on which side of the aisle do you sit?

[Angry Ayrab]

If none of the options float your boat, then feel free to explain your leanings.

[Jae Rae]

Which isle? Hawaii? Tahiti? Cuba?

[Orangey]

I tend to be left socially and fiscally. That's all.

[Edahn]

Your poll is going to be hard to interpret.

[kuranes]

I'm uncertain ( when it comes to the details ) what a fiscal conservative is. Obama brought up how government structures revenues as well as their spending. I think the traditional idea of a fiscal conservative is related mostly to restraint of spending versus who is left off the hook tax-wise.

Socially I lean to the left, mostly; but I do tire of the success of some low brow culture that appeals to the lowest common denominator and is "cheap to produce" and therefore plentiful.

I often wonder why there isn't more attention paid to the option of being centrist. You have the "We'll tell you what God wants you to do" people on the one hand, and the "If you can get away with it, then do it" people on the other. I hope some of the extremists on both ends get their asses kicked big time, sooner versus later.

[pure_mercury]

I'm uncertain ( when it comes to the details ) what a fiscal conservative is. Obama brought up how government structures revenues as well as their spending. I think the traditional idea of a fiscal conservative is related mostly to restraint of spending versus who is left off the hook tax-wise.


Generally, fiscal conservatives believe in lower levels of taxation and spending. They are also often believers in a balanced budget, but not always (see: Reagan, Ronald).

[millerm277]

Fiscally conservative-Low Taxes, Low spending, stop wasting money meddling in foreign affairs.

Socially Liberal?-Drugs, Guns, Pro-Abortion, shred the Patriot Act.

Ron Paul is pretty close to my ideal presidential candidate.

[heart]

I don't even know how to answer this anymore, politics is so crazy now. I am for the average person, that's all I know and I don't think either party is anymore, not in reality.

[6sticks]

Fiscally conservative-Low Taxes, Low spending, stop wasting money meddling in foreign affairs.

Socially Liberal?-Drugs, Guns, Pro-Abortion, shred the Patriot Act.

Ron Paul is pretty close to my ideal presidential candidate.
What he said, as usual.

[Martoon]

Which isle? Hawaii? Tahiti? Cuba?
Gilligan's?

I'm on the Northern Midwest side of this particular isle.



Re. the poll, do you have an option for "don't pay attention"?

[IlyaK1986]

Fiscally left, socially neutral. Sorry, I don't like the bible thumping on the right, and I don't like all of the affirmative action/equal opportunity stuff from the left either. Frankly, I say you should be able to discriminate on religion. If someone is wearing religious clothing day in and day out, I'm sorry, but if they can't question an idea created by a man who knows less than a sixth grader does today, how else are they limited in their critical thinking skills?

As for fiscally, I'm sorry, but left. If you're filthy stinking rich, you can pay more taxes. That won't keep your kid out of college or your stomach empty. I love capitalism to death, and as an immigrant, I think it's a beautiful, beautiful system.

However, I detest parasitism and the predatory tendencies of larger corporations to destroy Mom and Pop shops. Because here in college, the only place I eat is at a Mom and Pop deli. And it's miles above even Subway. I believe in capitalism only when the little guys have a chance, because it's the little guys that drive innovation. If there's one thing in which Silicon Valley absolutely eats Wall Street's lunch, it's that Silicon Valley is pure and free capitalism. Just because Microsoft has Windows doesn't mean you can't be the next Bill Gates if your idea is good enough. In Silicon Valley, if you have a good idea and the go-getter attitude, no giant corporation is going to destroy you--simply because they *can't*, not if your idea is something that is truly yours.

And I am about as NT as you can get.

[EffEmDoubleyou]

Socially Liberal?-Drugs, Guns, Pro-Abortion, shred the Patriot Act.

Have they invented a liberal yet who is pro-gun?

[Jack Flak]

Hmm. Define liberal I guess, coz I'm basically a libertarian, and pro gun as hell.

[Cimarron]

Fiscally left, socially neutral. Sorry, I don't like the bible thumping on the right, and I don't like all of the affirmative action/equal opportunity stuff from the left either.

As for fiscally, I'm sorry, but left. I think it's funny that you apologized for your political beliefs. Don't worry about it!

[Colors]

Hmm, 10 minutes of incredibly unscientific tallying later:

* Only two SJs, so bear with me. Also I just counted Victor as an NF, for kicks.
Social: Left-SJ SP NT NF - Right
Fiscal: Left- NF NT SP SJ- Right

Basically the order was reversed. :)
NTs were fiscally split but generally socially left. (:thinking: Psh, I'll invent my own economic system.)
NFs were socially split but heavily fiscally left. (:9436: Universal health care :jesus:-style.)
SPs were pretty much socially left and fiscally right. :banana:
SJs tended socially left and both identified as fiscally right. [:azdaja: Freedom for the oppressed (and the natural self-regulating flux of the market!)]

Would the "war against drugs" be a social and fiscal issue?

[edel weiss]

I ticked on socially left by mistake, I actually mean right. :blush: Fiscally, I'm more of a centrist leaning towards left.

[pure_mercury]

Interesting that the SJs tend toward the small government, "stay out of my business" end of things. Doesn't seem to be the stereotypical attitude.

[millerm277]

Have they invented a liberal yet who is pro-gun?

Yup. Not sure on where the politicians in the state stand, but VT is very democratic, yet has the least restrictive gun laws in the country. (Buy whatever you want, whenever you want, carry it however you want.)

On second thought though, I should probably change it to "Socially Libertarian".

[Cimarron]

Interesting that the SJs tend toward the small government, "stay out of my business" end of things. Doesn't seem to be the stereotypical attitude. 2 is a really small sample size, though.

[Trinity]

Can you even call 2 a sample size :huh:

[whatever]

left and left, if I hadn't made that obvious over the last year ;)

I'm far enough left to think that most politicians are either douchebags (reps) or pussies (dems) :)

[pure_mercury]

2 is a really small sample size, though.

Of course, and it's not random at all (two posters who read the Political threads and felt like responding). Interesting nonetheless.

[Orangey]

Heh, that's a lot of social lefties so far.

[Cimarron]

Heh, that's a lot of social lefties so far.
That's generally how it is on the internet. :nerd:

[Little Linguist]

Not trying to be a jerk: but define 'right' and 'left' because I think there is a lot of ground covered by those two terms. How far right and how far left? Think: political diamond rather than political spectrum.

[Oleander]

Hoo! You have a point there Linguist. Some people think Anarcho-Socialist an impossible union of direct opposites. When I think Left, I think as far as possible freedom for everybody to do whatever they want to do, something like an aristocratic slave state without the slaves (robots anyone?). But by 'Freedom', the Right often means freedom to choose between a few choices of what is necessary to survive that are set for you. Rightist freedom is like a supermarket stuffed full of different brands except they're all beans. Leftist freedom is directing a cook or doing it yourself.

[Little Linguist]

Hoo! You have a point there Linguist. Some people think Anarcho-Socialist an impossible union of direct opposites. When I think Left, I think as far as possible freedom for everybody to do whatever they want to do, something like an aristocratic slave state without the slaves (robots anyone?). But by 'Freedom', the Right often means freedom to choose between a few choices of what is necessary to survive that are set for you. Rightist freedom is like a supermarket stuffed full of different brands except they're all beans. Leftist freedom is directing a cook or doing it yourself.

Exactly. Far left and far right have nothing to do with freedom, with the possible exception of anarchy. Anarchy would be extreme far left; so would communism; socialism would as well; some might even argue that the green party is. But they are fundamentally different!! One could argue bible belt, national socialism, conservative nationalism, neo-conservative fanaticism, monarchism, are all far right, but have very, VERY different purposes. Eh, not even to mention the stuff in between.

Some ideologies are contradictory. Take internationalism. That could be far left, center, far right or anything in between depending on the circumstances.

So, at the risk of sounding NT, I'm leaving that one alone until it's classified better....:shock:

[Lateralus]

I'm not comfortable voting without definitions. I think I'm what most people would call socially left, but I'm not certain of that. Would me voting that way imply that I support things like affirmative action and slavery reparations?

Economically, does 'left' mean lots of government intervention, 'right' very little government intervention? And what does neutral mean? Does that mean you support a 'mixed' economy? I ask this because some people could interpret 'right' to mean you support corporatism, 'left' socialism/communism, with 'neutral' being non-interventionist.

