
I am a democrat. a conservative one at that.
i really believe that gay marriage, stem cells research, all that, shud be legal and duh obvious. however, i highly believe in our right and duty to liberate nations (thus i supported the war) and to spread ourselves across the globe, and, if necessary, impose will and force.
call it 'manifest destiny' if u like, but at least call it 'enlightened manifest destiny'

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 09:17 PM
I vote for Goku.

He'll save this planet from ANY evil invaders, disaster from outer space, etc.

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 10:27 PM

Originally posted by Flinx

Originally posted by Nerdling
1. I believe in a womans right to choose.
2. I believe taxes are required to help the less well off.
3. I believe the right of same sex couples to have a union.
4. I am for moderate foreign policy and the restriction of the armed forces.

You bring up an issue I'm curious about... Why is it that the most pressing political issue for many people (mostly upper-middle to rich) is the issue of taxes?

I mean, why do people bitch so damn much about being taxed? That's the price for living in a nation-state. That's the price you pay for upkeep of the roads and infrastructure. If no one paid taxes everything would collapse. There would be no government services. Sure you'd have a bunch of money in your horde, but we'd be driving on dirt roads, through crumbling cities, etc.

[Edited on 2/17/2004 by Flinx]

They bitch because the money they earned is being taken and given to those who have not.

They bitch because the socialists and communists try to create more wealth redistribution as if they should be punished for being well off to rich.

They bitch because financial accountability in the government sucks. Case in point...Halliburton.

They bitch because the government is too damn big and Bush who is supposed to be a Republican made the government way bigger for no reason.

Cut the taxes, cut the social spending, and return charity to individuals and to philanthropic organizations and churches where it used to be.

posted on Feb, 17 2004 @ 10:47 PM
Moderate. Don't know, just am.

posted on Feb, 18 2004 @ 12:02 AM
I lean to the right on many issues. Pro guns, pro-life (which also means I'm against the death penalty), small government, etc.

Taxes are a big issue, imho. NERDLING: you're wrong. We don't have a flat tax, if your income was 50x, your tax burden would be more than 50x, more like 150x. The top few percent of earners pay a large majority of the taxes.

Granted, I know we needs roads and schools, etc. I'm sick of that argument. It's weak and old. I'm not against ALL taxes. And, if you don't mind being taxed, could you come pay my prop. taxes??
greed has nothing to do with it. Getting taxed at every turn really takes the fun out of trying to make a living and raise a family. And dont be deceived by those that 'some' classify as being wealthy! That same bunch jumps on business also. Every company out there isn't Enron! Think of this way: The US has one of the highest business tax rates in the world PLUS U.S. companies get taxed on foreign income, unlike most other companies. This probably has something to do with companies moving somewhere else as well as moving their jobs somewhere else, like outsourcing IT jobs to India, manufacturing jobs to Mexico, etc, etc. So, you would think any sane politician would realize a tax incentive, or just straight up business tax reform, would enable an American business to stay in the US and keep jobs in the US, thereby retaining the income tax because of more domestic jobs. (though, that income tax should be small too)

[Edited on 18-2-2004 by Bob88]

posted on Feb, 18 2004 @ 12:17 AM
When it comes to politics it is better to not stand... but RUN! ha ha, little inside joke there.

Flat taxes are the way to go. This is a subject I know all too much about unfortunately, since it is one of the most boring subjects in the world too, only a flat tax GUARANTEES that EVERYONE pays.

posted on Feb, 18 2004 @ 01:25 AM
I am right now a independent.

But my views lean more towards the conservitive side.


posted on Feb, 18 2004 @ 09:32 AM

Originally posted by BeingWatchedByThem
I don't use the french-style, Left-Center-Right description of ideals. I perfer the "political compass".

And myself, you guessed it, im a Libertarian.

Social Policy: slightly to the Libertarian right

Economically: Lessaize Faire Libertarian

Foreign Policy: Extreme Libertarian stance

God bless my liberties/rights you gave me at birth, and punish those who wish to suppress them.

Here's how I scored.....
Libertarians are self-governors in both personal and economic matters. They believe government's only purpose is to protect people from coercion and violence. They value individual responsibility, and tolerate economic and social diversity.


Yesterday I was in a really pissy mood and just shooting off my mouth, I'd like to make things crystal clear and I apologise to anyone who saw my posts.

First I just want to start off by saying i've done some research on all parties, i'm in no way an expert, but I will say that i've been at the anarchist's website and they have similiar views of libertarians...
cons and libs imo seem to have the same agenda's, if they get in power one side will suffer over the over, one cuts, the other does the opposite. These two parties seem to be far from my personal truth, personal freedom, I want to keep it simple, I don't want to get into economics and foreign policy, my issue is about personal freedoms.
I really strongly believe people should be able to make their own decisions about anything, whether it be about doing drugs or having consentual sex..
Isn't is funny that government has laws on sodomy and prostitution? They are telling people what they can and can't do, and alot of it is to generate money aka police shake down.. That's really my passion, freedom, anarchists view things similar in the libertarian light.

