Let's brand ourselves red.

[Green Gaia]

Yay!! I was waiting for you guys to show up! :group:

I agree with you on the guns thing. Personally, I would love a world without guns or the need for them, but that's not practical. I have no desire to outlaw guns, but I also have no desire to have one in my home.

I probably agree with the other points you raised as well, but I'm too tired to go back to see what they were.

 

[Mathematician]

I have a question for Gene: How is "Green" not liberal? Liberal doesn't just mean Democrat does it?

Good question.

I suppose you could take a few of these labels to mean different things. For example, many people believe socialism can fall under liberalism, as with communism.

Personally, I think the main (and obvious, I suppose, judging by the name itself) difference between Greens and liberals is the commitment given to environmentalism and Earth preservation. Most Greens believe in radical reform when it comes to renewable energy, while the popular opinion held by conservatives and liberals is usually that off weaning ourselves of fossil fuels. There's also the matters of destroying nukes, shutting down nuclear power plants, enforcing recycling, ending dirty subsidy, removing the electoral process, ending the War on Terror, and abolishing the current tax system for a new one.

And no, I don't see liberals as just being Democrats.

 

[lilithu]

Personally, I think the main (and obvious, I suppose, judging by the name itself) difference between Greens and liberals is the commitment given to environmentalism and Earth preservation. Most Greens believe in radical reform when it comes to renewable energy, while the popular opinion held by conservatives and liberals is usually that off weaning ourselves of fossil fuels. There's also the matters of destroying nukes, shutting down nuclear power plants, enforcing recycling, ending dirty subsidy, removing the electoral process, ending the War on Terror, and abolishing the current tax system for a new one.

I do believe that radical reform is necessary. I do believe that we have perhaps only ten years before we pass a point of no return in the disruption of our global ecosystem. It's just that I also think that there are other issues that are just as important as environmentalism. Not that I think it's wrong to focus one's energies on environmentalism; it's all related. Ultimately, we're not going to be able to address environmental issues without addressing issues of economic and racial justice, and vice versa.

Go Green!

 

[Random]

Anarchist of the Libertarian Socialist variety. That is, an anarchist who can organize things!

 

[Smoke]

My issues are civil liberties, economic justice, and the environment, so I'll have to go with green -- and in fact, I'm a member of the Green Party. I have no objection to being described as a Socialist, but I do think Communism is just as impractical a religion as Free Market Capitalism.

 

[ayani]

i'm more middle of the road. conservative on some social issues, more liberal on others.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

the above might be interesting for some. :yes:

according to the above, i'm somewhere between nelson mandela and mamoud abbas.

 

[dawny0826]

Overall, I'm a fairly conservative individual, although I'm totally left of the right but still, right of the middle.

 

[Capt. Haddock]

My title says it all.

My only cause is the cause of Latvian world domination, beginning with the state of Michigan.

Once Latvia rules the world, all things will fall into place, everything will make sense, the birds will sing, the children will eat lollies, and bunnies will be cute.

 

[RevOxley_501]

i am a progressive, morally conservative, economically liberal (as in capitalism is teh evil shaitan) super libertarian soclialist


essentially i am extremely morally leftist if that makes an iota of sense

 

[Tigress]

i'm more middle of the road. conservative on some social issues, more liberal on others.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

the above might be interesting for some. :yes:

according to the above, i'm somewhere between nelson mandela and mamoud abbas.

I'm pretty much in the middle of the Libertarian Left.

 

[greatcalgarian]

Socialist towards humanitarian

 

[dbakerman76]

I am apparently in the middle of the Libertarian right. It was no suprise.

 

[lilithu]

i'm more middle of the road. conservative on some social issues, more liberal on others.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

the above might be interesting for some. :yes:

according to the above, i'm somewhere between nelson mandela and mamoud abbas.

Economically Left, Socially Libertarian. As I said, LIBERAL.

Closest "celebrity" would be the Dalai Lama, tho I think I'm slightly more libertarian than him based on the relative positions of our dots, assuming the test is that accurate.

 

[jamaesi]

I'm a red diaper doper baby!

I mean progressive liberal.

 

[Wandered Off]

So far, I've seen at least three people label themselves "libertarian socialists". Please help remove my ignorance, because that seems contradictory. What am I missing? :help:

 

[Revasser]

So far, I've seen at least three people label themselves "libertarian socialists". Please help remove my ignorance, because that seems contradictory. What am I missing? :help:

Socialists that are socially libertarian (as opposed to authoritarian, ie. Stalinists).

If you're from North America, you probably associate the word "libertarian" with the right-wing Libertarian party, but the rest of the world uses the original definition.

 

[lilithu]

So far, I've seen at least three people label themselves "libertarian socialists". Please help remove my ignorance, because that seems contradictory. What am I missing? :help:

I think they mean economically socialist (ie - govt handles things like unemployment and social security instead of people relying on private charity) but socially libertarian (ie - govt butts out of what goes on in your private life). At least that's where I stand personally, so I'm assuming that's what they mean. I wouldn't call myself a socialist (because it implies more govt control than I desire socially) and I wouldn't call myself a libertarian (because it implies less govt control than I desire economically).


What I couldn't reconcile is calling oneself both a socialist and an anarchist. To me, anarchist means no govt control over the economy, period, allowing people to decide for themselves on a local level what is best for them. Whereas socialism for me is the belief that things operate more efficiently (and fairly) on a bigger, national scale. So how can one be both an anarchist and a socialist?

 

[Wandered Off]

If you're from North America, you probably associate the word "libertarian" with the right-wing Libertarian party, but the rest of the world uses the original definition.

Thank you, Revasser. Yes, I admit suffering from the parochial view you mention, and I appreciate your perspective.

I think they mean economically socialist (ie - govt handles things like unemployment and social security instead of people relying on private charity) but socially libertarian (ie - govt butts out of what goes on in your private life).

Thanks. That makes some sense. I am having trouble separating economic freedom from "social" freedom, but I am working on it.

So how can one be both an anarchist and a socialist?

Agreed. I don't see how that would work at all.

 

[Ciscokid]

I'm a tad to the right of the middle of the road.

Fiscally speaking, I'm just a notch to the left of archie bunker.

 

[Trey of Diamonds]

Care to get Specific? Here is a comprehensive list of ideologies to choose from.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_political_ideologies

I went through it and couldn't find a single one I could agree with. I still just call my self a Moderate who is socially liberal and economically conservative. Party wise I am independant.