[Little Linguist]

I'm not comfortable voting without definitions. I think I'm what most people would call socially left, but I'm not certain of that. Would me voting that way imply that I support things like affirmative action and slavery reparations?

Economically, does 'left' mean lots of government intervention, 'right' very little government intervention? And what does neutral mean? Does that mean you support a 'mixed' economy? I ask this because some people could interpret 'right' to mean you support corporatism, 'left' socialism/communism, with 'neutral' being non-interventionist.

Eh, yeah, exactly!!! Socially left can mean anything from NO government (anarchy) to liberalism (SPD/Democrat), to extreme governmental control (communism). Eh. Like I said, I'm leaving it alone until it's defined better.

[Orangey]

I think that, to keep the poll simple, the categories were boiled down to fewer, larger (and yes, therefore more ambiguous ones). With this in mind, I'm thinking that fiscally left and fiscally right would encompass both the more libertarian views of those sides and the more authoritarian (I'm thinking of political compass). So both go into the one category.

As for social, I'm guessing that it depends on which you are in general. So for most issues, do you fall more to the left or right for the majority of them? In other words, out of, say, abortion, gay marriage, and affirmative action (this is just an illustration, there are of course many more issues), are your views mostly left, right, or equal between them all (neutral)? And I think that it's fairly obvious that a left position on something like abortion is pro-choice. That's not to say that someone who is pro-life isn't socially left, but when looking at the composite of all your opinions, if they are mostly to the right you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that you are socially left. If those three issues were all the issues possible, and I were at once pro-life, anti-gay marriage, and anti-affirmative action, I wouldn't be able to consider myself socially left. I think that much is fairly unambiguous.

[Little Linguist]

I think that, to keep the poll simple, the categories were boiled down to fewer, larger (and yes, therefore more ambiguous ones). With this in mind, I'm thinking that fiscally left and fiscally right would encompass both the more libertarian views of those sides and the more authoritarian (I'm thinking of political compass). So both go into the one category.

As for social, I'm guessing that it depends on which you are in general. So for most issues, do you fall more to the left or right for the majority of them? In other words, out of, say, abortion, gay marriage, and affirmative action (this is just an illustration, there are of course many more issues), are your views mostly left, right, or equal between them all (neutral)? And I think that it's fairly obvious that a left position on something like abortion is pro-choice. That's not to say that someone who is pro-life isn't socially left, but when looking at the composite of all your opinions, if they are mostly to the right you'd be hard pressed to convince anyone that you are socially left. If those three issues were all the issues possible, and I were at once pro-life, anti-gay marriage, and anti-affirmative action, I wouldn't be able to consider myself socially left. I think that much is fairly unambiguous.

How about this? If someone knows of a good political test, I will take it and get back to you. :D

[Orangey]

How about this? If someone knows of a good political test, I will take it and get back to you. :D

The Political Compass - Test (http://www.politicalcompass.org/test)

[01011010]

Socially Left, Fiscally Conservative

[pure_mercury]

Eh, yeah, exactly!!! Socially left can mean anything from NO government (anarchy) to liberalism (SPD/Democrat), to extreme governmental control (communism). Eh. Like I said, I'm leaving it alone until it's defined better.

I'd be down with the Free Democrats in Germany, Ling.

[Little Linguist]

The Political Compass - Test (http://www.politicalcompass.org/test)

Here are my results.

[Uberfuhrer]

Socially, I am in the middle because it depends on my mood. Fiscally, I'm on the right. I'm very cautious about money, although the purchases I do make are very large ones.

[Little Linguist]

Eh, here's another one

Your results:

On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Conservative (65).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Centrist (48).
Your score is on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being fully liberal and 100 being fully conservative.

just took the Political Brew Political Gauge and came up as a Moderate Conservative on Non-Fiscal Issues and a Centrist on Fiscal Issues. You can take the test at The Political Brew: Political Test (http://www.politicalbrew.com/politest.cgi)

[Eileen]

I'm always in the green (for Gandhi) box.

Socially left, fiscally left. Actually, I'm fiscally undecided, except that it I think that giving the wealthy tax breaks is stupid.

