This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Political definition/alignment

Hello there, i'm confused - what am i? lol...i mean in terms of political alignment and definition, i'm not a liberal, conservative, communist, fascist or socialist - lol anyone got any suggestions at to what i am??? lol....is there a party which represents what i believe in??

cheers :smile:

Social Democrats support:
·
· An extensive system of social security network, although not to the extent of communists (see welfare state), notably to counteract effects of poverty and to insure the citizens against loss of income following illness and unemployment.
· Ensuring good education, health care, child care, et cetera for all citizens through government funding (I believe them only to a minarchist extent).
· Extensive social laws (minimum wages, working circumstances, protection against firing).
· Environmental protection laws (like environmental laws specifically opposing monoculture) (although not to the extent of Greens).
· Anti-xenophobic and non-fundamentalist legislations (pro-choice, anti-racist, anti-homophobic) (although not to the extent of anarchists).

Anarcho-syndicalism: I believe in the principles of workers solidarity, direct action, and self-management.

Conservatism:
· Personal responsibility.

· Restraint in taxation and regulation of businesses.
· Support for a strong military, and well-defended protected borders with regulated immigration. Support for drug prohibition.

Peelite Principles:

• Cheap and Efficient government - less direct taxation, but enough to keep the government running to an extent where it is an efficient government,
• Free Trade
• more national interest that party interest - policy and reform for the benefit of the state rather than the party and its electorate
•

Socialism:

• mixed economy with varying degrees of government ownership and private ownership, and with various degrees either of central planning by the government or other cooperative planning

Minarchism:

• the view of civics that government should be as small as possible….that government should be restricted to its "minimal" or "state functions of government (courts, police, prisons, defence forces, education)

CLASSIC LIBERALISM:

· The importance of the individual - inalienable individual rights
· Freedom
· Reason
· Justice

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

material breach

peel was overrated by Gash as a random comment

Reply 2

randdom

Sami_ThePeelite

What are you views on things like the amount of money going into the NHS, whether someone has the right to economic support from the government, asylum seekers, tuition fees ect?

Reply 3

Cossack

I have to say I agree with most of what you say but it is difficult to 'put you in a box' because of the contradictions in your views.... its difficult to be pro an expansive welfare state and also in favvour of tax restraint although i understand what you mean - i think you're getting at the idea that you think their should be a strong welfare state without everyone having to fork out a lot of their own income to pay for it - which is what most people are .....to decide which party you follow you'd need to decide which of the beliefs you stated are most important...

So would you rather have high spending on the welfare state or low taxes

Should the goverment be really small (minarchism) or large and bureaucratic enough to provide for the people.

Overall tho if you presented these views to any of the party leaders in Britain then they'd say that you believed the same as them - the tories in favour of tax restraint, small government, strong military, but more in favour of market economy

Labour - Strong Welfare system, Ensuring good education, health care etc and more keen on a mixed economy but with large market economy

Basically your views mean that you could support any of the parties as you 'have a bit of everything'

Reply 4

Sami_ThePeelite

hey peel wasn't overrated !

to Randomm: well i believe that the nhs should be funded only enough to keep it operating at a productive and useful level - cutting out the unneccessary bureaucracy and waste , on economic support - i think people should be self-sufficient and provide for themselves, but the state should provide minimum benefit

to Cossack - yeh i see what you mean - i am contradictary in terms of my political views - it is a pain to vote for a party because various parties have various agreeable principles (to me anyway) -

i would like to vote and be involved in the poltical system - but with my very specific views i don't think i could wholeheartedly support a single part...hmmm.

Reply 5

MuniE

Cossack

How can you have a strong welfare state without everyone forking out large chunks of their income for it?

Reply 6

Cossack

MuniE

How can you have a strong welfare state without everyone forking out large chunks of their income for it?

i was saying thats what most people want - i didnt say i thought it was attainable

Reply 7

EPD

Try www.politicalcompass.org
I'm Economic Left/Right: -6.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.28
Around the same positioning as Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama :biggrin:

Reply 8

Cossack

Economic Left/Right: -4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.03

Similar to Gandhi but a bit more anarchist - better get down to Macdonalds wiv me bricks then

Reply 9

an Siarach

In regards to the NHS i think the welfare aspect of it should be greatly reduced. If you develop a brain tumour or leukemia then fair enough you should be given state funded treatment but if youve smoked all your life and consequently develop lung cancer why the hell should other people pay for your stupidity? likewise with alcohol related injuries/illness and generally anything which results from a persons conscious decision to risk their own welfare. Anyone who causes injury to another person through assault/dangerous driving etc should also be liable to pay for the victims treatment rather than the state doing so.

Reply 10

zizero

Economic Left/Right: 1,75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2,51

Interestingly enough, (apart from Friedman) there is no-one mentioned who is in the "Libertarian Right" quadrant.

Reply 11

NDGAARONDI

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.38

I consider myself as a Liberal, but I like ideas from Labour, Conservatives and the Greens. Just a question of what ideas and how much from each party I guess.

Reply 12

material breach

Sami_ThePeelite

hey peel wasn't overrated !

by Gash he was. Gladstone did more and Peel's leadership style was arrogant.

Reply 13

kingslaw

NDGAARONDI

How the hell can you like the ideas of the Greens and the Conservatives? Its not particuarily difficult to like ideas from both Labour and Conservatives, as theyre both so similar.

Reply 14

Masonne

an Siarach

i kind of agree, but large chunks of the nhs's funding comes from tax on alcohol and cigarettes. apparently if everyone stopped drinking and smoking the nhs would collapse from under-funding. or so ive heard. :eek:

Reply 15

Sami_ThePeelite

Speciez99

by Gash he was. Gladstone did more and Peel's leadership style was arrogant.

that's not right !!! Peel set about free trade in this country and determined the direction in which economic reforms and policies would go for the next 200 years !!

Peel's leadership was arrogant??? Gladstone was sententious and a moralising old fool ! he was so pompous and up himself ! :smile:

Reply 16

Sami_ThePeelite

well different parties have different policies on different issues, it would be niec to be able to pick and mix - perhaps having a coalition government?

Reply 17

samd

Economic Left/Right: -5.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.46

Similar place to Gandhi.

Reply 18

Sami_ThePeelite

Ghandi? ahah

i got :

economic left/right :-2.75
social libertarian/authoritarian: -5.18

Reply 19

material breach

Sami_ThePeelite

free trade was going to happen anyway, Ricardo and Smith had proposed it near the start of the century and the sucess of Huskinson and Robinson under Liverpool showed that free trade was going to be a sucess. Its Bank charter act and the re-introduction of income tax were important measures agreed however he is not as great as Gash claims he is.

Peel lost his party over the corn laws/maynooth/sugar duties/the factory act ect because he didnt respect the backbenchers. arrogant may be the wrong word but aloof isnt. Had you read evan's book on him? and why the obession with him? and also what level are you studying at?

anyway this is abit of an aside, maybe we should create a new thread to do with 19th century british politics. :tongue: