[ukip72]

(Original post by electriic_ink)
Why do you think all three main parties favour a policy which is not common sense?

Labour have already admitted they favour mass immigration to win votes. As for the Tories and Lib Dems, I can't speak for them so you'd have to ask Cameron and his assistant.

[TCD23]

(Original post by mimx)
I defined authoritarian policy as that which forces individuals to act in a certain way.

Clearly both of those meet this standard.

So punishing any crime and imposing any restrictions on immigration is authoritarian? You're a complete idiot that is not what authoritarian means.

[mimx]

(Original post by TCD23)
So punishing any crime and imposing any restrictions on immigration is authoritarian? You're a complete idiot that is not what authoritarian means.

It's how I have defined authoritarian policy for the purposes of my claims and it's how it's used by e.g. the political compass and, as far as I'm concerned, it's the only way that makes sense.

I'm not particularly concerned about how it's used in common parlance. We're not having a pub discussion.

[TCD23]

(Original post by mimx)
It's how I have defined authoritarian policy for the purposes of my claims and it's how it's used by e.g. the political compass and, as far as I'm concerned, it's the only way that makes sense.

I'm not particularly concerned about how it's used in common parlance. We're not having a pub discussion.

No, the political compass does not define it like it. Only you do.

[callum9999]

You can't just remove a policy from the political spectrum, remove all categorisations of it and then brand it simple common sense...

I suspect you know full well what the answer is - that people associate anti-immigration, anti-Europe nationalist parties with the right. Who on earth cares that some people are allegedly using the term incorrectly? It's entirely irrelevant - and voting on the basis of someone telling you a party is either left or right wing is moronic to the extreme.

[mimx]

(Original post by TCD23)
No, the political compass does not define it like it. Only you do.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010

I'm sure you can identify the letters UKIP. Note the 'Authoritarian' in big letters along the top. Let me know if you need any more help deciphering this diagram.

[electriic_ink]

(Original post by ukip72)
Labour have already admitted they favour mass immigration to win votes.

Source?

[RyanT]

Because their focus is the individual rather then the community.

Being fair towards individuals is sometimes not equivalent to being fair to communities.

[TCD23]

(Original post by mimx)
http://www.politicalcompass.org/ukparties2010

I'm sure you can identify the letters UKIP. Note the 'Authoritarian' in big letters along the top. Let me know if you need any more help deciphering this diagram.

Yeah, that doesn't in anyway correlate with what you have defined authoritarian at mate. Also the Political Compass doesn't even explain which of its policies are authoritarian does it I notice... So WRONG WRONG WRONG AGAIN.

[prog2djent]

Haha, UKIP are libertarian? They are just more libertarian than the tories, which essentially means they are just less authoritarian, but In some instances they are not .. Oh well, whatever, I think we can all agree they are to the right of the modern day Tory party.

The distinction needs to be made that Nigel Farage does not represent the party lines, remember, he is just the leader.

[mimx]

(Original post by TCD23)
Yeah, that doesn't in anyway correlate with what you have defined authoritarian at mate. Also the Political Compass doesn't even explain which of its policies are authoritarian does it I notice... So WRONG WRONG WRONG AGAIN.

Well if you actually read the site (challenging though it may be) you'd see that they use authoritarian in the same manner I do, and that they discuss generic policies which would fall under that definition, some of which UKIP are partial to.

[mimx]

The youtube vids of old Nige at the European Parliament are the most bizarre thing. His 'dominating' EU bureaucrats is usually just him shouting at some guy whose grasp of English is shaky at best, and who wouldn't respond in kind even if he could.

The UKIP supporters would have you believe they're just dumbfounded by the insurmountable common sensey-ness of it all.

[patrickinator]

Because ignorant people class them in the same political class as the BNP simply because there name is condensed into letters rather than being a proper noun like the Conservatives and Labour.

GO UKIP!

