Which political ideology best describes you? Watch

Poll: Which political ideology best describes you?
Conservative (39)
23.78%
Socialist (57)
34.76%
Libertarian (40)
24.39%
Fascist (3)
1.83%
Communist (3)
1.83%
Anarchist (7)
4.27%
Other (Please state) (15)
9.15%
Drunken Bard
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#1
Curious to see what the make up of TSR's views are.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 years ago
#2
I'm a mixture of classical liberal and conservative depending on the issue.

I reckon that the pre-WW1 Liberal Party would have been a good fit for me. Free trade, imperialism, eugenics however today you'd probably have prostitution and gay marriage.
2
reply
RF_PineMarten
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#3
Report 4 years ago
#3
I honestly don't know.

I generally lean towards the left on quite a few issues, but I disagree with some other aspects of that. And on some issues I'm more right wing. Then there are issues that aren't really left or right, which complicates things further.

I think my interest in politics is more based around specific issues I care about, rather than ideology.
2
reply
AristoBrat!
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#4
Report 4 years ago
#4
I'm a mix of Anarchist + Libertarian.
:dontknow:
1
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 years ago
#5
(Original post by RFowler)
I honestly don't know.

I generally lean towards the left on quite a few issues, but I disagree with some other aspects of that. And on some issues I'm more right wing. Then there are issues that aren't really left or right, which complicates things further.

I think my interest in politics is more based around specific issues I care about, rather than ideology.
You are one of the hardest to pin down into one box.
1
reply
JayReg
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 years ago
#6
Probably some sort of Egalitarian Liberalism.
I don't see the freedom in inequality of economic opportunity or crony capitalism, but I'm a strong supporter of free markets.

(Edit:
Geolibertarianism
Libertarian Paternalism
Egalitarian Liberalism
Libertarian Socialism

All resonate with me)
1
reply
viddy9
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#7
Report 4 years ago
#7
Communism is a form of anarchism, first of all, and in theory, a stateless, classless society without currency would be desirable. And, both are forms of libertarian socialism.

In today's society, in which we haven't overcome scarcity, I'm a supporter of social democracy, so the best fit for me in general is 'socialist'.
0
reply
N-R-G
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report 4 years ago
#8
I'm into Marxism which is like Anarchism with state administration. I dont agree with the kind of communism that created a political class of champagne socialism i.e. late Communist Russia. As a pacifist I don't agree with violent revolution or the horrors of early Communist Russia. I am into equality in education and the workplace. I think the main difference between Marxism and Capitalism is the way people are treated with people treated as a value to society by Marxists and people treated as commodities by Capitalists.
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#9
Report 4 years ago
#9
Liberal conservative - pro EU, NATO and capitalist liberal democracy

My idealpolitical system would be libertarianism but I do not think it is applicable in the real world with threats like Islamism and authoritarian regimes globally
0
reply
Davij038
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#10
Report 4 years ago
#10
(Original post by N-R-G)
I'I think the main difference between Marxism and Capitalism is the way people are treated with people treated as a value to society by Marxists and people treated as commodities by Capitalists.
Marxists view them as commodities to the state as in government.
Marxists think that humans are inherently bad so require force from the state to improve society- of course they don't factor in that the people running such a state succumb to human nature to- and thus why commie states have been such ****holes.
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#11
Report 4 years ago
#11
(Original post by N-R-G)
I think the main difference between Marxism and Capitalism is the way people are treated with people treated as a value to society by Marxists and people treated as commodities by Capitalists.
The key distinction between capitalism and anything else is property rights.

The capitalist believes that profit belongs to the holder of the property rights (be that intellectual property or land) and that the employer is providing a benefit in allowing employees to trade their labour for wages. Extreme social democrats/libertarian socialists believe that the employee is entitled to an equal share of the profit because it is they who created value by manufacturing the product (the most extreme believe in enforced co-operatives as the corporate structure). The traditional socialist goes further and believes that the state has overriding property rights to any idea or good and that the proceeds should be centrally redistributed for the good of society. Communists of course do away with currency and property rights full stop.
0
reply
username878267
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#12
Report 4 years ago
#12
Liberal Socialist.
I believe in a quite ( but by no means absolute) equal society. Where we don't witness such disgusting wealth inequality.

I think the public Should own our public services including rail and energy.

I'd heavily regulate the free market to prevent monopolies and encourage small and local businesses to take the place of large tax-dodging corporations.

Also very liberal on social issues.
5
reply
ChampEon
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 years ago
#13
(Original post by Bornblue)
Socialist.
I believe in a quite ( but by no means absolute) equal society. Where we don't witness such disgusting wealth inequality.

I think the public Should own our public services including rail and energy.

I'd heavily regulate the free market to prevent monopolies and encourage small and local businesses to take the place of large tax-dodging corporations.
You read my mind!
0
reply
Mamoixen
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#14
Report 4 years ago
#14
We live in a dog-eat-dog world, whether you like it or not. Is it a choice? No, it's inherited. We are a species which has survived for at least one hundred thousand years in the ultimate free market, no rules, no intervention, each to their own. These are the Darwinian principles of adaptation via natural selection via survival and thus reproduction of the fittest. In my view, we can't forget the history of our species, because it's something innate in us all.

