Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|7140|Tampa Bay Florida
There's a cool site which explains what I'm trying to say, www.politicalcompass.com

"Welcome to The Political Compass™.
There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's complex political landscape. For example, who are the 'conservatives' in today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret Thatcher ?
On the standard left-right scale, how do you distinguish leftists like Stalin and Gandhi? It's not sufficient to say that Stalin was simply more left than Gandhi. There are fundamental political differences between them that the old categories on their own can't explain. Similarly, we generally describe social reactionaries as 'right-wingers', yet that leaves left-wing reactionaries like Robert Mugabe and Pol Pot off the hook.

The idea was developed by a political journalist with a university counselling background, assisted by a professor of social history. They're indebted to people like Wilhelm Reich and Theodor Adorno for their ground-breaking work in this field. We believe that, in an age of diminishing ideology, a new generation in particular will get a better idea of where they stand politically - and the sort of political company they keep"
Ender2309
has joined the GOP
+470|7021|USA

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Democrates...
Democrates...sounds like a gnomish wizard!
no no no. you're pronouncing it wrong. its dem-OCK-RAT-ES.

it was the party for gay sex in ancient Greece.
Spearhead
Gulf coast redneck hippy
+731|7140|Tampa Bay Florida

Ender2309 wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Democrates...
Democrates...sounds like a gnomish wizard!
no no no. you're pronouncing it wrong. its dem-OCK-RAT-ES.

it was the party for gay sex in ancient Greece.
You're funny.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7125|Canberra, AUS

TeamZephyr wrote:

Ridir wrote:

oug wrote:


Far left = Loss of all rights, everyone is the same in every regard.  No individuals.  Think 1984 (the book).
Far Right = State of Chaos, total freedom, no government laws to tell you what to do. Nothing to govern you.
You seriously need to do some research.

The far right is Fascism which rules through the Police State (ie Soviet Union, which ruled with a fascist iron fist), 1984 is a book about the extreme right not the extreme left.

The far left is a state that isn't a state, communisitic with a government which would indeed be a state of chaos with total freedom and no government.
Ridir has it right, except that the words 'left' and 'right' need interchanging. Far left = anarchy, far right = fascism/stalinism.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,074|7222|PNW

Ender2309 wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Democrates...
Democrates...sounds like a gnomish wizard!
no no no. you're pronouncing it wrong. its dem-OCK-RAT-ES.

it was the party for gay sex in ancient Greece.
No, I pronounced it right, but it's still a wizard gnome.
Ridir
Semper Fi!
+48|7214

Spark wrote:

TeamZephyr wrote:

Ridir wrote:


Far left = Loss of all rights, everyone is the same in every regard.  No individuals.  Think 1984 (the book).
Far Right = State of Chaos, total freedom, no government laws to tell you what to do. Nothing to govern you.
You seriously need to do some research.

The far right is Fascism which rules through the Police State (ie Soviet Union, which ruled with a fascist iron fist), 1984 is a book about the extreme right not the extreme left.

The far left is a state that isn't a state, communisitic with a government which would indeed be a state of chaos with total freedom and no government.
Ridir has it right, except that the words 'left' and 'right' need interchanging. Far left = anarchy, far right = fascism/stalinism.
Actually it's State of Anarchy, and State of Chaos.  The term anarchy has been somewhat bastardized into meaning no government, but a State of Anarchy needs no government because everyone believes the same thing.  I guess it is still a matter of how you interpert it though.  I was using a basic model to try and avoid this but if you think of it and break down, and this is my thoughts. 

Fascim/Stalinism is a simple step away from Communism and Totalirism each. Both of which are on the left.  In fact Nazi Germany and the USSR under Stalin were very much into the one mind (For the Mother/Father Land), anything else is not accepted (Jews, Gypsies, etc.), etc.  Facism and Stalinism are more to the left in the basic simple model.