[Little Linguist]

Okay, based on my tests, which put me as center because basically one really left answer generally cancelled one really right answer, :D I'll just go with socially right, fiscally neutral. Oh, and NF, of course. :D

But heh, I coined a phrase for my own political beliefs.

[Orangey]

Lower left quadrant on both of those tests.

[pure_mercury]

Here is mine:

Political Compass Printable Graph (http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=7.12&soc=-3.28)


BTW, I hate what they write about libertarianism being "Darwinian," "extremely right-wing," and in favor of (or, at least, not against) "strong law and order positions." That is just wrong.

[Jeffster]

It really depends on the issue, but I picked right for both, mostly because I knew almost nobody else would. ;)

[Orangey]

It really depends on the issue, but I picked right for both, mostly because I knew almost nobody else would. ;)

Ha, I was about to argue with you because of all of the fiscal right people, but out of them all only two picked both fiscally right and socially right (and one was you).

[lowtech redneck]

I left the social option blank, because I'm not sure how each term is defined. For instance, I'm against a constitutional amendment banning flag-burning, and I support the second amendment. Both prioritize individual rights that do not directly impact the rights of others, yet they are commonly viewed as being on opposite sides of the left/right social divide.

[Cimarron]

I left the social option blank, because I'm not sure how each term is defined. For instance, I'm against a constitutional amendment banning flag-burning, and I support the second amendment. Both prioritize individual rights that do not directly impact the rights of others, yet they are commonly viewed as being on opposite sides of the left/right social divide. Yeah, it was kind of weird, which is why I just went with "neutral".

[Angry Ayrab]

Here is mine. (http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-6.62&soc=0.36)

Personally I am really a strict social conservative on myself, but I don't normally care what others do. Fiscally, I am a socialist.

EDIT: Oh yeah, I am a vegetarian that loves guns by the way... wierd huh?

[Colors]

Hmm, 10 minutes of incredibly unscientific tallying later:

* Only two SJs, so bear with me. Also I just counted Victor as an NF, for kicks.
Social: Left-SJ SP NT NF - Right
Fiscal: Left- NF NT SP SJ- Right
" be a social and fiscal issue?

A little bit more improvised crunching:

Social: Left-___SJ_SP__NT___NF____________________-Right
(With "left"=0, "neutral=0.5", "right=1")
(average: SJ=0.200, SP=0.214, NT=0.278, NF=0.409)

Fiscal: Left-_________NF_________NT__SJ__SP________-Right
(average: NF=0.273, NT=0.579, SJ=0.600, SP=0.708)

[Angry Ayrab]

A little bit more improvised crunching:

Social: Left-___SJ_SP__NT___NF____________________-Right
(With "left"=0, "neutral=0.5", "right=1")
(average: SJ=0.200, SP=0.214, NT=0.278, NF=0.409)

Fiscal: Left-_________NF_________NT__SJ__SP________-Right
(average: NF=0.273, NT=0.579, SJ=0.600, SP=0.708)

Holy crap, that is awsome, thanks for doing that!!!!

+7 browny points.
:wubbie:

[ygolo]

Holy crap, that is awsome, thanks for doing that!!!!

+7 browny points.
:wubbie:

I especially appreciate the visual charting on the left-right scales. :wubbie:

[Colors]

No worries, just leftover guilt.

Long-rambling statistical nightmare story: In high school, somehow I got dumped with "slur/name-calling surveys" a previous club president had given out. Now I know that obviously he hadn't known anything about sample sizing because to sample the school, he'd.... provided enough paper survey forms for every single student on campus through English classes, which are required for all students. I estimate about 40-70% of those were returned, which was amounted to a ridiculous amount of paperwork for me, due to the complexity of the survey:
-Separated by gender, grade level, and ethnicity- at least 4 different distinctions and "other"/"mixed (:cry: Plenty of high-school kids don't know what "caucasian" is, alright?)
-Approximately 18 questions total- most of which had 5 different answer options (Damn those "how often" questions!:steam:)
-Additional comments
We'd managed to tally about half and I managed to type in a table form of about half of those. The guilt of not completing this socially relevant task keeps them nicely in a corner of my closet despite the fact that I have long since graduated. :doh:
*Bascially I found out that plenty of high school students generally don't give a shit about calling someone a "FOB"-fresh off the boat" or someone a "fag" or something "gay". And to a lesser extent, gender slurs and mental-disability slurs. The worst offenders are chronic due to the fact that their particular social circle is rife. Most of the others don't think about it much at all. And then there's the minority group which find slurs intensely offensive and demoralizing. Across the board, all student groups perceive that authority figures don't care about and/or ignore slur usuage.