Conservative values therefore, in my opinion, couple the need for state intervention in certain areas which would otherwise be wholly unethical with the ultimate free market of our recent past. Most academics support left wing virtues, in an attempt to impose a certain kind of 'solution' or academic framework to natural world.

Further, in reality therefore, we must seek solutions, with reference to our history. Thus the Tory way is the only way.
0
reply
scrotgrot
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#15
Report 4 years ago
#15
(Original post by Mamoixen)
We live in a dog-eat-dog world, whether you like it or not. Is it a choice? No, it's inherited. We are a species which has survived for at least one hundred thousand years in the ultimate free market, no rules, no intervention, each to their own. These are the Darwinian principles of adaptation via natural selection via survival and thus reproduction of the fittest. In my view, we can't forget the history of our species, because it's something innate in us all.

Conservative values therefore, in my opinion, couple the need for state intervention in certain areas which would otherwise be wholly unethical with the ultimate free market of our recent past. Most academics support left wing virtues, in an attempt to impose a certain kind of 'solution' or academic framework to natural world.

Further, in reality therefore, we must seek solutions, with reference to our history. Thus the Tory way is the only way.
The species survived but a ****load of PEOPLE didn't. Call me a supporter of the devolution of humanity if you want but that's not acceptable to me.

Governments, states, laws etc are inherently left-wing: they are institutions we build to temper our dog-eat-dog instincts so we can reap the social and technological progress benefits of living in a well populated polity. Without these institutions we are stuck with settlements of 200 people or less and hunter-gathering.

I don’t see the point of any government which says right, we're not going to interfere, you can all just work it out for yourselves. It might just as well abolish itself. At least libertarians are honest about that sort of thing. The Tories are far worse and hypocritical to boot as they actively use the state to favour those who already hold power in the "free" market while oppressing those who don't.

A hypothetical pure Tory government would literally be worse than not having one at all - and that takes some doing.
3
reply
Mamoixen
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 years ago
#16
(Original post by scrotgrot)
The species survived but a ****load of PEOPLE didn't. Call me a supporter of the devolution of humanity if you want but that's not acceptable to me.

Governments, states, laws etc are inherently left-wing: they are institutions we build to temper our dog-eat-dog instincts so we can reap the social and technological progress benefits of living in a well populated polity. Without these institutions we are stuck with settlements of 200 people or less and hunter-gathering.

I don’t see the point of any government which says right, we're not going to interfere, you can all just work it out for yourselves. It might just as well abolish itself. At least libertarians are honest about that sort of thing. The Tories are far worse and hypocritical to boot as they actively use the state to favour those who already hold power in the "free" market while oppressing those who don't.

A hypothetical pure Tory government would literally be worse than not having one at all - and that takes some doing.
Well it wouldn't be, the Tories regulate the market to some degree. For example, in a purely hypothetical free market, there would be zero taxes, thus state education would be non existent, the NHS would non existent, and unfairness and inequality would be absolutely rife. People would seek to profit out of every situation possible, from funerals to primary education. I agree, in an ethical society this would be completely wrong, and that's why I would vote Tory.
0
reply
Cristocracy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#17
Report 4 years ago
#17
Libertarian, the only logically defensible ideology
0
reply
Mamoixen
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 years ago
#18
(Original post by Cristocracy)
Libertarian, the only logically defensible ideology
Low taxes = Incentives = Opportunity

Opportunity leads to innovations and jobs, this leads to a successful country. Do you know what Churchill said about Libertarianism?

''you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain'' - Churchill
I have a large head start on your all I'm Tory now
0
reply
Cristocracy
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#19
Report 4 years ago
#19
(Original post by Mamoixen)
Low taxes = Incentives = Opportunity

Opportunity leads to innovations and jobs, this leads to a successful country. Do you know what Churchill said about Libertarianism?

''you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain'' - Churchill
I have a large head start on your all I'm Tory now
You know Libertarians advocate No tax right? :rolleyes:

Also, just because Churchill said something doesnt automatically make it true or right. Liberalism is one of the most confusing and logically indefensible philosophies, all it relies on is a weird mix of free market principles, socialism and communitarianism. It does not have a logical foundation and flounders when applied to difficult situations in society
0
reply
Mamoixen
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report 4 years ago
#20
(Original post by Cristocracy)
You know Libertarians advocate No tax right? :rolleyes:

Also, just because Churchill said something doesnt automatically make it true or right. Liberalism is one of the most confusing and logically indefensible philosophies, all it relies on is a weird mix of free market principles, socialism and communitarianism. It does not have a logical foundation and flounders when applied to difficult situations in society
No I didn't know that, I must admit that I'm not an economist, nor have I studied economics or free markets. I like to test the waters by applying reason and logical argument to more or less any situation which I'm not a specialist. You'd be surprised how far you can get

I'll do some research, though, I quite like the Tories
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (60)
23.72%
No (193)
76.28%

Watched Threads

View All