What is the main intellectual foundation of the major political POVs here on ATPN?

[glenn1]

As the title states. Basically looking for something which in one sentence or so summarizes their worldview and gives a context for understanding why they take the positions on issues that they do. I'll start.

Liberal/Progressive: Their main complaint is with a fact that everyone learns from an early age, namely that the world isn't fair. "It's not fair that the rich have so much and the poor have so little, etc." Put any of their political positions into the context of them trying to overcome this basic fact of life and it will make more sense.

Conservative: Their main complaint is with a different fact that everyone learns from an early age, namely that people don't always make "good" or moral choices. "____ is a sign of decline in family values." Put any of their political positions into the context of them trying to overcome this basic fact of life and it will make more sense.

 

[gsaldivar]

Conservative: Success is a primarily a measure of an individual's merit, ability and hard work, rather than a measure of that individual's entitlements, conditions and seniority. A given degree of success isn't necessarily a proportional, inclusive representation of all segments of the population. Individuals will experience varying degrees of success, depending primarily on their specific merits, abilities and disposition towards work.

 

[cKGunslinger]

Libertarian: This nation was founded upon the ideals of personal freedom and freedom from an oppressive government that seeks to control our rights, instead of enabling them. People are responsible for their own actions and should be free to pursure whatever activities they desire, as long as those activities to do not infringe upon the rights of others.

 

[HalosPuma]

Capitalist: the free-market will always solve society's problems. Government intervention from fiat currency to subsidies to quotas to social programs only hinders progress. The free-market always wins in the end and society suffers in direct proportion to government intervention. The desire to make a profit and better oneself is the stimulus which propels humanity forward.

 

[Rainsford]

Liberal Libertarian: Our country is based on the ideas of personal freedom and government non-intervention. These values are the foundation of our country, however, there are certain situations where the government can do a better job than individuals and corporations and the government has a role to play in making sure our country runs smoothly. Personal freedoms should be limited only when they interfere with the freedoms of someone else. Society can be more than just a group of individuals, but society will only be great as long as those individuals are treated as something greater than servents of society.

Edit: As far as a context for understanding goes, my positions are almost always based on what I view as protecting personal freedom without arguing against government when I think it has a positive benefit. In other words, personal freedom always and government non-intervention except when it would actually help.

 

[GoPackGo]

I am a Left Wing Neo Con. I grew up during the Reagan-Bush Era but I watched loads of PBS

 

[jackschmittusa]

Agree very much with cKGunslinger. One man's pursuit of happiness is another man's road to damnation. Untold dollars and man hours are wasted trying to shackle others with restrictions on their thoughts and actions which harm no one. If all that money and effort were channeled into constructive endeavers, we would all live in a better place. Live and let live; the very definition of freedom.

 

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: jackschmittusa
Agree very much with cKGunslinger. One man's pursuit of happiness is another man's road to damnation. Untold dollars and man hours are wasted trying to shackle others with restrictions on their thoughts and actions which harm no one. If all that money and effort were channeled into constructive endeavers, we would all live in a better place. Live and let live; the very definition of freedom.

Oh, you mean like the bazillions being spent on promoting "marriage"? Total waste of cash that the government has no business spending.

Jason

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
I am a Left Wing Neo Con. I grew up during the Reagan-Bush Era but I watched loads of PBS

That explains a few things.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
I am a Left Wing Neo Con. I grew up during the Reagan-Bush Era but I watched loads of PBS

That explains a few things.

Bizarre isn't it? :sun:

 

[Proletariat]

I'm really confused as to how libertarianism is intellectual at all. It is a cop-out at best which is why you only see people mention in it the states. It seems as if it derives from despair, in that you cannot deal with the problems that government can and will face and you cannot accept that there may be others with higher ideals than you. It is a knee-jerk reaction to the complex problem of accepting a confusing, sometimes chaotic reality.

People call socialism a utopian ideal, but isn't the idea that a massive group of people will behave properly without governmental intimidation tremendously foolish/utopian? It is, but you won't admit it.

This nation was hypocritically founded upon oppression and genocide. The ideal that all men are created equal wasn't even halfway achieved before the liberal-socialistic movements of the 1960's with great leaders such as JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. In many peoples minds that ideal still does not compute. Stating these facts is not being anti-American, it is telling it like it is. If anything we need to move very far away from the libertarian philosophy because it enabled these things. As we have moved closer to socialism, America has moved forward in the fields of justice and equality in parrallel. We have in the last 40 years finally come closer to realizing the American dream. Equality and freedom for all. Inevitably those in power, the conservatives and rich capitalists will be angered by this shift and will spew their hatred against the philosophy that those less fortunate should be helped. Pure capitalism, and this 'libertarianism' have only opened up avenues for the rich, richer, and richest to exploit the middle-class and the poor. For when you give a man freedom over everything, he can and will do anything.

 

[SuperTool]

Liberal
See sig:
|
|
|
v

 

[daveshel]

Originally posted by: SuperTool
Liberal
See sig:
|
|
|
v

How about:

The test of our progress is whether we can provide a level playing field so that life isn't too easy for those that have nor too hard for those that have not.

 

[glenn1]

Some good input in this thread. However, in addition to just summarizing some of the intellectual foundations for certain POVs, it would be nice if you also discussed some of the potential downfalls in that same mindset.

Being a Libertarian myself, I'll choose that philosophy and witll use another person's statement to point out what I would consider to be a potential downside of the type which I'm referring to:

Libertarian: This nation was founded upon the ideals of personal freedom and freedom from an oppressive government that seeks to control our rights, instead of enabling them. People are responsible for their own actions and should be free to pursure whatever activities they desire, as long as those activities to do not infringe upon the rights of others.

The potential problem with this is that it's premised on everyone involved knowing and being able to assert their rights, otherwise the system breaks down. It would be nice if everyone asserted their rights and were able to prevent others from engaging in acts which infringed upon their rights, but that's not always going to be the case (and there can be varying reasons for this).

 

[Cerb]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
I'm really confused as to how libertarianism is intellectual at all. It is a cop-out at best which is why you only see people mention in it the states. It seems as if it derives from despair, in that you cannot deal with the problems that government can and will face and you cannot accept that there may be others with higher ideals than you. It is a knee-jerk reaction to the complex problem of accepting a confusing, sometimes chaotic reality.

OK, since you haven't answered it in two threads now, how is it is a cop-out?

People call socialism a utopian ideal, but isn't the idea that a massive group of people will behave properly without governmental intimidation tremendously foolish/utopian? It is, but you won't admit it.

Er, that's extremely redundant. I would call socialism a Utopian ideal. Note that it is Utopia, a proper noun, which by its origin and definition, can not properly exist

This nation was hypocritically founded upon oppression and genocide. The ideal that all men are created equal wasn't even halfway achieved before the liberal-socialistic movements of the 1960's with great leaders such as JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. In many peoples minds that ideal still does not compute.

The biggest problem is that people want uniformity. They want people to be 'equal'--not just under law, but in full complete reality. Diversity, is good, and equality should only be a legal ideal.

Stating these facts is not being anti-American,

Facts...

it is telling it like it is.

From your PoV

If anything we need to move very far away from the libertarian philosophy because it enabled these things.

It neither enabled nor hindered them. The beliefs in scientific racism, rampant sexism, and class wars, which our forefathers merely brought over from England did that, with the help of maligned religions.

As we have moved closer to socialism,

...and don't forget the secular ideals the current administration is trying to stamp out!

America has moved forward in the fields of justice and equality in parrallel. We have in the last 40 years finally come closer to realizing the American dream. Equality and freedom for all. Inevitably those in power, the conservatives and rich capitalists will be angered by this shift and will spew their hatred against the philosophy that those less fortunate should be helped.

...and that they are above the rest of us

Pure capitalism, and this 'libertarianism' have only opened up avenues for the rich, richer, and richest to exploit the middle-class and the poor.

Right...the drug war and high taxes are doing such a great job. I don't see how any libertarian ideals caused the need for multiple incomes for families.

For when you give a man freedom over everything, he can and will do anything.

...and must accept responsibility for those actions. One of the things that makes libertarian ideals different in our age is that they are largely social, stemming up from the bottom, rather than down from the top. That's also why they are so small, as the Rs, Ds, and MSM actively shun them, as they represent a threat.

 

[cwjerome]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
I'm really confused as to how libertarianism is intellectual at all. It is a cop-out at best which is why you only see people mention in it the states. It seems as if it derives from despair, in that you cannot deal with the problems that government can and will face and you cannot accept that there may be others with higher ideals than you. It is a knee-jerk reaction to the complex problem of accepting a confusing, sometimes chaotic reality.

People call socialism a utopian ideal, but isn't the idea that a massive group of people will behave properly without governmental intimidation tremendously foolish/utopian? It is, but you won't admit it.

This nation was hypocritically founded upon oppression and genocide. The ideal that all men are created equal wasn't even halfway achieved before the liberal-socialistic movements of the 1960's with great leaders such as JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. In many peoples minds that ideal still does not compute. Stating these facts is not being anti-American, it is telling it like it is. If anything we need to move very far away from the libertarian philosophy because it enabled these things. As we have moved closer to socialism, America has moved forward in the fields of justice and equality in parrallel. We have in the last 40 years finally come closer to realizing the American dream. Equality and freedom for all. Inevitably those in power, the conservatives and rich capitalists will be angered by this shift and will spew their hatred against the philosophy that those less fortunate should be helped. Pure capitalism, and this 'libertarianism' have only opened up avenues for the rich, richer, and richest to exploit the middle-class and the poor. For when you give a man freedom over everything, he can and will do anything.

LOL!

