November 1, 2010
-
My political ideology in random arbitrary meaningless percentages
I’m 45% Liberal, 25% Democrat, 20% Libertarian, 10% Conservative.
I’m 0% Republican.
I’m -100% Tea Party.
What are you?
This post should probably be a tweet. But then I couldn’t fit the cool title.
Comments (5)
was this the result of a quiz? or just something you thought up?
I’m 100% annoyed with politics. It’s the worst time of year for political science classes.
Probably 75% liberal/democrat, 25% apathetic/disillusioned, and 0% psycho history-revising local police-ambushing tea bagger.
@IntrospectiveOctober - no quiz. Just arbitrary self identification numbers.
Elections are always like this. That’s a big part of why so few people vote. By time the election comes around everybody’s already burnt out except for the most extreme and passionate among us.
-100% Tea Party sounds good. Ditto, ditto.
Not sure all the time how to label myself, when things get specific. For instance, it might be easy for me to say I’m kind of fiscally conservative, because I believe the country should live within its means, rather than racking up debt. But then when it comes to spending money, I think the vast majority of federal and state funds should be spent on the good of the people.
Whenever the concepts of education, financial assistance, unemployment insurance, medical care for those who can’t afford it, and infrastructure repair come up, someone is sure to say, “We can’t afford it.”
But suggest blowing up a country that never attacked us or a “space mission” that involves floating a camera around some random Jovian moon, and suddenly we have the money for THAT.
If it were up to me, NASA would be dissolved and space exploration totally privatized. War would be restricted to real-life national defense and stepping into inhumane situations as a last resort (getting mixed up in Vietnam but ignoring the regime of Pol Pot, for instance, was a total screwup of priorities). Meanwhile, funds collected from Americans would actually benefit Americans- in the forms of education, financial assistance, unemployment insurance that doesn’t cut out and leave people stranded in the middle of an economic depression, etc.
So I can’t help but think I must be fiscally liberal.
I’m like that in a lot of ways. I consider myself a constitutionalist, but I believe that the document is alive and open to interpretation by the Supreme Court (*cough*church and state*cough*). I respect the corporate system but don’t believe that gives business- big or small- the right to harm consumers in the name of profit. In the end, it all keeps coming back to the people for me. When it comes to politics, nothing is more important than an American individual’s life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness.
Other people matter just as much as I do.
That’s why I consider myself liberal overall. Some of my policies have a conservative flavor, but the means are only intended to improve the ends.
I’m 60% Conservative, 40% Liberal, 0% Republican, 0% Democrat, I don’t remember what Libertarian is, and 100% Genius.
;D
and yet, I don’t disagree with @SoapAndShampoo - in the least. The people come first.
@SoapAndShampoo - lol almost nothing about your response was random, arbitrary, or meaningless! You’re breaking the rule!
@SoapAndShampoo - @The44thHour - I think “The people come first” is a principle nearly everyone would agree with. There are those rare few who put their own self interest first purely selfishly but that’s rare. Even those who seem like they are purely selfish are acting under an ideology wherein they’ve come to believe that they are among the elite class and that their success as a part of that class is inextricably linked to the betterment of the masses.
So the question is how do you put the people first?
Is it by ensuring that they all have food clothing and shelter?
Is it making sure everyone has a job so they feel as if they earned their place in the society?
Is it by building a powerful military to protect the people from the threats of external powers?
Is it by building effective internal services like police forces and firefighting forces to protect the people from internal threats?
Is it by creating a space program in the hopes that it will help humanity develop a deeper sense of significance in their existence by learning about the greater scope of the universe?
Is it by regulating industries so as to ensure that they meet minimum standards when producing potentially harmful products that they sell to people?
Is it by deregulating industries so that there are few barriers to entrepreneurship so that more people can create successful businesses?
Is it by shielding people from what you consider culturally destructive elements like violence, profanity, or porn?
Is it by ensuring that people treat one another respectfully and do not discriminate against one another?
What’s most important in terms of people? Is it their safety? Is it their happiness? Is it their freedom? Is it their fulfillment? Is it their wealth? Is it their security? Is it their education? Is it their opportunities? Is it their spirituality?
Do we care about people as a collective more or as individuals more? Are we trying to create the best society or the best people? Are we trying to achieve something grand with humanity or are we just trying to continue to persist in this universe for as long as possible?
None of these are easy questions to answer. But the reason why we disagree and the reason why these labels arise is that we all feel strongly about our own interpretations of what putting people first really means.