[Eileen]

*Bascially I found out that plenty of high school students generally don't give a shit about calling someone a "FOB"-fresh off the boat" or someone a "fag" or something "gay". And to a lesser extent, gender slurs and mental-disability slurs. The worst offenders are chronic due to the fact that their particular social circle is rife. Most of the others don't think about it much at all. And then there's the minority group which find slurs intensely offensive and demoralizing. Across the board, all student groups perceive that authority figures don't care about and/or ignore slur usuage.

It's probably the case that authority figures ignore it a lot (but let me tell you that it is probably in many cases not that they don't care but because discipline is hard--that's my story, anyway). That said, I ALWAYS call kids out on homophobic and mental disability slurs. Those are the ones I hear most often (ie, "that's gay" and "that's retarded"). But I teach English, so word choice is a central topic in my class--so I try to observe those offenses as "teachable moments." That said, nobody gets to abuse one another in my class without being called on it (and in particularly egregious circumstances, written up for it).

[Jeffster]

It's probably the case that authority figures ignore it a lot (but let me tell you that it is probably in many cases not that they don't care but because discipline is hard--that's my story, anyway). That said, I ALWAYS call kids out on homophobic and mental disability slurs. Those are the ones I hear most often (ie, "that's gay" and "that's retarded"). But I teach English, so word choice is a central topic in my class--so I try to observe those offenses as "teachable moments." That said, nobody gets to abuse one another in my class without being called on it (and in particularly egregious circumstances, written up for it).

Man, I would hate your class. The kids aren't usually using those words to mean anything to do with homosexuality or even mental disability. They're insults along the same level as "poopie face" or "dweeb." The word "gay" was co-opted into having a sexual connotation anyway, it really means joyful. If it can be co-opted by one group, why not another who wants it to mean lame or dumb? I don't think the first co-opping is somehow more valid.

On second thought, maybe I would love your class. :D

[Lateralus]

Man, I would hate your class. The kids aren't usually using those words to mean anything to do with homosexuality or even mental disability. They're insults along the same level as "poopie face" or "dweeb." The word "gay" was co-opted into having a sexual connotation anyway, it really means joyful. If it can be co-opted by one group, why not another who wants it to mean lame or dumb? I don't think the first co-opping is somehow more valid.
Lame and dumb were also co-opted.

[Jeffster]

Lame and dumb were also co-opted.

There ya go. Such is the cycle of language.

[Colors]

They're words, but they reveal a strong undercurrent (and sometimes not so under) of hostile sentiment. Over time, becoming desensitized to such hostile sentiment doesn't mean necessarily mean it has disappeared.

It can often just mean that an environment has been created where it is socially accepted; that's all.

But I teach English, so word choice is a central topic in my class--so I try to observe those offenses as "teachable moments." That said, nobody gets to abuse one another in my class without being called on it (and in particularly egregious circumstances, written up for it). Yeah. It's pretty hard to get kids to do anything, but it's appreciated that you try and enlighten them. :)

[Cimarron]

Personally I am really a strict social conservative on myself, but I don't normally care what others do. Yeah, I feel the same way. :yes:

[booyalab]

I associate the right more with economic freedom and individual rights, and wikipedia agreed with me. So there you go.

[Anja]

Yay, Colors!

Yay, Eileen!

Negative energy. . .

Like Rush says, "Words mean things." There's one thing I can agree with him about. We're becoming people who don't stop to think about connotations or "vibes."

Meh. I like to sit in the aisle and when people trip over me get the giggles.:smile:

Edit: And for gosh sakes let's keep words meaning things because pretty soon we'll all be communicating in nonspeak.