 

[cKGunslinger]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
I'm really confused as to how libertarianism is intellectual at all. It is a cop-out at best which is why you only see people mention in it the states. It seems as if it derives from despair, in that you cannot deal with the problems that government can and will face and you cannot accept that there may be others with higher ideals than you. It is a knee-jerk reaction to the complex problem of accepting a confusing, sometimes chaotic reality.

People call socialism a utopian ideal, but isn't the idea that a massive group of people will behave properly without governmental intimidation tremendously foolish/utopian? It is, but you won't admit it.

This nation was hypocritically founded upon oppression and genocide. The ideal that all men are created equal wasn't even halfway achieved before the liberal-socialistic movements of the 1960's with great leaders such as JFK, RFK, Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. In many peoples minds that ideal still does not compute. Stating these facts is not being anti-American, it is telling it like it is. If anything we need to move very far away from the libertarian philosophy because it enabled these things. As we have moved closer to socialism, America has moved forward in the fields of justice and equality in parrallel. We have in the last 40 years finally come closer to realizing the American dream. Equality and freedom for all. Inevitably those in power, the conservatives and rich capitalists will be angered by this shift and will spew their hatred against the philosophy that those less fortunate should be helped. Pure capitalism, and this 'libertarianism' have only opened up avenues for the rich, richer, and richest to exploit the middle-class and the poor. For when you give a man freedom over everything, he can and will do anything.

Toke! Toke! Toke!

I'm not even going to try an address that "the evil rich man is out to get me" drivel. And you have the nerve to call something else a 'cop-out?'

 

[dmcowen674]

Liberal/Progressive: My sh1t stinks like everyone else's.
Conservative: My sh1t doesn't stink.

 

[miketheidiot]

I suppose I closest fit to democratic-socialist. In our current state, with our tremendous resources and production, there is no reason why anyone should suffer from poverty, no reason why we cannot provide people proper health care, or educate our youth. I see no reason why anyone should have to struggle just to get by. Basically i feel that we should treat each other like humans and not like animals.

capitalism is also very shortsited and is unable to deal in an acceptable way with some serious problems (peak oil in particular).

 

[cwjerome]

Hmmm, I would start with the premise that reality is an absolute and man is a rational being. From there I would deduce that man has Natural Rights and further deduce that a capitalistic social system with limited government is best suited for living together.

Uh... I don't think I've ever over-simplified things more

 

[Dissipate]

Anarcho-capitalist libertarian:

No "government" can ever be created which wields legitimate authority for this is a direct violation of the idea that all men are created equal. Every current function of the "government" is more efficiently and justly performed in the free market.

 

[HalosPuma]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
I suppose I closest fit to democratic-socialist. In our current state, with our tremendous resources and production, there is no reason why anyone should suffer from poverty, no reason why we cannot provide people proper health care, or educate our youth. I see no reason why anyone should have to struggle just to get by. Basically i feel that we should treat each other like humans and not like animals.

capitalism is also very shortsited and is unable to deal in an acceptable way with some serious problems (peak oil in particular).

#1 - Who is going to pay for your social programs? Horrible ideas like minimum wage only cause unempoyment. Further, if I would be clothed, housed, and taken care of by government, what's my motivation to go to work... just so my salary can be stolen by government and redistributed to the lazy people. That is why communism failed. That is why socialism is a failure. That is why Democrats are failures. Poverty is only a temporary state for the motivated. For the lazy it is a permanent state. F--- 'em.

#2 - There is nothing wrong with peak oil. You can blame "greedy oil companies" but we would not even be approaching peak oil if it wasn't for demand - from all people in all countries especially China and India (2.3+ billion people). Smart investors will see that we are approaching the end of the oil age and will look to develop/harness other forms of energy. All of this takes place without government intervention. In fact, government involvement only delays innovation due to its horrendous bureacracy.

 

[Speedy3D!]

Originally posted by: HalosPuma

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
I suppose I closest fit to democratic-socialist. In our current state, with our tremendous resources and production, there is no reason why anyone should suffer from poverty, no reason why we cannot provide people proper health care, or educate our youth. I see no reason why anyone should have to struggle just to get by. Basically i feel that we should treat each other like humans and not like animals.

capitalism is also very shortsited and is unable to deal in an acceptable way with some serious problems (peak oil in particular).

#1 - Who is going to pay for your social programs? Horrible ideas like minimum wage only cause unempoyment. Further, if I would be clothed, housed, and taken care of by government, what's my motivation to go to work... just so my salary can be stolen by government and redistributed to the lazy people. That is why communism failed. That is why socialism is a failure. That is why Democrats are failures. Poverty is only a temporary state for the motivated. For the lazy it is a permanent state. F--- 'em.

Maybe I'm stupid, but please explain to me how a minimum wage causes unemployment.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: Speedy3D!

Maybe I'm stupid, but please explain to me how a minimum wage causes unemployment.

It's called Under-employment. Something the President relishes.

 

[Tom]

basically whatever a person sees themslef as, they describe as wonderful.

like "conservative" means believing in work, self-reliance, etc. Which is utter BS because EVERYBODY believes that.