Login is disabled. This forum is read-only.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Elitism results from the Democratic Party
Agreed with Psychogenesis 
@BW
Both the dems and rebubs are right-wing. Most right-wing parties in the world support gun-control, universal healthcare and free education. This just shows that the bebubs are far-right and dems moderate-right.
@Zarf
The parties do show the views of the people, but as I have said before there are many groups inside the parties that are large enough to start a new party but they won't do it because fe: the conservative democrats split from the democratic party and form a new party. The democratic partie will now be weak and the C.D. would be to small to stand up to the rebublican party. Thus resulting in rebublicans taking over.
@ PVP and the rest of you non-Americans.
First off, this topic is about the Democrat party of the US.
2nd, its about US Politics.
3rd who cares what you all think is right or left in US Politics, if you are not American.......that said.....
Your right-wing party is what ?
low taxation, low Govt. spending ?
Less Govt. intrusion/control of industry ?
Strong National Defence ?
Tough, long incarceration for repeat violent offenders ?
Control of the national border to block undocumented workers ?
Support for small business owners ?
Support of free open trade with equally free open trading nations ?
The right of the individual over the whole ?
Little to No govt. control of Health care or Education ?
Freedom of Religion, w/no control on any religion from Govt. ?
Support of the Constitution (or what ever document) as intended by the framers ?
Support of appointing justices that interpret the law, and not legislate from the bench ?
Elimination of ANY preferential treatment by the Govt. for religion, gender, race or creed ?
Is this considered "Right-Wing"?
Guns ?? The US is very different from the world when it comes to Gun Ownership. Its really a local issue.
all of those except for 3,4,9
> Justinian I wrote:
> Yup, it's true.
The Democrats won't dare challenge the mega rich. But they love their paternalistic programs, and in order to fund them they need to drop the hammer on the upper middle class (the people who make $75-200,000 a year and may have $5 million in savings). This class consists of working professionals and investors. Nancy Pelosi may argue that American's won't stand for a person inheriting a $million without heavy taxes, but at the same time she isn't going to take the same stance for someone inheriting a $billion. No the mega rich can't be taxed!
This demagoguery does one very important thing, it eliminates competition for the mega rich. The Democrats are in league with America's elite I tell you! Their paternalistic programs moreover are intended to make people dependent on them, and their rhetoric about supporting the people and fighting the rich is all a scam.
> Belhaven Beast wrote:
> Aren't the republicans also in league with the US elite?
they all r because its the d**n elite that pays them their 'walking around money +some'
HAHA this is a fairly silly discussion. All it really boils down to is perspective. Compared to Euro-socialist parties the democrats look as though they stand towards the right wing. Whereas the european conservatives look as though they are towards the left wing to American conservatives. Americans have found a better place to draw the line than the rest of the world. You have to understand that.
Lol Soth 
"All it really boils down to is perspective."
And then
"have found a better place to draw the line than the rest of the world. You have to understand that."
I hope that was intentional, else it is quite a... stupid thing to say
And the democrats is a right wing party however you put it. Perhaps not "very right wing" but they are definetely not a left wing party......
what i said was correct dragon. To Americans the democrats are liberal and the Republicans are conservative. Europeans are forcing their view of politics on Americans and that is a stupid thing to do.
The Republicans had 5 viable candidates ..... representing 5 different platforms.
The Democrats had prob 3 maybe 4.
The Republicans settled on one, that a lot are not happy about....but COMPRIMISE is being reached.....you know....a coalition to you Euros.
Dems still have two fighting for control of their party.
We have a two party system, w/many differing views. They Compromise or form a coalition in the Primary/Caucus season.
Then move on to the General Election. Sometimes a 3rd or 4th party candidate runs.
If you ACTUALLY saw a US Ballot, there would be more they 4, sometimes as many as 8 choices.
We have MANY parties. Just two that are the main parties.
So, you Euros that have ZERO knowledge of US politics......PLEASE stay the hell out w/your stupid assumptions,
......or learn.
...Ahem....Dragon, for one, will stop there.....for now.
I am quite possibly the most extreme right-winger here, and neither the Republican or Democrat parties are anything close to resembling right-wing. The Republicans will use vague notions of proper right-wing thought, only to mix into their palette of socialist thought and have it output as something exactly opposite of what a right-winger would think. The Old Right would be appalled at the modern incarnation of the Republican party.
first, acolyte, define what you mean by right wing.
The right- and left-wings of the political spectrum can be further divided by an authoritarian/libertarian axis, but to keep things simple I put the extreme right down as favoring capitalism ("freedom"), or minimum/no economic intervention by government, and the extreme left as favoring socialism/communism ("slavery"), or maximum economic intervention. Anarcho-communists would say this is a gross simplification, but I don't personally consider their ideology worth any serious consideration. In my opinion, any emergence of anarchy would ultimately result in a form of anarcho-capitalism.
as I've said before....
IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT THE ECONOMY!!!!
To me Personal freedoms are much more important.
"To me Personal freedoms are much more important."
well, economic freedoms are personal. you cant be an anarchist and be far left in economic freedoms.
"socialism/communism ("slavery")
lol"
is the best response you can come up with because you know its true.
@avo
they are not...
The patriot act restricts personal freedoms to pursue "terrorist" no warrents needed for searches, searching of your house while yr not home, detaining a person for a very long time without access to a lawyer or a phone call: all if the government is suspisious of u being a terrorist. How do those things affect personal freedoms.
U r right you cant be an anarchist youll be a socialist or social democrat. an anarchist is far-left on social matters and far-right on economic matters.
there is no left or right in social matters. the common graph would have social run vertical. left and right is descriptive of economic freedom. and anarchists are extremely right while communists and socialists are extremely left.
in a socialist country, there is only the illusion to rights. look at the US in 1942 and you'll see Japanese Americans born in America thrown into camps for committing no crimes and denied all their rights. Individual rights in democratic governments are only secured when the mob approves of your actions.
In my opinion it is: "Right wing = selfish people", "Left wing = people working together".
The government in these cases either does nothing (and lets everyone take care of themselves) or does alot (making sure everyone got all basic things that they need).
I dont really see how the ring wing part could be better unless you already are rich enough that you wont need anything. And this is usualy only a few % of the people in a country. The richest ones, who (In USA at least) holds the power.
So we can either make sure everyone manages or we can make sure that everyone has to take care of themselves (which means loads of people wont manage). An easy choise for me, help eachother.
or....
Right-wing=close-minded bible huggers
Left-Wing=pot smokin' eco-hippies
@ Dragon,
So help people then. Why is it you leftist types feel the need to empower a central Govt. to MANDATE what one must or must not do ??
You want to help people ?? DO SO YOURSELF !!!
Example: I volunteer my time to a veterans Organization, we service the local Veterans Administration (VA) hospital. I am also a state officer in the organization.
- No one FORCES me to do this. I do it on my own.
Care to look up the philanthropy of any of the so called "Rich" people ??
The Obama's are under attack by the Conservatives for their LACK of donations.
Here you have a PRESIDENTIAL candidate, preaching how America doesnt do enough, lives the life of leisure, makes a good living, and donates basically NOTHING !!!
Stop assuming to know what America is or is not.
I keep telling you to educate yourself on America and its policies FIRST...then attempt to comment. You may actually have something of substance to talk opine about.
paul valter pihlo: "as I've said before....
IT'S NOT ALL ABOUT THE ECONOMY!!!!
To me Personal freedoms are much more important."
Then you are very ignorant of economics. It's more than the science of exchanges, it's the science of how modern civilization is possible and why "personal freedom" a/k/a individual rights are integral to any successful "economy". Economic freedom is as much in hand with personal freedom, as photosynthesis is hand-in-hand with life on Earth. This is why I disregard the "social" axis entirely, because your economic position is very telling of your "personal freedom" preferences, whether you choose to realize it or not. You are clearly no student of economics, and I was a biology major who ended up working in civil aviation.
Black_Wing so long as that compromise includes McCain swearing on a cross with a bible in his hand, and the Pope overlooking him, on live television that he wont do amnesty or open border type actions, I dont see how he can hope to get the large conservative votership.
@acolyte
So conservatives who support economic freedom support no-abortion, patriot act, drug laws, no-gay marriges and so on...
also support more personal freedoms than the american liberals which support less economic freedoms making the conservatives libertarians and the the liberals authoritarians taking the left-right axis away and changing it to a up-down axis.
as you can see it doesn't make sense which means that you don't make sense.
so supporting non-freedom to murder is being authoritarian?
freedom has a moral underpinning to it, so yes, it does make sense if you actually understand what freedom means.
paul valter pihlo: "So conservatives who support economic freedom support no-abortion, patriot act, drug laws, no-gay marriges and so on...
also support more personal freedoms than the american liberals which support less economic freedoms making the conservatives libertarians and the the liberals authoritarians taking the left-right axis away and changing it to a up-down axis.
as you can see it doesn't make sense which means that you don't make sense."
I don't think you've read anything I said. Republicans and Democrats are all socialists to me. I don't agree with laws against abortion, the Patriot Act, drug prohibition, or any legislation on marriage period. There is no such thing as a Republican politician, except perhaps Ron Paul, who understands capitalism. There's not a single Democrat politician who would ever dare to question the necessity of their very office. The ultimate question in economics is: do you support an unregulated market whereby the means of production are privately owned; or do you support a wholly centralized economy whereby the means of production are publicly owned? There is no such thing as a marriage between these two contrary patterns of social organization, it's either capitalism or socialism.
Imperial Forum → Politics → Elitism results from the Democratic Party
Powered by PunBB, supported by Informer Technologies, Inc.