As for my professor (the Doctor in Polisci) I'm in his 101 class, so the models are pretty simple.  But as I progress farther on in it as either a major or minor I'm sure that they will expand.
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|7125|Canberra, AUS
Fascism is nooo way on the left... my goodness. What has this professor been teaching you?

wiki wrote:

In modern Western countries, the political spectrum is usually described along left-right lines, based on the seating of the liberal and conservative members of the Legislative Assembly of France in 1791, where liberal and conservative were partly defined by attitudes towards the ancien regime. (See section Historical origin of the terms.) This traditional political spectrum has come to be defined along an axis with socialism and communism, ("the Left") on one end, and nationalism and Fascism ("the Right") on the other.
Notice my use of the word stalinism instead of communism, I think Animal Farm makes no doubt as to the difference between the two.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6855|North Carolina

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7011
Spark, give it up, dude.  There are people on these forums that don't understand liberalism or conservatism, and never will.  Don't waste your time.
UGADawgs
Member
+13|6771|South Carolina, US

Turquoise wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Lobbying per se is not bribery. Lobbying itself is enshrined in the Constitution as the right for anyone to ask a Congressman to act on an issue.

And I can see why you're annoyed by the extravagant levels of campaign money, but it's not like running a campaign is a cheap thing. You can try to limit campaign contributions, but I don't think the government has any authority to tell candidates how to spend money in a campaign (besides bribery or something like that).
Mitch
16 more years
+877|6975|South Florida

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
Hmm well its hard for me to say this, but he is too moderate. He isnt conservative enough. We need a leader who isn't the least bit wishy washy. I believe in our president and i like him, but i believe a better conservative would do a better job. I wish Ronald Reagan was still alive and well.
But you have to keep in mind, George Bush did not write these laws, the presidents job is not to write laws, he cant write a law! if you want someone to blame, blame your congressmen.

Last edited by Dezerteagal5 (2007-02-18 12:47:13)

15 more years! 15 more years!
Ridir
Semper Fi!
+48|7214

Spark wrote:

Fascism is nooo way on the left... my goodness. What has this professor been teaching you?

wiki wrote:

In modern Western countries, the political spectrum is usually described along left-right lines, based on the seating of the liberal and conservative members of the Legislative Assembly of France in 1791, where liberal and conservative were partly defined by attitudes towards the ancien regime. (See section Historical origin of the terms.) This traditional political spectrum has come to be defined along an axis with socialism and communism, ("the Left") on one end, and nationalism and Fascism ("the Right") on the other.
Notice my use of the word stalinism instead of communism, I think Animal Farm makes no doubt as to the difference between the two.
Give me a reason why Fascism is on the right.  I'd be more inclined to believe you if you told me your reasoning.
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|7218

ATG wrote:

I hear Laura is gonna divorce him.
Maybe his kids too
d4rkst4r
biggie smalls
+72|6903|Ontario, Canada
This is like watching hundreds of fat children run around in Mcdonald's.
"you know life is what we make it, and a chance is like a picture, it'd be nice if you just take it"
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6979|Global Command

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:


Fourth time I'm going to agree with Bubbalo.
First time for me.  Is there some therapy we need to attend?
No, I think Bubbalo has logic now.
I actually must give props to the Lizard.


He has been debating more and flaming less of late.
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7260|Nårvei

What would Bush be without Dick and Rummy to ignite his dynamite politics ? .... and what would Dick and Rummy be without Rice to tidy up after them ?
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6979|Global Command

Varegg wrote:

What would Bush be without Dick and Rummy to ignite his dynamite politics ? .... and what would Dick and Rummy be without Rice to tidy up after them ?
Luckily for my sanity not all Liberals are as simple as a jack-in-the-box.
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|7218

Turquoise wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Bush used the fear of terrorism and the church to get re-elected.

Comments like "if you vote kerry in, we will get hit again. Hard this time"
He used the church and its members to spread his message, door knock, hold meetings, etc

Pretty shameful stuff
Varegg
Support fanatic :-)
+2,206|7260|Nårvei

Never, never, never believe any war will be smooth and easy, or that anyone who embarks on the strange voyage can measure the tides and hurricanes he will encounter. The statesman who yields to war fever must realize that once the signal is given, he is no longer the master of policy but the slave of unforeseeable and uncontrollable events.

