tuxgeo
Adventurer
Yeah, that was my point. Good analysis, IMHO.
To be even clearer: IMHO, there are limits on the extent of the reach of politics within human activity.
Last edited:
Politics -- do you have a favored side?
- Thread starter Bullgrit
- Start date
- Status
Yeah, that was my point. Good analysis, IMHO.
To be even clearer: IMHO, there are limits on the extent of the reach of politics within human activity.
I think I might, off the top of my head, think of it in terms of.. spheres.
There's the sphere of myself. There's the sphere of social interaction and individual psychology - one-to-one or small groups, where you're are dealing with individuals. After that, you get into large-groups, where you cannot expect to interact directly with everyone, and that's where politics really comes up, as you need group affiliations to represent your interests.
This is different from saying that everythign you do has some political implications - what I buy, whether I recycle, and so on, does add a small note into the aggregate of what we do. So, for example, I have replaced every possible light in my house with LED lighting. Aside from it dropping my electric bill noticibly, it is part of reducing use of fossil fuels. It is *small*, I admit. But, small things do add up.
Well...
[video=youtube;1t-gK-9EIq4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t-gK-9EIq4&sns=em[/video]
[video=youtube;1t-gK-9EIq4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1t-gK-9EIq4&sns=em[/video]
bone_naga
Explorer
I don't really have one party that I completely identify with. I often vote based on the major issues and the platforms of the candidates. I also have an eye towards a balance of power. If a Republican is President, I'm more likely to vote for a Democrat Congressman, and visa versa. When gay rights were a major issue in Congress, I leaned Democrat. When gun rights were a major issue, I leaned Republican.
In general, I am heavily Libertarian, being a fan of individual liberty and limited government. However, my idea of limited government is a bit different than most Libertarians so I can't get behind it 100%. I want the government to stop trying to run our lives, but I don't think taxes are theft, I still think the government should be providing basic services like roads, I'm not opposed to welfare programs (sometimes I take issue with the particular implementation but not the idea in general), and I don't think that an unregulated market will remain a free one.
If I had it my way, we would go back to taxes being apportioned among the states rather than the income tax, Senators would still be chosen by the states, and the House would be more like a Parliament style where people can vote for whatever party they want, and your vote will count even if you are a Republican in a heavily Democratic district. I think those changes would make the government more budget-conscious, help reign in the federal government (which I think is largely overstepping its Constitutional boundaries), and would let third parties into the mix (which would also have the effect of reducing the chance that one of the two major parties dominates the government at any given time).
In general, I am heavily Libertarian, being a fan of individual liberty and limited government. However, my idea of limited government is a bit different than most Libertarians so I can't get behind it 100%. I want the government to stop trying to run our lives, but I don't think taxes are theft, I still think the government should be providing basic services like roads, I'm not opposed to welfare programs (sometimes I take issue with the particular implementation but not the idea in general), and I don't think that an unregulated market will remain a free one.
If I had it my way, we would go back to taxes being apportioned among the states rather than the income tax, Senators would still be chosen by the states, and the House would be more like a Parliament style where people can vote for whatever party they want, and your vote will count even if you are a Republican in a heavily Democratic district. I think those changes would make the government more budget-conscious, help reign in the federal government (which I think is largely overstepping its Constitutional boundaries), and would let third parties into the mix (which would also have the effect of reducing the chance that one of the two major parties dominates the government at any given time).
Homicidal_Squirrel
Adventurer
Pffftt... Says the guy that gets his paycheck from my stolen taxes.
All joking aside, I'd say I don't fit any particular side in any particular category, but if I were to have to choose a "favored side" it would be more towards the current liberal side. Conservatives, or those that call themselves conservatives, are far too extreme.
MechaPilot
Explorer
I do and do not have a "favored side."
My philosophy on who to vote for is to choose the candidate whose policies will advance the goals that I consider desirable while requiring the least amount of resistance on my part to mitigate the policies that I consider undesirable (every candidate is going to have at least one stupid policy that I object to).
That philosophy does not make me lean toward one party or the other. However, in recent years one party has consistently had candidates that met that criteria better than the candidates of the other parties.
My philosophy on who to vote for is to choose the candidate whose policies will advance the goals that I consider desirable while requiring the least amount of resistance on my part to mitigate the policies that I consider undesirable (every candidate is going to have at least one stupid policy that I object to).
That philosophy does not make me lean toward one party or the other. However, in recent years one party has consistently had candidates that met that criteria better than the candidates of the other parties.
- Status
Similar Threads
