The Sum of Awe will replace you as one of my few allies.
It gets lonely in the libertarian (purple) corner.
But we do get the most bi***'n color!
Hmmmm....is it violet, periwinkle or purple?
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Comparitive Politics of RF Members.
- Thread starter dust1n
- Start date
It gets lonely in the libertarian (purple) corner.
But we do get the most bi***'n color!
Hmmmm....is it violet, periwinkle or purple?
Alceste
Vagabond
I'm sure I posted my results here before, but I couldn't find them in the thread. I have grown more libertarian / socialist since the last time I did this quiz, I think.
I made this for my blog years ago. Actually, looks like I'm in the same place as ever. I guess once you're finally right about everything, there's no need to change.
I made this for my blog years ago. Actually, looks like I'm in the same place as ever. I guess once you're finally right about everything, there's no need to change.
Like a broken record, I must point out that the green square isn't libertarian.
We're about both social & economic liberty.
Green is just "left" or modern "liberal".
Blue = conservative
Red = statist
We're about both social & economic liberty.
Green is just "left" or modern "liberal".
Blue = conservative
Red = statist
idea
Question Everything
there were some questions that I felt that did not have an answer that reflected my views. Doesn't seem to be very many here that agree with me.
My results were pretty close to yours! I agree, there were several questions for which I disagreed with all of the answers.
Alceste
Vagabond
Why do you think everybody in the world should have to define their terms the way Americans define them? You guys are really bad at politics. You're like the LAST people on earth that anyone should consult on the finer points of political philosophy.
Libertarian socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cuz that's how I prefer it.
And most active posters here are N Americans, where the Libertarian Party (in both Canuckistan & USA) platforms favor both social & economic liberty.
(Are you unfamiliar with the party in your own country?)
Why use some goofball European definition from people who don't even use English as their first language...especially the Brits?
Last edited:
Nobody ever told me the difference between Socialist Libertarianism and Modern Liberalism
Alceste
Vagabond
Modern liberalism is centrist and statist. These folks do their best to find what they think is a reasonable balance between the competing interests of the general public and the political and economic elite. They believe a strong, centralized authority is essential to that task. They're more socially liberal than conservatives and more economically conservative than left-libertarians.
Socialist libertarians favour direct democracy and public control of the means of production. We see authoritarian structures, such as a strong central government as coercive. We are basically nice anarchists.
Last edited:
Alceste
Vagabond
I didn't know there was a Canadian "American Libertarian" party. We have a hell of a lot of parties up here. Not just the political kind either. My initial reaction to the news is that they must be just as ignorant of the socialist history and origins of libertarianism as Americans. In fact, they probably got their ignorant views from Americans. There are a lot of US fan-boys up here. Our Prime Minister is one.
Alceste
Vagabond
Well, that was informative. What a bunch of quacks.
The Little Red Umbrella: Fringe Party Profiles: The Libertarian Party of Canada
They finished in 8th place in the last election, and did worse than the Marxist-Leninist party. Maybe if they'd studied up on the history of libertarianism and given themselves a more appropriate name, they'd have done better.
The Little Red Umbrella: Fringe Party Profiles: The Libertarian Party of Canada
They finished in 8th place in the last election, and did worse than the Marxist-Leninist party. Maybe if they'd studied up on the history of libertarianism and given themselves a more appropriate name, they'd have done better.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
Given that the root word of libertarian is liberty, it makes sense that it embraces both social and fiscal freedom.
Alceste
Vagabond
We do embrace "fiscal freedom". We reject private ownership of the means of production, which is a separate consideration. We see wage labour as a form of exploitation and coercion, and believe that allowing one individual (or a small group of individuals) to reap most of the benefits of a collective effort is an offense to the liberties of all the other contributors. When we go into business, we favour collectivist business models, like guilds and cooperatives, where everyone who contributes to the production of a good or service benefits from the rewards. If there must be private control of the means of production, we favour collective bargaining (IOW, unions).
Whatever "makes sense" to Americans and 0.05% of Canadians, it is simply a fact that the roots and the history of libertarianism are deeply stuck into anarcho-socialist ideology. Anybody who knows a little bit of history is likely to be careful to distinguish between "libertarianism" and "American libertarianism".
Fun fact: The philosophy and the word describing it was invented by the French! That's gotta sting, right Revoltingest?
Imagine that....a poorly educated backwards Yankee knew more about politics in Canuckistan than one of its learned denizens!I didn't know there was a Canadian "American Libertarian" party. We have a hell of a lot of parties up here. Not just the political kind either. My initial reaction to the news is that they must be just as ignorant of the socialist history and origins of libertarianism as Americans. In fact, they probably got their ignorant views from Americans. There are a lot of US fan-boys up here. Our Prime Minister is one.
You ought to accept that whatever the etymology of a word, the best definition is the one which is commonly used.We do embrace "fiscal freedom". We reject private ownership of the means of production, which is a separate consideration. We see wage labour as a form of exploitation and coercion, and believe that allowing one individual (or a small group of individuals) to reap most of the benefits of a collective effort is an offense to the liberties of all the other contributors. When we go into business, we favour collectivist business models, like guilds and cooperatives, where everyone who contributes to the production of a good or service benefits from the rewards. If there must be private control of the means of production, we favour collective bargaining (IOW, unions).
Whatever "makes sense" to Americans and 0.05% of Canadians, it is simply a fact that the roots and the history of libertarianism are deeply stuck into anarcho-socialist ideology. Anybody who knows a little bit of history is likely to be careful to distinguish between "libertarianism" and "American libertarianism".
Fun fact: The philosophy and the word describing it was invented by the French! That's gotta sting, right Revoltingest?
When one says "libertarian", N Americans know we advocate liberty in all things, some obscure European quiz, notwithstanding.
To try to include socialism in our spectrum is erroneous & confusing.
Last edited:
I suppose that you also support "freedom of speech" by rejecting private ownership of news media.
What next? Will prisons be called "freedom centers"?
Well, that is the purpose of a definition, ie, that which makes sense.
We took their word, & made it useful.
As a Canuckistanian, she would prefer to ignore the Latin root word, & instead focus on its meandering thru French.
To use a froggy definition of an English word in an English speaking setting seems pointlessly pedantic.
Last edited:
jasonwill2
Well-Known Member
Just found this one
Obama aint fittin' there!
jasonwill2
Well-Known Member
I think I recall being somethign like:
x: -2.5
y= -5
Something like that... too lazy to retake.
x: -2.5
y= -5
Something like that... too lazy to retake.