• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

How would you decribe my political "lean"?

How would you decribe my political "lean"?


  • Total voters
    21

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That's one way to view it.

There is more variance from a within group standpoint for a hive, but there is far greater variance between groups in the packs.

But the larger variance within the singular group is due to the population size more than anything else. But it makes the group as a whole far less susceptible to change.

While a small amount of variance within a pack coupled with a large degree of variance between packs makes for a more dynamic system that is far more susceptible to change.

I look at the times when major socio-political advancements have occurred in history. Normally, it occurs in the build-up to a hive-like society. Once the hive-like society is complete, though, it will ultimately stagnate and fall.

The "fall" is regression towards decentralization, and it is never consciously implemented. It occurs when the hive-like, centralized system can no longer sustain itself and it collapses.

Then the process renews itself, with a period of totally decentralized dynamic change followed by a period of advancement again towards the centralized society. The greatest advancements occurs during this buildup, IMO.

I would prefer to consciously alter the cycle. Removing the period of regression and replacing it with a consciously implemented system designed to spark that dynamic change without the chaotic underpinnings.

To do this, one would require some degree of centralized government that works for the benefit of a collective of smaller sovereign governments. Sort of like what the US was originally implemented as.

Generally, I would like to see something that fits somewhere between the Articles of Confederation and the Constitution. The AoC created a central government that was a little too weak, but the Constitution created one that was a little too strong (if using a Hamilton-style interpretation of the constitution, which is the prevailing interpretation these days. A Madison-style interpretation would have been closer to what I'm talking about, but the wording was left too vague to maintain that perspective over time).

I also believe this would be the most utilitarian approach to governance, since I adhere to a belief that happiness is in part dictated by a person's sense of autonomy. The more willing a system is to allow for variability of thought, the greater the potential for autonomy there is.

Totally agree, your words describe it better than I could.
I find it odd that people belief that we are some unified super community when that isn't even close to the truth.

Most of our relations are on a intimate personal level, with locality being next.
National community uniformity is counter productive to human progress.
 

Tucker Case

Matthew 16:3
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 28, 2008
Messages
45,596
Reaction score
22,536
Location
Everywhere and nowhere
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Wessexman introduced me to this.

Ah, That makes sense. Wessexman was/is about as much of an extreme decentralist as I am. He and I took different paths to reach our similar conclusions, but I enjoyed discussing the issues with him because of our similiarities.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Ah, That makes sense. Wessexman was/is about as much of an extreme decentralist as I am. He and I took different paths to reach our similar conclusions, but I enjoyed discussing the issues with him because of our similiarities.

Incredibly smart guy, wish he would come back.
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,358
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Totally agree, your words describe it better than I could.
I find it odd that people belief that we are some unified super community when that isn't even close to the truth.

Most of our relations are on a intimate personal level, with locality being next.
National community uniformity is counter productive to human progress.

Mmmmmnn! This IS interesting. It's not totally new to me but I'm not familiar with the wider writings on the subject. I'm going to read a lot more about distributism (Amazon will thank you!). First thoughts are sceptical in relation to the emphasis on the Christian-based concepts of nuclear families as the fundamental bases of society and economics (doesn't community play a role in and of itself, rather than as a corollary of the NF?). Reading may well throw light on this.

The ideas seem to take elements of feudalism, anarchism and corporativism and create an overarching philosophy that promises a middle path (to steal a concept from Buddhism) but which is necessarily predicated on Judaeo-Christian ideas of the fundamental building blocks of society with which I don't entirely hold.

This is good and challenging and interesting.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Mmmmmnn! This IS interesting. It's not totally new to me but I'm not familiar with the wider writings on the subject. I'm going to read a lot more about distributism (Amazon will thank you!). First thoughts are sceptical in relation to the emphasis on the Christian-based concepts of nuclear families as the fundamental bases of society and economics (doesn't community play a role in and of itself, rather than as a corollary of the NF?). Reading may well throw light on this.

The ideas seem to take elements of feudalism, anarchism and corporativism and create an overarching philosophy that promises a middle path (to steal a concept from Buddhism) but which is necessarily predicated on Judaeo-Christian ideas of the fundamental building blocks of society with which I don't entirely hold.

This is good and challenging and interesting.

I still hold that individuals are king but family relationships are the ultimate of society.
I'm not catholic or super religious, so I think that the traditional position of family can be altered to include same sex parent families.
 

Andalublue

Hello again!
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 2, 2010
Messages
27,101
Reaction score
12,358
Location
Granada, España
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
I still hold that individuals are king but family relationships are the ultimate of society.
I'm not catholic or super religious, so I think that the traditional position of family can be altered to include same sex parent families.

That wasn't really the cause of my hesitation. Of course there can be same-sex-based nuclear families, and thousands exist. My problem is that the concept of the nuclear, dual-generational, single relationship-led nucleus is neither traditional nor self-sustaining. Multi-generational, extended family groups including blood, half-blood and neighbourly links, while less convenient, is still a more widely-spread, more traditional and more sustainable basic social unit. This being so, it does make any distinction between concepts of family and community difficult to maintain and is certainly in conflict with Judaeo-Christian ideas of unitary, blood-based social relationships having any kind of 'natural' primacy.
 

Harry Guerrilla

DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 18, 2008
Messages
28,951
Reaction score
12,422
Location
Not affiliated with other libertarians.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
That wasn't really the cause of my hesitation. Of course there can be same-sex-based nuclear families, and thousands exist. My problem is that the concept of the nuclear, dual-generational, single relationship-led nucleus is neither traditional nor self-sustaining. Multi-generational, extended family groups including blood, half-blood and neighbourly links, while less convenient, is still a more widely-spread, more traditional and more sustainable basic social unit. This being so, it does make any distinction between concepts of family and community difficult to maintain and is certainly in conflict with Judaeo-Christian ideas of unitary, blood-based social relationships having any kind of 'natural' primacy.

I believe that is the most common form of existence throughout the history of homo erectus.
It's not just immediate(parents/children) or extend(aunt/uncles/cousins) family but also a small community.
Emphasis on small.

Once you get to big, the community starts to deconstruct itself, creating further competing factions.
 

Orion

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 25, 2008
Messages
8,080
Reaction score
3,918
Location
Canada
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I would say right of centre... but I almost said centrist.
 

Tashah

DP Veteran
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
18,379
Reaction score
9,231
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Centrist
From my perspective, you're slightly left of center.
 

Captain America

Jedi Master
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2006
Messages
23,383
Reaction score
13,748
Location
Wisconsin
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Centrist
Well, I've eliminated the two choices that include the word "hard" in them..........


You strike me as being fairly moderate, though.

That's nothing a little Viagra won't fix.
 
Top Bottom