UPSB v4
Serious Discussion / Democrat (Liberal) vs. Republican (Conservative)
-
Date: Wed, Feb 29 2012 05:45:40
Which do you lean more towards?
-
Date: Wed, Feb 29 2012 13:20:14
I'm surprised that republicanism is leading. I really do not think that republicans nowadays are REALLY republican. They hold none of the traditional values of one. I am Independent, but I lean strongly Republican. Actually more conservative/strict constructionism more than republicanism. The only belief I don't agree with Republicans on is not taxing the extremely wealthy.
-
Date: Wed, Feb 29 2012 15:13:58
I dont care. Good ideas are good ideas. If a Conservative has a good idea, then i believe in that idea while believing in other ideas created by Liberals. But I guess it doesnt matter. Both sides have are on an equal level of corruptness. Fuck politics.
-
Date: Wed, Feb 29 2012 17:26:03
Liberal social, conservative economic.
-
Date: Wed, Feb 29 2012 17:39:16
-
Date: Wed, Feb 29 2012 22:47:02
Republicans are inherently bad people, even they know this. I don't even know a single Republican in real life.
-
Date: Thu, Mar 1 2012 00:36:22
Moderate
-
Date: Thu, Mar 1 2012 06:55:11
If we're talking about the political parties in the US then well they're both retarded, they're not even that different for that matter. I'm what I think to be middle of the road, there are somethings that I like about conservatives and somethings I like about liberals.
-
Date: Thu, Mar 1 2012 07:16:29
I'm a socialist (technically a left moderate social libertarian, according to a rather lengthy, bullshitty quiz). I believe that stricter government control over the economy and how goods and services are distributed and wealth is redistributed is a far superior system to the current capitalist nation. With no commercial assets or capital owned privately, there will be no more corruption from outside sources to the government. the idea is that the government would run on a fixed budget and have to find ways to redistribute money to the population rather than use it for personal or business gain. and socialism is not communism. Communism is the crackpot ideal that no government is best government, and in application is simply volatile to life. It pisses me off when people i talk to think I'm a communist. I don't think we should have less personal freedoms or rights, only the economic side of socialism should be implemented.. you could say a fixed budget is a bad thing, but so is 15 [16?] trillion dollars of debt. Wasting immense amounts of money on our military isn't helping the issue. If we'd stop playing police of the world we could afford to do so.. I think this may be my first 'real' post on this forum...
-
Date: Thu, Mar 1 2012 07:51:30
Stare wrote: Communism is the crackpot ideal that no government is best government
lolwut? have you even taken any poli sci courses?? -
Date: Thu, Mar 1 2012 09:39:09
strat1227 wrote: lolwut? have you even taken any poli sci courses??
he's not wrong communism is stateless socialism is the "necessary" transitional government needed into communism which requires strong state control "The Marxist conception of socialism is[B] that of a specific historical phase that will displace capitalism and precede communism[/B]. The major characteristics of socialism (particularly as conceived by Marx and Engels after the Paris Commune of 1871) are that the proletariat will control the means of production through a workers' state erected by the workers in their interests. Economic activity would still be organised through the use of incentive systems and social classes would still exist, but to a lesser and diminishing extent than under capitalism. For orthodox Marxists,[B] socialism is the lower stage of communism[/B] based on the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his contribution" while upper stage communism is based on the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need"; the upper stage becoming possible only after the socialist stage further develops economic efficiency and the automation of production has led to a superabundance of goods and services.[44][45]" there hasn't been any sucessful communist states yet, the furtherst we've got is socialism (with soviet union). some people believe mankind is not advanced enough to embrace communism yet, but once the average intelligence of the human goes up, we'll learn to cooperate more peacefully, which will abolish the need for a state. or police. or weapons. or war, etc. this could take hundreds or thousands of years, just like it took thousands of years for democracy to kick in to replace monarchy. I really like the republic style of politics, as presented by Plato. I believe the average human is too dumb to know whats best for his/her interests or for the nation, therefore the state should be run by elites that know better than you. the average human should have no voting power because either they dont care or they're too stupid to know what to do with it. once the average human has evolved enough, then we can switch to communism because everybody will be smart enough to know how society should function without requiring forced coordination from a centralized entity. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 00:20:56
That's not the central ideal though, to just pick a particular aspect of something and then ridicule it is a logical fallacy called "Red Herring" ... "once the average human has evolved enough, then we can switch to communism" That implies that a classless, everyone-is-equal society is inherently the best ... once everyone is evolved enough it should switch to pure democracy so everyone can decide for themselves what they want instead of a representative deal
-
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 00:25:05
strat1227 wrote: That's not the central ideal though, to just pick a particular aspect of something and then ridicule it is a logical fallacy called "Red Herring" ...