[Dand218]

Well I think the three strike policy is pretty authoritarian

[Dand218]

Source of the info is their own website.
But I'll select a few other authoritarian policies as well.
http://www.ukip.org/content/ukip-policies

From criminal justice section.
"Introduce a ‘three strikes and you’re out’ policy to deal with persistent offenders and make our streets safer for the public"
" Double prison places through better use of existing prisons and a substantial programme of new prison building. UKIP will also end the scandal of early releases and weak sentencing. This will cost approximately £2bn p.a. in contrast to the cost of crime, estimated by the Home Office at £45bn p.a." (focusing on the double prison places bit.)

Pensions section
"Save the UK from a potentially ruinous pensions burden by leaving the EU and its enforced common pensions pot. While the UK has 74% of its GDP invested in UK private pensions, Germany has a mere 5.8% and France 5.6%. Further integration of the UK into the EU, through Euro membership for example, would turn this into a pensions tax time bomb" (This is just mental, how do we have 74% of our GDP invested into pensions?)

Defence section
"Maintain Britain’s independent nuclear deterrent with existing Trident submarines and then replace them with four British-built submarines armed with US missiles"

"Spend an extra 40% on defence annually, another 1% of GDP"

Transport
" Introduce a ‘Britdisc’ which foreign lorries will have to pay to use major British roads. Currently, many of these lorries pay nothing for the wear and tear they cause"

Immigration
"Enforce the existing terms of the 1951 UN Convention on Refugees until Britain replaces it with an Asylum Act. To avoid disappearances, asylum seekers will be held in secure and
humane centres until applications are processed, with limited right to appeal. Those seeking asylum must do so in the first ‘designated safe country’ they enter. Existing asylum seekers who have had their application refused will be required to leave the country, along with any dependants. We oppose any amnesties for failed asylum seekers or illegal immigrants."

"Ensure British benefits are only available to UK citizens or those who have lived here for at least five years. Currently, British benefits can be claimed by EU citizens in their arrival year"

[Super Cicero]

Ok maybe I'm wrong here, but my defintion of libertarianism would be:
Economic policy: conservative (or classical liberal) - basically very pro-free market
Social policy: liberal
Defence/miitary policy: non-interventionist, small military.

UKIP favour more defence spending, so I fail to see how they are libertarian with regards to defence/military policy. Also UKIP are against immigration and gay marriage, so I don't really see how they are socially liberal? So, they are only libertarian on economic policy - one out of three categories.

Surely they are closer to socially conservative, neo-con Republicans in the US like George W Bush and Rick Santorum, rather than libertarians like Ron Paul?

Please tell me if I'm wrong.

[Dand218]

(Original post by Super Cicero)
Ok maybe I'm wrong here, but my defintion of libertarianism would be:
Economic policy: conservative (or classical liberal) - basically very pro-free market
Social policy: liberal
Defence/miitary policy: non-interventionist, small military.

UKIP favour more defence spending, so I fail to see how they are libertarian with regards to defence/military policy. Also UKIP are against immigration and gay marriage, so I don't really see how they are socially liberal? So, they are only libertarian on economic policy - one out of three categories.

Surely they are closer to socially conservative, neo-con Republicans in the US like George W Bush and Rick Santorum, rather than libertarians like Ron Paul?

Please tell me if I'm wrong.

Sounds right to me (:

[prog2djent]

Libertarianism is a very, very broad church.

For the position you argued, what the internet generation think libertarianism is, i.e

economic - Liberal (pro "free market")
social - Liberal
Foreign - Non - interventionist

This can be applied also to the Old right conservativism of the US, basically the republicans before WW2, it could also be applied to several left wing anarchists who favour market socialism ... which is still a free market, the Lib dems under kennedy could largely fall under these areas as well, to an extent, constitutionalists, Paleoconservatives etc

[Snagprophet]

Immigration is definitely something which needs tighter controls. We need to stabilise the English population of 50 million before we run out of food and starve to death. Sustainability, not 'oh I want the right move anywhere, including ultra high population areas'.