Fascism in America

I don't want either extreme. In the middle of the range is where I want to be. I do not want the police state we're rapidly moving towards, nor do I want a neo-feudalist state.

Just because I do not want to be indefinitely detained without charge, trial, or legal representation and don't want government agents sneaking around in my home poking through my stuff doesn't automatically indicate I want the opposite extreme.

 

well ya know, if it's a white lady all you gotta do is give her a twinkie and she'll calm down nah I appoligize to all the big black deaf ladies who read this... especially if you like twinkies.

anyway I think I'll try that poll! I love those xD especially if it's on Facebook :| so last I checked I think I was pretty far to the right and lib so but I could be wrong we'll see. edit: I'm pretty much in the middle of everything, taking out Gary Johnton's 71% and Virgil Goode's 28% everybody else is 50-60. all the other numbers trying to figure my political party is 50-60% too lol.

 

I know what you mean, but that chart is completely screwed up due to the fact that "libertarian" is NOT an opposite to "authoritarian". It makes the rankings meaningless. Neo-feudalism (i.e., those with the gold make the rules) is actually MORE authoritarian than any society with representative government. I think history has effectively proven that to be true.

 

You could use to word "Anarchism" or whatever word you think best represents the opposite of Authoritarian.

 

I think the most telling number there is that I side with 48% of American voters lol. Take that as you will, but to me 48% is failure .

 

How about the individual candidates?

BTW, 57% of the country agrees with my positions. And my views tend to be most in line with people like Jill Stein, The Dalai Lama, and Nelson Mandela. Definitely a lefty.

Only around 20% to 35% of the public self-identifies as liberal (depending on the available options in the survey), yet the majority agree with the positions of a lefty like me. That pretty clearly demonstrates just how confused most Americans are politically.

 

There is no opposite to "authoritarian", only degrees of authority and types of authority. And if you look at some of the placements of individuals on that chart, it's obviously screwy...the Pope is further left than an elected public servant in a democracy?? Makes no sense at all.

 

They imagine the bottom of the figure says "Less Authoritarian," as that's basically what is intended.

The placement is based on the positions of the individuals, not the level of governmental power a person possesses. I took a quiz from the website that it's from (political compass), and I came out on the lower left quadrant with Jill Stein and the others in that region. The inclusion of a dimension of governmental control is much better model than a simple line with left and right. One can be a left-leaning libertarian for example, whereas the single left to right line always lumps the libertarians at the far right end. This added dimension also tends to be a terrific predictor for who I tend to be the most pleased with, at least until they reach the middle of the continuum. If there were anarchists at the extreme end, I wouldn't want anything to do with them. But in general, the more extreme authoritarian, the less I tend to like them. I view that as being more important than left and right. Things are bad enough that I'll listen to a non-crazy, non Teabagger right winger if he's in favor of civil rights and common sense positions.

 

Monkey, I think you and Jill Stein should get married lol

 

There's nobody at the bottom. In fact, even the Dalai Lama is only four squares removed from being considered "authoritarian". That's the giveaway that the chart is skewed by the largely meaningless context of the bottom category which hardly anyone seems to qualify for. You could easily lop-off the bottom 3/4 of the "less-authoritarian" area and label the entire chart "Authoritarian" and voila, Obama starts to fall much closer to the middle of the "authoritarian" range. And libertarians like Gary Johnson are not "less-authoritarian", but rather want the private sector to trump the public sector when it comes to authority. Anyone who is uncomfortable with the idea of the general public having power over private interests is MORE authoritarian, not less.

And again, how could the Pope, who is appointed by peers into a lifetime position, be considered so far to the left of officials who are voted into office by the public and have term limits? Public vote and term limits are always to the left politically of lifetime appointees. Democracy, by definition, is always going to be to the left of the Catholic Church.

 

What does this mean? Who should I vote for?

 

Conan the Libertarian

 

It seems your politics are fairly similar to those of Rocky Anderson and Jill Stein. I'm not sure about your feelings about third party candidates. I vote third party at least half the time. I don't trust the establishment candidates and would like to see support for additional parties grow. The two major parties seem to follow the same corporate masters.

 

In reality, Obama isn't anywhere near the political positions of conservative Republicans...

Obama campaigned as a moderate, and is overall the most moderate Democratic president post-WW II.

 

The problem with that is the fact that "moderate" by US standards tends to be "moderately right" for the rest of the industrialized world. Meaning conservative. Jill Stein is the only candidate with a chance of being on the ballot for the presidential election who could legitimately be considered a lefty.

The guy who extends the Bush tax cuts, warmongers, raids marijuana dispensories, has conservatives running his economic policies, expands upon the Patriot Act, ect. is far from a liberal. Taxes are lower now under Obama than they were under Clinton and W. Bush. Obama also pledged to further slash corporate taxes.

Those darn lefties are always slashing taxes for billionaires.

And mark my words, Obama's "Grand Bargain" is coming. He will slash social safety nets if he wins again.

EDIT: I'd also argue that Rocky Anderson is a legit moderate candidate. He'd be a good choice to represent most Americans. He was Mayor of Salt Lake City as a Democrat for 8 years and has a pretty decent record of consumer advocacy and working for the good of the public of various views.

 

Taxes are lower now because Obama followed through on his campaign promises to help the middle class. There was a substantial middle class tax cut included as part of the original 2009 stimulus, and the reason the Bush tax cuts were extended in late 2010 was a concession to the GOP in order to keep payroll tax cuts and extended unemployment benefits in effect. Those weren't in place to help millionaires/billionaires.

And Obama's economic advisors have been a mix of both liberal and conservative. Christina Romer was on board at the same time as Larry Summers. Obama's current top economic advisor, Gene Sperling, is generally considered a progressive. It's not like Obama doubled down on the advice of conservatives like Summers.

As for "warmongering", Obama included a timetable for withdrawal from Iraq as part of his original campaign platform. Hillary Clinton didn't do that initially, and Obama certainly oversaw the withdrawal from Iraq as President. During the campaign, he consistently referred to Afghanistan as the place where the military focus should have been during the Bush era. He didn't promise to withdraw as part of his platform. Of course, the continued military campaign in Afghanistan hasn't really accomplished much of anything, so that's a strike against Obama certainly. However, his handling of other Middle Eastern situations (like Egypt, like Libya, like Syria) that did not already exist when he took office is completely different from Iraq/Afghanistan.

 

I still see Obama as not the worst choice, which is what US politics boils down to anyway. A good candidate is never even an option.

 

I agree that Obama is not as bad as Romney. I agreed with 7% of Romney's views according to one of these political quizes, and I think his genuine perspectives are far less appealing than what he presents to the general public.

I do have some huge concerns about Obama, however. Most notably his "Grand Bargain" and his frightening ideas about indefinite detention and monitoring US citizens. Also, given the fact that he's a Democrat, the rest of the Democrats will fall in line with whatever slashing he wants to do to social safety nets.