uhh yes the central idea of communism is statelessness.That implies that a classless, everyone-is-equal society is inherently the best ... once everyone is evolved enough it should switch to pure democracy so everyone can decide for themselves what they want instead of a representative deal
democracy shouldn't be needed anymore, because everybody will not be greedy and only take what they need. you wont need to vote for anything because there shouldn't be any more issues ever. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 02:18:41
Zombo wrote: \democracy shouldn't be needed anymore, because everybody will not be greedy and only take what they need. you wont need to vote for anything because there shouldn't be any more issues ever.
Lol that sounds more dystopian than utopian ... Just because everyone is smart doesn't mean everyone agrees ... -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 02:30:52
strat1227 wrote: Lol that sounds more dystopian than utopian ... Just because everyone is smart doesn't mean everyone agrees ...
everybody would be smart they would recognize the objective truth -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 04:55:15
Zombo wrote: everybody would be smart they would recognize the objective truth
being smart =/= being able to predict the future. There is no "objective truth" on what's the right thing to do a lot of the time -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:28:55
democrats are weak, republicans are crazy
-
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:43:08
only one place in the universe has the right system of government...
-
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:43:40
hoiboy wrote: democrats are weak, republicans are superior.
Fixed. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:48:15
MickChickenn wrote: Fixed.
democrats are intelligent and innovative, republicans are crazy jackasses who refuse to move forward for any reason
fix'd'd -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:50:21
ok, enough with the stupid categorizing, it's turning into flaming
-
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:50:46
Zombo wrote: once the average intelligence of the human goes up, we'll learn to cooperate more peacefully, which will abolish the need for a state. or police. or weapons. or war, etc..
Not going to happen. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:54:06
Zkhan wrote: Not going to happen.
agreed. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 05:55:54
Zkhan wrote: Not going to happen.
Agreed. If humans are all weak and average, (according to @Zombo ) then they will keep reproducing weak and average offspring, thus not moving society foward. EDIT: Mod please delete the above post of mine. Sorry for double post. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 06:32:16
Do Democrats have good ideas? Sometimes. Do Republicans have good ideas? Sometimes. You know what's not a good idea? Vowing to do everything possible to prevent Obama from being re-elected.
-
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 15:46:17
strat1227 wrote: being smart =/= being able to predict the future. There is no "objective truth" on what's the right thing to do a lot of the time
ideally people should be rational enough that after some discussion they can come to an agreement, there would be no need to put a vote up, at least when it concerns the spheres covered by communism, which is social, politics, economics. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 16:55:19
Zombo wrote: ideally people should be rational enough that after some discussion they can come to an agreement
Yeah, and on the million-person scale, that's called a vote. -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 17:06:13
strat1227 wrote: Yeah, and on the million-person scale, that's called a vote.
no it would be more like an unanimous decision -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 17:18:36
Zombo wrote: no it would be more like an unanimous decision
Again, just because everyone will be smart doesn't mean everyone will agree. There will never be unanimous decision among a very large number of free-will entities because no one can predict the future -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 17:23:57
its not about predicting the future but taking the course of action that will most likely succeed rational means everybody, based on the same input, will produce the same output
-
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 17:34:00
Zombo wrote: but taking the course of action that will most likely succeed
No, because people can still have preferences, especially in terms of particular models. Some people will prefer high-risk high-reward models, some people will prefer safer models. Unless you're implying "evolved" means everyone has identical thoughts and preferences, in which case I just disagree with your entire premise so we're comparing apples to oranges -
Date: Sat, Mar 3 2012 19:28:11
I guess i am on the liberal left side. But of course there is a difference in the german multi-party-system with a strong parliament system and the american two-party-system with a strong president. We have more diversity when it comes to Parties and and a greater varity of opinions (At least i think so. I am not that good with american politics) Well I still think that a Plurality voting system like the one in the US and Great Britain is not good for a democratic system, although it offers more stability. I also think that both parties are stupid (same with german parties, they´re a bunch of idiots). >.> To speak about such stuff in english is kinda hard. I hope you guys could understand it.