Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Ideologies
How many posters feel they could describe their views with only one or a few words? (Such as "american conservative" or "anarcho-collectivist")
Do your views and the ideology match perfectly?
How many posters have in their lives switched to another ideology? (I mean more radical changes)
How many posters' ideologies match with those of their parents? Peers?
My opinions could not be described in 2 words. Maybe a page or 2 will give you some idee. So I don't have a red line wich to folow. That also answeres your 2 question.
I've switched pov about differen cases but I think it does not aply to what you mean.
My parents and I are completely different on numberous issues.
My friends, even the more political ones vary from left to right all over. Conservative, progressive, anarcho, authoritarian, catholic, atheist, nationalists, libertarians, etc etc.... all the colours of the rainbow. I couldn't really pick one that is predominant.
![[TI] ZoZferatu [Pw9]](https://imperialconflict.com/forum/img/avatars/2979.gif){kind=small}
Narrowing it down lead to labels. And in discussing human science topics those are no good for somebody with half a mind. There's good ideas to be found in either left or right political camp, and a knee-jerk reaction on such a label is a waste of neurons.
You can call me eclectic. 
"confused equalisitic human"
I think we're all confused and we're all human, so that leaves you just "equalistic" 
"Gathering everyone up in 2-3 words is nonsense. That just leads to mindless follow-the-leader type games, and doesn't really allow people to express their individual views on various topics and sub-topics."
I think a lot of people would say that. That's why I'm more interested in the answers of people who are more dedicated to a certain ideology.
To add, is it really that one-sided?
You seem to assume individuality is better than obedience. Can you explain why? Because I think that common mindsets which people adhere to could provide more stability. If there's a dominant ideology there's a bigger chance of things getting done than when everyone "is being themselves", upholding their own different ideas. I haven't thought this through too well yet, but I think it's safe to say ideologies aren't absolutely harmful.
Neither, of course, is individuality, so we shouldn't dismiss any of those.
"Its also relative. To some i am communist. To others i am a brutal fascist. To others again i am an anarchist, and others again i am lonely boy looking for that definitive answer."
No, I don't want you to list what everything you've been called in your life. I want you to compare your views with textbook definitions of ideologies. So it should be a pretty objective answer, if there is one.
realist
I could describe my views with one word: liberal, in particular as the word is defined as an adjective in the following definitions: 1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs 2. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties. 3. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers 4. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies 4. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners. 5. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc.
("liberal." Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. 08 Jun. 2008. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/liberal>.)
Moreover, I also describe myself as a 'liberal' as the word is defined as a noun following definitions:
1. a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties [ant: conservative]
2. a person who favors an economic theory of laissez-faire and self-regulating markets
However, I would go on to describe myself as individualistic, as in an advocate of individualism, as defined as 1. a social theory advocating the liberty, rights, or independent action of the individual. 2. the principle or habit of or belief in independent thought or action. 3. the pursuit of individual rather than common or collective interests; egoism.
I would likewise hold to the doctrines of individualism as they are described by the American Heritage dictionary: 1. A doctrine advocating freedom from government regulation in the pursuit of a person's economic goals. 4. A doctrine holding that the interests of the individual should take precedence over the interests of the state or social group.
Finally, I would say that political anarchy, according to its literal meaning of 'lack of a leader', and as it is defined in the following definition is desirable: 1. a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.
Thus, in one or two words, I would call myself: individualistic, liberal, and anarchistic - three spectrums, if you will, with liberal in the center.
"I think we're all confused"
you would think that, wouldnt you? you're confused and you find comfort thinking that you're no different then anyone else and we're all confused little children.
obamarama!
*wait for DD, einstien, avo and BW to come and flame me
Don't forget about me, Gladiator
I don't think I could describe my views in any couple words. I mix parts from just about every ideology into one confused little mesh.
i dont flame you Gladiator, i flame Obama and then you flame me for flaming your hero.
I am an empiricist, a pragmatist, a machiavellian, a realpolitiker, and a chinese legalist.
<<<==="ass-face neocon warmonger"
"you would think that, wouldnt you? you're confused and you find comfort thinking that you're no different then anyone else and we're all confused little children."
indeed I do, how'd you guess?
"Individuality > Forced Obedience
Which is what i mean by everyone shouldn't be afriad to step away from group-thinking. If you start using titled/phrases you tend to get stuck in a 'grouping'."
So you continue to assume that many different ideas are better than a few dominant ones. Explain.
Also, does everyone in the world have the a) time, b) capability, c) dedication, to produce their own distinct and thought-out opinion about every matter?
And the last bit, what if you get stuck in a 'grouping'?
It would be interesting to also know if any of the posters have ever changed their views, and how big an influence the environment has on their views.
This your surroundings mold who you are I think it has a big influence. Do you mean with changing invironments throughout your life?
"Racist Libertarian".
Contradicting as that might be!
Arocalex: I'm interested in any changes of your views, due to any reason
Little Paul: huh?
No, I understood that part. I didn't understand
"you got one justas"
was I supposed to 'get' someone?
Oh, on changing my views, I've done it plenty of times.
In real life, I spend a good portion of my time (you don't even want to know how much time that is) doing research on political issues, understanding both sides of the issue. I've fairly often switched opinions based on this work.
"It would be interesting to also know if any of the posters have ever changed their views, and how big an influence the environment has on their views."
I used to be a communist in my teens.
"the cr
lol@bief
@justas:
a person who folows a certain ideology one can describe in one word.
"indeed I do, how'd you guess?"
look out the window....
Imperial Forum → Politics → Ideologies
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.