Winston Churchill
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6855|North Carolina

UGADawgs wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Lobbying per se is not bribery. Lobbying itself is enshrined in the Constitution as the right for anyone to ask a Congressman to act on an issue.

And I can see why you're annoyed by the extravagant levels of campaign money, but it's not like running a campaign is a cheap thing. You can try to limit campaign contributions, but I don't think the government has any authority to tell candidates how to spend money in a campaign (besides bribery or something like that).
I think a more honest system would be like Canada's.  They explicitly limit how much can be spent on a campaign.  There is a maximum amount that can be spent, so it levels the playing field.
Turquoise
O Canada
+1,596|6855|North Carolina

BN wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Bush used the fear of terrorism and the church to get re-elected.

Comments like "if you vote kerry in, we will get hit again. Hard this time"
He used the church and its members to spread his message, door knock, hold meetings, etc

Pretty shameful stuff
There were plenty of scare tactics for sure, but the monetary aspect seems to hold the most weight.  It's less a democracy than it is a plutocracy.
Bubbalo
The Lizzard
+541|7011

ATG wrote:

cyborg_ninja-117 wrote:

usmarine2007 wrote:


First time for me.  Is there some therapy we need to attend?
No, I think Bubbalo has logic now.
I actually must give props to the Lizard.


He has been debating more and flaming less of late.
Swearing off arguing with those members who provoke me has helped.  The list doesn't include many regulars.
ATG
Banned
+5,233|6979|Global Command

BN wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Ridir wrote:

Love him or hate him, here is what I think of him. 

George W. Bush.  This Man alone sparks debate over issues.  Democrates and leftist hate him, say he is the worst thing to ever happen.  But look at the plans he has implimented.  No Child Left Behind sucking away at our tax dollars, spying on some of our own citizens (not much, but still a crack in the door leads to it being swung wide open), and several other "left" ideas.  He also has done some very "right sided" things so don't get me wrong, I'm not calling him a democrate, but he is rather moderate.  The war was his downfall, he let his personal feelings cloud his judgement and he will be remembered in history that way.

What are your thoughts?
He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Bush used the fear of terrorism and the church to get re-elected.

Comments like "if you vote kerry in, we will get hit again. Hard this time"
He used the church and its members to spread his message, door knock, hold meetings, etc

Pretty shameful stuff
What, is it okay for Hillary to campaign at a black methodist church, fake a accent and play the race card?
She's already done it.
BN
smells like wee wee
+159|7218

ATG wrote:

BN wrote:

Turquoise wrote:


He will be remembered as the perfect example of why the American political system is collapsing in its integrity.  He bought both elections.

Granted, he wasn't the first to do this, but he is the most blatant example of a candidate who essentially maintained power through a massive amount of funding.  In 2000, he was the first candidate to spend over $100 million on his campaign.  In 2004, he spent over $300 million vs. the $100 million that Kerry had.

We live in the best democracy money can buy, and because of this, our government only represents corporations and special interest groups.  Basically, lobbyism is legalized bribery.

Bush is just the face of corporate politics and the war machine, and it is very unlikely that we will move away from this corporate takeover of government, regardless of who enters office next.
Bush used the fear of terrorism and the church to get re-elected.

Comments like "if you vote kerry in, we will get hit again. Hard this time"
He used the church and its members to spread his message, door knock, hold meetings, etc

Pretty shameful stuff
What, is it okay for Hillary to campaign at a black methodist church, fake a accent and play the race card?
She's already done it.
great, I'll bag her too
Drakef
Cheeseburger Logicist
+117|6812|Vancouver

Turquoise wrote:

I think a more honest system would be like Canada's.  They explicitly limit how much can be spent on a campaign.  There is a maximum amount that can be spent, so it levels the playing field.
It is a good system, but there are ways around it. For example, the ruling party, the Conservatives, have television advertisements playing since it does not count towards the election limits. Unfortunately, these advertisements have actively been using lies to gain support.

Liberalism? For the pursuit of liberty? Leftists do not support spying, as it restricts freedom. I see the political spectrum as a circle. Left and right meet both at the centre, and at the extremes of the far left and the far right. Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union were both similar because at the extremes, left and right use techniques common to both sides.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard