On the political spectrum, where do you stand?

There are some people who are doing good out there. The best thing to do is to figure out who the best candidate is based on their voting record. A big issue now is that like with pretty much all movements the anti establishment tea party wave of the last several years has led to some negative outcomes as well as as some debatable positive outcomes. There were many cases especially much more frequently at a local and state level where long time reasonable "moderate" democrats or republicans lost to people running on the promise of being outside the establishment often with very little experience. As a result we have some of the least productive and most incompetent legislation coming out of both the fed and stave governments. Until the people learn who the real problem is and actually show up to vote for better alternatives it's all talk.

I'm gonna use a crude analogy to voting out congress members but I think it's very similar to the Middle East, stick with me here. If you are gonna destabilize a nation aka overthrow a regime aka liberating a nation, then you have to make sure there is a feasible alternative otherwise it will just become an even bigger problem you have to then deal with in the same manner. People vote too much on gut and say shit like I'm gonna vote someone out based on a bull shit attack ad and it ended up making our congress more brain dead than it was in the past, which is pretty fucking hard to do. Either way I'm going to tell people about shitty politicians and vote for who I think best represents the people. Will I have a significant impact, probably not but it makes me feel better knowing I tried.

 

You sound like a revolutionary socialist, its something I've been considering quite a lot. Like I respect people like Bernie Sanders who want to implement socialism via legislative means, however it's basically begging the status quo to not work against that change, which almost never happens. Eventually you will need to simply violently overthrow current power structures, or not violently overthrow, but just take quick, collective action.


However not using violence runs the risk of a movement being quelled. For example I'm currently reading Banana's by Peter Chapman, which is a book about how the United Fruit Company created a monopoly on the banana business in Central America. Eventually workers started staging small protests at different plantations, but an incredibly large one happened in Colombia where some 32 thousand workers started protests. However United Fruit thought otherwise, and with the help of the Colombian military (and the watchful eye of American interests), gun downed around 1000 workers after a protest. Quite sad really, because they wanted an 8 hour work day and to only work 6 days a week, be paid in actual wages not United Fruit credit, etc.

 

LOL @ violence.


That's all government people know. Everything is done by force.

 

Sure, but who will make those perfect libertarian pencils

 

There's some evidence the Chicago School of Economics played a role in the overthrow of the democratically elected Salvador Allende. It's disputed, but it's there.

 

I like to say im in the middle because of all the motherfucking poppygocky our politicians like to spew out their ass, but i lean to the left. Honestly, you have to be insane to be a far right republican or something close

 

^ James: I will probably just use my royal powers to rape young bitches. The men can just stay the fuck out of my way or I'll have them beheaded.


I'll probably steal a lot of money and shit too.


Sounds just like any other government. And they say that monarchies suck!

 

LOL @ climate change and "healthcare for all."


Why not free cars and nice houses "for all"? And food?


Despite the mountains of dead bodies, the untold amounts of wealth confiscated and destroyed, utopianism will never go out of style.

 

Social democracy (free market economy but with lots of entitlement programs) and Civil Libertarian (values freedom of speech, freedom of press, freedom of religion, freedom to assemble, right to privacy, due process and no torture)..

 

This is basically right about where I'm at. Civil liberties like freedom of speech, right to reasonable search, right to do drugs in your home and other fundamental freedoms shouldn't be impeded on unless there is some crazy extreme circumstance like yelling fire in a crowded Theater. It's a tough balance between a big government and not impeding on people's freedoms but I think it can be done with strong civic engagement/better policies like less NSA spying, more public defenders, etc. I also would prefer to have everyone have some reasonably priced basics access to healthcare in this country than have different options for healthcare that are all going to fuck me over in the long run anyway. I think the free market has clearly failed in sectors like healthcare and higher education and the government, even with all its issues can do something to help fix the problem. Maybe I'm an idealist but I think that we can give everyone access to basic healthcare and people who are very smart a reasonably priced college education without it causing an unreasonable amount of damage economically.

 

The free market hasn't failed in healthcare, because there IS no free market -- or anything close -- in healthcare. There used to be (in my lifetime) and it worked well as do all free markets. But there's been increasing government involvement every decade. I read that even before ObamaScare the gov't controlled about 2/3 of the healthcare system. Medicare and Medicaid have been around for 50 years. HMOs, which were a reaction to Washington mandates, have been around for 30 or more, depending on where you live.


Every state has their separate controls, mandates, taxes, regulations etc. on the health industry.



Expect things to get worse as this trend continues -- which it inevitably will. I've seen it get much worse just in the last 10-20 years.


Education? There is no free market. "Public schools" are government schools. So-called "private" schools aren't much better. The entire education establishment teaches political correctness.


The free market has failed in government? What the hell does that mean? A "free market" means NO government involvement. They are in total opposition to each other in every way. How can there possibly be a "failure of the free market in government"? It doesn't even make any sense.


I know what the problem is here, the total failure of government schools to teach anything meaningful.


EDIT: LOL, this country is so fucked; I'm glad my years are short. Fighting back is one thing, but when you don't even know who the enemy IS -- you are doomed.

 

What should schools teach instead of alleged political correctness?

 

I'm a Libertarian Socialist/Social Libertarian. With a dash of Minarchist because I'm not convinced anarchy is sustainable.

I believe in safety nets such as a liveable minimum wage, single payer healthcare, free tuition to public colleges, universal basic income etc.

I also believe we need to bring back the gold standard, abolish the federal reserve, abolish the controlled substance act, abolish NSA, abolish the DEA, massively cut military spending, stop meddling in other countries affairs (return to our non-interventionism ideals of yesteryear), so on and so forth.

And lastly for the Minarchy, I believe the Government's only purpose is to protect the rights of its citizens. The only powers they should have are to uphold the constitution, and protect its citizens from those who would exploit them (the elite). And that any and all government corruption should be investigated by an independent secret committee (so they cannot be bought or influenced), and those found guilty of putting themselves or the rich and powerful before the needs of we the people, should be publicly executed.

 

Non-violent and therefore incompatible with politics.


In other words: Anarchist/voluntaryist.