I didn't choose the "ism", the "ism" chose me

[Hoplite]

I have a great degree of respect for people who admit that they came to a particular philosophy unwillingly.

Many people seek to assimilate philosophies that agree with their particular lifestyle or way of thinking and thus often dont critically analyze their positions; they chose that position because it best suited their current schema.

However, there are others who choose positions based on the position in question being the best possible position that a combination of their faculties settled on.

For instance, I am a Socialist. I would identify as a Socialist by default, not design, because combining input from my knowledge, my morals, my education, my perception, my understanding, and my experiences, Socialism shows itself to be the best position to take.

I have used logic and my own mental tools to discard other affiliations because I find them flawed in a particular way that cannot be fixed without fundamentally changing the idea itself into something else with it's own set of problems. That's not to say I'm the only one that is right, but it means that I have arrived at my current position through a thorough review of everything I have to select the best position based on an amalgamation of my values, logic, experiences, and knowledge.

In short, I am Socialist because to be anything else would require me to deny something I felt or knew to be true and thus be intellectually dishonest with myself in order to fit myself into an ideological mold that I found preferable.

 

[other]

In short, I am Socialist because to be anything else would require me to deny something I felt or knew to be true and thus be intellectually dishonest with myself in order to fit myself into an ideological mold that I found preferable.

Although I disagree with your positions, I'm impressed by your honesty.

 

[MaggieD]

I have a great degree of respect for people who admit that they came to a particular philosophy unwillingly.

Many people seek to assimilate philosophies that agree with their particular lifestyle or way of thinking and thus often dont critically analyze their positions; they chose that position because it best suited their current schema.

However, there are others who choose positions based on the position in question being the best possible position that a combination of their faculties settled on.

For instance, I am a Socialist. I would identify as a Socialist by default, not design, because combining input from my knowledge, my morals, my education, my perception, my understanding, and my experiences, Socialism shows itself to be the best position to take.

I have used logic and my own mental tools to discard other affiliations because I find them flawed in a particular way that cannot be fixed without fundamentally changing the idea itself into something else with it's own set of problems. That's not to say I'm the only one that is right, but it means that I have arrived at my current position through a thorough review of everything I have to select the best position based on an amalgamation of my values, logic, experiences, and knowledge.

In short, I am Socialist because to be anything else would require me to deny something I felt or knew to be true and thus be intellectually dishonest with myself in order to fit myself into an ideological mold that I found preferable.

Good luck with that.

Socialism doesn't work. Maybe in a utopian abstract it does, but not with real people. One only has to look at our own socialist programs to understand why.

 

[Gardener]

For instance, I am a Socialist.

Then it's high time to change what you claim as your lean to something more honest.

 

[alexa]

Then it's high time to change what you claim as your lean to something more honest.

Why should he. You do not disclose yours but claim to be liberal while showing all the signs of red neck, far right, evangelicalism.

 

[Gardener]

Why should he. You do not disclose yours but claim to be liberal while showing all the signs of red neck, far right, evangelicalism.

Yes, my supporting of gay rights, progressive taxation, secular humanism and my opposition to the disease of antisemitism certainly indicates I am a red neck, far right evangelist. :roll:

 

[Tucker Case]

I didn't choose cynicism. Cynicism chose me. Not that that makes any ****in' difference.

 

[Gardener]

I didn't choose onanism. Onanism chose me. Not that that makes any ****in' difference.

It chooses us all, Tucker. It chooses us all.

 

[Hoplite]

Then it's high time to change what you claim as your lean to something more honest.

My lean is as honest as it can be.

I am a Socialist, however do support the death penalty and I even feel it should be expanded to include more crimes and expedited. I believe in harsh punishments for government officials and employees who are guilty of malfeasance. I support the war on drugs (just not how it's fought). I support a limited form of globalism and I'm often equally critical of the left as I am the right.

If that isn't a Moderate, I dont know what is.

 

[danarhea]

Actually, I chose to have an orgasm. But maybe the orgasm chose me, while I was having sex with my wife. :mrgreen:

 

[Tucker Case]

Actually, I chose to have an orgasm. But maybe the orgasm chose me, while I was having sex with my wife. :mrgreen:

This threads about "-isms" not "-asms".

So intead of orgasms, you should be taliking about jism.

:2razz:

 

[Gardener]

So intead of orgasms, you should be taliking about jism.

Well, that would certainly be a seminal moment in the history of Debatepolitics.

 

[Josie]

On what scale is a Socialist a "Centrist"?

 

[Harshaw]

My lean is as honest as it can be.