[Blackmail!]

just took the Political Brew Political Gauge and came up as a Moderate Conservative on Non-Fiscal Issues and a Centrist on Fiscal Issues. You can take the test at The Political Brew: Political Test (http://www.politicalbrew.com/politest.cgi)

On Non-Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Strong Liberal (9).
On Fiscal Issues, you rank as a Moderate Liberal (25).

Your score is on a scale of 0 to 100, with 0 being fully liberal and 100 being fully conservative.

-----

Quite predictable. In France, I lean towards centrism, while in the US, I would be considered as a die-hard liberal.
Economically speaking, despite my score I'm basically a Schumpeterian.

[Peguy]

Hmmmn....interesting question. Long story short: my political views are unclassifable as far as the standard spectrum is concerned - even though many here like to automatically assume I'm on the right(you know who you are! ;) )

The Anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon once proclaimed himself as "the most revolutionary person of his time, but also as the most conservative".

That's probably the best way to describe where I stand on the political spectrum. Like Proudhon, I too rail against excessive state power, yet defend the family and traditional morality. Believe it or not, there was a time when the Left was socially conservative.

Not only do I criticise Big government, I also criticise Big business as well - two sides of the same coin as far as I'm concerned. I'm strongly believe in the concept of self-government.

I'm a staunch defender of the virtue of patriotism, as well as the legitimacy of parochial identities(local, ethnic, regional, national, etc.) in the face of abstract Globalism - which I guess places me on the Right.

Yet I also staunchly believe in the virtue of social justice and standing up for the underdog, which would place me very much on the Left.

I could go on endlessly about this. As I said, my politics are hard to fully classify.

Concerning mainstream politics, Im a Ron Paul supporter.

[Peguy]

Think: political diamond rather than political spectrum.

That's a good way to think about it. Personally I prefer the comparison to a sphere and a line. The standard political understanding is that of the line: you're either on one end or the other.

With the spherical perspective: even if you're on the right side of one hemisphere, you still have more in common with the Left side of your hemisphere then you do with the right side of the other hemisphere.

That probably explains why that even though I'm a Ron Paul supporter, I still have more in common with Ralph Nader than I do with Rush Limbaugh or Bill O'Reilly.


Concerning the definition of Left and Right: It originated from the time of the French Revolution, and various factions sat in the National Assembly. Those we would consider "conservatives" tended to sit together on the right side of the assembly, while the "liberals" and radicals sat more towards the left side. Hence how the terms were coined.

[Peguy]

The Political Compass - Test (http://www.politicalcompass.org/test)

I think this one is better:
http://www.typologycentral.com/forums/politics-history-current-events/10191-what-s-your-political-philosophy.html

[Falcarius]

Fiscally: I am probably the most left wing member of this forum, and I doubt too many will disagree.

Socially: It is hard to say if I am a righty or lefty or whatever. On one hand, I oppose divorce except for infidelity and extreme violence, same-sex marriage, abortion, euthanasia, drugs, and embryonic stem cell research.

While on the other hand, I don't like telling people what to do so I would not necessarily make the above things illegal if say I was head of state; Does this make me a social conservative in denial?:shock:


Hmmmn....interesting question. Long story short: my political views are unclassifable as far as the standard spectrum is concerned - even though many here like to automatically assume I'm on the right(you know who you are! ;)

The Anarchist Pierre-Joseph Proudhon once proclaimed himself as "the most revolutionary person of his time, but also as the most conservative".

That's probably the best way to describe where I stand on the political spectrum. Like Proudhon, I too rail against excessive state power, yet defend the family and traditional morality. Believe it or not, there was a time when the Left was socially conservative.

Not only do I criticise Big government, I also criticise Big business as well - two sides of the same coin as far as I'm concerned. I'm strongly believe in the concept of self-government.

I'm a staunch defender of the virtue of patriotism, as well as the legitimacy of parochial identities(local, ethnic, regional, national, etc.) in the face of abstract Globalism - which I guess places me on the Right.

Yet I also staunchly believe in the virtue of social justice and standing up for the underdog, which would place me very much on the Left.

I could go on endlessly about this. As I said, my politics are hard to fully classify.

Concerning mainstream politics, Im a Ron Paul supporter.

If George Orwell was here he would call you a 'Tory Anarchist', like he used to refer to himself before he became a socialist.;)