One of the original anarchists, Callicles of Acharnae, a Greek from the late 5th Century B.C., basing his arguments on the Sophist position that might makes right, held that laws were made by weak men, in order to control and restrain the few who were strong.

I believe that in order for freedom to be reestablished a consistent movement must take place, one based in reason and possessing a clarity of ideas. An intellectual situation must be achieved wherein the concept of man's rights is fully understood and accepted. Because of this, those who choose to work toward the establishment of a limited government must be fully consistent. Their professed goal must be that of a limited government that is charged only with defending and protecting the rights of man. Further, they must not join forces with others who advocate opposing systems of government. Also, I believe that liberalism will soon hold little power in our country. This is because the liberals have lost credibility by continuing to foster an ideology whose time has passed, that no longer works and has created massive losses and little benefit to the American citizen. Currently our political scene has witnessed a shift toward the right and it remains to be seen whether this shift will result in free enterprise or in repressive theocratic fascism. There are enough indications to warrant the danger of fascism. Because of the events of 9/11/01, many Americans have reevaluated the reasons why America was attacked and have recognized that what makes us different and hated are our freedoms, our democratic institutions, our affluence and open personalities. Some have taken to reevaluating their religious premises and see these events from a theocratic perspective that is unfortunately, exclusive of the many non-Christian, non-denominational people. Criticisms of Muslims and other non-Christians, as well as atheists, are done with such vehemence and anger that one would think that all non-Christian Americans are un-American. Some liberals have reevaluated the role played by liberal politicians in weakening our country and making us vulnerable to these attacks. Other liberals, those who felt guiltiest, have gone into denial and chose to blame everything on conservatives with so much distortion that they seem childish and self-serving.

Those of us who had favored limited government must now negotiate a new political culture and ensure that in advocating a fight against terrorism and the very real enemies of America we do not also serve the interests of fascism. In addition, those Libertarians who advocate a limited government and free economy, if they continue to fight as a political party outside the ranks of the major parties are missing a very real necessity of preventing the now entrenched Republican Party from moving toward fascism.

references: Roberto Diego

Interesting read...

How Opinion Makers Use Spin to Manipulate Truth

I understand i'm all over the map sometimes, but just want to let you know sometimes my mind is running a millions miles/second and it's hard to word things the way i want to... all i can do is express myself the best way i know how... I'm still learning.

posted on Feb, 21 2004 @ 02:51 PM
There is a difference between liberals in the American political scene, and being libertarian. You don't have to be a liberal if you are libertarian. But liberalism is libertarian. TrueLies: You said you had visited the Anarchists website... I suppose you mean (because you linked to that site on another thread here on ats). Judging from your earlier posts you should probably get a better understanding of the economical and political map. I know you apologized, and Im not attacking you... but some of your comments hinted that you are a bit confused there.

There is a lot of confusing use of the terms: Liberal, conservative, democrat and republican in political discussions on the internet. I find it very hard to discuss politics on the internet, because people from different nations base their political stands on different terms and categories. I use the raw terms: Libertarian, Authoritarian, Capitalist (or Right, depending on the discussion and the degree of rightness) and Socialist (or Left, depending on the discussion and degree of leftness)

I use this map:

You have: Four quadrates (political directions) parted into two categories each. You have Marxism, which is Authoritarian Left. Anarchism is libertarian left. Liberalism is libertarian right. Fascism is authoritarian right.

I am myself an Anarchist. Fitting into the libertarian left quadrate of anarchism. I want anarchy. But anarchy understood. Not chaos.

"The word anarchy origins from Greek. The prefix "an" means "negation of" as in anaerobe versus aerobe and "arch" means "superior, i.e. in contrast to subordinates", as in archbishop, archangel, archduke, arch villain, etc. Thus anarchy, anarchism, anarchist, a.s.o., mean coordination on equal footing, without superiors and subordinates, i.e. horizontal organization and co-operation without coercion."

That is the opposite of authoritarian tendencies and chaos, i.e. different types of superiors and subordinates.
Read more about anarchism and anarchist ideas, systems and models on They also have a good introduction to (and the history of) anarchism in Norway (where I come from)

I do not support lawlessness. I do not want riots. I do not want chaos. I want order, system, rules and control, but arranged libertarian. I do not support troublemaking kids who throw rocks at the police during demonstrations. Police with weapons acting authoritarian at demonstration piss me of... But the kids who trigger them piss me off even more. They lost the left movement a life during the anti-EU protests a while ago.
"Police acting libertarian in Norway at the ABCDE-event 24-26.06.2002 in Oslo, i.e. real, anarchist law and order."
"Police acting authoritarian in Spain similar to at the EU-meeting 21-22.06.2002 in Seville. "Order" achieved by repression in this way is not real, anarchist, law and order"

[Edited on 21-2-2004 by AntiSystem]

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in