I am a Socialist, however do support the death penalty and I even feel it should be expanded to include more crimes and expedited. I believe in harsh punishments for government officials and employees who are guilty of malfeasance. I support the war on drugs (just not how it's fought). I support a limited form of globalism and I'm often equally critical of the left as I am the right.

If that isn't a Moderate, I dont know what is.

What does your view on the death penalty have to do with socialism? Lots of socialists are all about the death penalty. Lots aren't. The one has nothing to do with the other.

 

[Hoplite]

What does your view on the death penalty have to do with socialism? Lots of socialists are all about the death penalty. Lots aren't. The one has nothing to do with the other.

I have yet to meet a Socialist who is in favor of the death penalty.

 

[TurtleDude]

My lean is as honest as it can be.

I am a Socialist, however do support the death penalty and I even feel it should be expanded to include more crimes and expedited. I believe in harsh punishments for government officials and employees who are guilty of malfeasance. I support the war on drugs (just not how it's fought). I support a limited form of globalism and I'm often equally critical of the left as I am the right.

If that isn't a Moderate, I dont know what is.

many socialists support the death penalty. Look at all the people socialist utopian states have executed over the last 100 years. 100 million or so.

 

[TurtleDude]

I have yet to meet a Socialist who is in favor of the death penalty.

Really? Or do they start favoring state sponsored genocide only when they start calling themselves communists

Castro's Cuba, the PRC, Stalinist russia through 1988 or so. Pol Pot, etc.

 

[TurtleDude]

On what scale is a Socialist a "Centrist"?

well they are in the center between hard core communists and far left welfare statists

 

[WingsOfDesire]

I'll be a senior Government major/History minor at a Baptist, private university this Fall. I entered staunchly conservative, but due to the countless number of mindless "conservatives" around me, I have increasingly adopted more liberal views, but still as a whole identify more with conservativism.

Hey, somebody's gotta keep them in check from drinking the cool-ade.

Also, antidisestablishmentarianism is a good one to be.

 

[Khayembii Communique]

many socialists support the death penalty. Look at all the people socialist utopian states have executed over the last 100 years. 100 million or so.

You're so smart I wish I could be more like you!!!!

 

[Orion]

Even though I employ -isms when conveying my opinions to others for the sake of understanding, I philosophically reject them. Same thing with political labels.

 

[Hoplite]

many socialists support the death penalty. Look at all the people socialist utopian states have executed over the last 100 years. 100 million or so.

The absolute vast majority of modern Socialists do not support the death penalty, especially in first world countries. Some governments that claim to be Socialist have employed it.

The SPUSA has drawn a firm line against it
Socialist Party USA

Really? Or do they start favoring state sponsored genocide only when they start calling themselves communists

Castro's Cuba, the PRC, Stalinist russia through 1988 or so. Pol Pot, etc.

I cannot answer for Communists, not being one.

Even though I employ -isms when conveying my opinions to others for the sake of understanding, I philosophically reject them. Same thing with political labels.

While on principal, I agree. Political labels have a purpose beyond simply pigeon holing people.

For instance, I am a Pagan and I identify myself simply as Pagan. If I were to use the technical terminology to identify myself, I would have to identify as an Ecclectic Hellenic Pagan. Labels give us a quick way to get a general idea of what a person believes or where they stand. They are meant as a starting place that simplifies communication. The problems arise when people use labels to be all-encompassing. As another example, though I identify as Socialist, on here people frequently make wide, sweeping judgements about what that means and they are frequently wrong.

 

[Black_Zawisza]

Good for you, Hoplite. I grew up in a conservative family, but was libertarian through my teen years. Recently I have turned towards anarcho-capitalism. I wish (Ron Paul-ish) libertarianism was logically consistent, because a) anarcho-capitalism, compared to libertarianism, benefits only murderers and child molesters and b) it'd be quite a bit easier to persuade people to it. Sadly, it isn't.

 

[Hoplite]

Good for you, Hoplite. I grew up in a conservative family, but was libertarian through my teen years. Recently I have turned towards anarcho-capitalism. I wish (Ron Paul-ish) libertarianism was logically consistent, because a) anarcho-capitalism, compared to libertarianism, benefits only murderers and child molesters and b) it'd be quite a bit easier to persuade people to it. Sadly, it isn't.

I have to confess some slightly Anarcist leanings of late. I have a lot of faith in the human ability to do things, but at the same time a part of me thinks a return to less forgiving times would be good for us as a whole.

 

[TurtleDude]

You're so smart I wish I could be more like you!!!!

recognizing that fact, my son, is a step towards enlightenment