Leftists want to make parasites like drug addicts who never worked a day in their life have the same access to goods and services, immensely increasing their sense of entitlement.
Rightists want to make sure that inheritance remains as the only way of creating wealth.
I haven't even mentioned anarchism (of any economic alignment), libertarianism, American Republicans and Democrats, etc.
Partisanship is pointless. Every political ideology has very serious flaws. Without formulating an ideology, or at least a guiding principle, it's pretty easy to contradict oneself.
Do you think there's an ideology or a political system that doesn't have very serious political flaws?
DISCUSS.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-06 3:42
No. humanity is flawed, so in effect all our systems and ideologies are flawed. and 'they' know its bullshit (left/right paradigm). they just pick two extremes so that everyone can remain too busy arguing over stupid shit to realize they're being fucked.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-06 12:07
Eskimos were able to feed themselves without foreign aid for centuries.
North Korea receives massive food rations, while claiming to espouse some "Juche" ideology with "self-sufficiency" at its core. All while threatening to nuke everyone.
That's what ideology and politics brings people.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-06 13:11
Yeah, I do actually. If you take into account what >>2 said and make an ideology which basically says "we're all flawed idiots, me, you, everyone, we can only try our best and be as rational and logical as possible", then I guess you have created an ideology that doesn't have serious flaws.
I agree. But honestly you can't just look at politics with a left/right viewpoint. Life, just like politics isn't just black and white like that. There are many shades of grey.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-07 12:25
That whole one-dimensional L/R "map" is just ballocks to begin with, doomed to fail from the start (like predestination).
Any n-dimensional map sucks. That is, every possible political ideology sucks. As well as not having an ideology.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-08 0:46
Do you think there's an ideology or a political system that doesn't have very serious political flaws?
Most political systems have few flaws. When the flaws become obvious a new system is conceived to replace the old. Men have flaws. Ultimately, for reasons like pride, personal convenience, laziness, ignorance, and outright foolishness they allow the flaws in their political system to reach untenable proportions before they act, and a chaotic readjustment ensues.
It need not be this way. The fundamental issue in the design of a society is the question of personal freedom versus social responsibility. There is a brilliant and popular theoretical model that, with some tweaking, avoids the exercises in compromises that are our current political systems. This model demands integrity. Those who wish to serve, serve, and those who would be free, are free. Any man who knows service, knows that service means obedience. And any man who Knows freedom, knows that freedom means responsibility.
>>11
That analysis is logical but it seems to be to be based on an inverse perspective on the nature of law and state, instead of viewing it as the application of authority you have appear to have taken the perspective of it being a permission of freedom. For practical reasons the former is more logical, the state can only apply authority thus the fundamental question is the utility in laws in ensuring individuals, both private and those with authority in the government, do what is best for themselves and those they affect. Though this reasoning will not yield perfect solutions it does provide an objective platform for judging ethical issues thus meaning that the solutions will be far more effective.
Feeding starving orphans is obviously beneficial for society whereas feeding able bodied adults is not, if said orphans are the sons or daughters of said slothful able bodied adults then it is justified to fine or imprison the neglectful parents where they can pay off their debt and will not procreate any further.
Leftists want to make parasites like drug addicts who never worked a day in their life have the same access to goods and services, immensely increasing their sense of entitlement. Rightists want to make sure that inheritance remains as the only way of creating wealth.
Nice blanket statements dipshit. Only the extreme nutjobs on either side of the political spectrum would want those things. Do you think there's an ideology or a political system that doesn't have very serious political flaws?
No.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-10 17:28
The working class white descendants of the Catholic and Orthodox eastern and southern European immigrants who arrived at Ellis Island between 1890-1910 were discriminated against and persecuted in the early 20th century. They weren't even considered white. And now their grandchildren have joined the Republican Party after assimiliating. Sell-outs! The Republican Party is a continuation of xenophobic and nativist bigotry. I know some issues are important like morality, taxes, and crime but should we forget what they did to our ancestors?
Why is/was being an Anglo-Saxon Protestant so damn valued for?
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-10 18:32
>never worked a day in their life
we all know thats a fucking lie. addicts have a problem and they need help. they dont need to be considered criminals and they should be treated like human beings.
I live in Australia, which is essentially a socialist nation and the government pays for addicts to swap their needles for new ones so they don't contract AIDS while they are illegally injecting drugs into their system.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-11 0:54
>>19
Damn. They need rehabilitation, not clean needles to fuel their addiction even further. Although ideally, I'd rather they not have AIDS on top of that, so I'm a bit divided here.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-11 2:19
Enslave drug dealers and use the money to rehabilitate addicts.
how does that refute what i said? furthermore, making drugs illegal in the first place is retarded. theres people that can use it recreationally, and people that become addicted. people that become addicted need to be helped, even if it was their fault they became addicted in the first place. treating them like criminals for being addicted solves nothing! and treating all drug users as criminals is idiotic.
providing those safe measures helps those people, and allows them to be in contact with people that can help them get off the drugs as well.
i would much rather pay for drug addicts needles and their treatment, then fund police and prisons to catch and incarcerate these people.
Just another fucktard that thinks it's government's business to "help" addicts.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 19:25
>>Rightists want to make sure that inheritance remains as the only way of creating wealth.
I disagree. Rightists (IMHO) want everyone to have the same opportunity to succeed. It is then up to the individual to make his way thru life.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 19:59
Politics just follow social tendencies. People are more concern by their objects, they vote conservative. People are more implicated in their worlds, they vote more liberal.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-14 22:25
what about up, down, forward, and backward? screw 1-D politics!
One thing I don't like is I see blacks who brag and boast about all the accomplishments they have made and Hispanics who brag and boast about all the accomplishments they have made and Asians who brag and boast about all the accomplishments they have made. Yet it's "offensive" when a straight white Christian humbly points out Europe and its descendents' inventions and accomplishments in sports, music, arts, literature, and science. It also makes you a hateful bigot if you point out the low academic performance of Hispanics and African-Americans and their high incarceration rates. It also makes you a racist if you point out how most of rap and hip hop steals and reuses other people's beats and encourages gangs, crime, drug use, women abuse, among other things.
Name:
Anonymous2009-11-19 23:33
>>31
Sir, I agree. But your post is a bit off topic.
Name:
Anonymous2009-12-02 17:46
The (economic) Left-Right and Authoritarian-Liberal/Anarchist scales are the best way to evaluate a government.
There are non-authoritarian leftists (eg. Gandhi), authoritarian leftists (Stalin), authoritarian rightists (Pinochet perhaps), Authoritarian centrists (Napoleon, arguably Hitler economically), non-authoritarian right (Milton, or most Chicago school economists)
It's imperfect but it's probably the closest. Ideology must be grounded in reason to be of any worth, which is the ultimate ideology, really.