Rep vs. Dem Differences

In article , "Ash Wyllie"
writes:

James Robinson opined

Wdtabor wrote:

The Nazi Party was the National SOCIALIST Party, fascsim is a left wing
philosophy, it never has had anything to do with the political right. It
is only characterized as such by entertainers with no knowledge of
history.

Someone doesn't know the definition of right and left.

Right wing philosophies tend to be conservative, want to retain
traditional values, and often advocate the establishment of an
authoritarian political order.

Left wing philosophies promote political change, and generally promote
greater freedom and well being of the common man.


Uh, No. Left and right and liberal and conservative have become distorted from
their dictionary meanings.

I can make it simpler. Look at the party NAMES.

Do you want to live in a Republic, with unalienable rights not even the power
of government is permitted to violate, or do you want to live in a Democracy,
where there is no right of yours that is not subject to transgression if 51% of
the populace lusts for what right protects?

That is what the political spectrum is all about, the degree to wich the
individual is soveriegn compared to the degree to which the collective is
soveriegn.

The order is, strarting with maximum individual rights

Libertarian Republican Democrat Nazi Socialist Ants

If you own yourself, and are willing to be responsible for yourself, you are a
Libertarian. If you are owned by the collective, and expect to be guided and
protected from your own failures by that collective, you are an ant.

Pick the degree to which you are your own person or to which you are willing to
trade away your liberty for economic security, and find your place on the
spectrum.

The only wild cards are the theocrats, who are collectivists who submit to
their invisible friend instead of the majority. They are currently allied with
the Republicans, but for 100 years before SCOTUS ****ed them off were allied
with the Democrats.

Note that theocrats are less dangerous when allied with the GOP, where they
have succeeded in passing almost nothing, than they were when they were allied
with the statist Democrats, and passed the Sodommy laws, Prostitution laws,
Drug laws and Prohibition. An alliance between Theocrats and Collectivists
gives you the Taliban, an alliance between theocrats and individualists gives
you some hurtful rhetoric but nothing more.

So, forget the spin and demagoguery, and decide where you are on the political
spectrum based on the single matter of personal freedom vs submission to the
collective and you will not go wrong.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

In article ne.com, Andrew
Gideon writes:

BillC85 wrote:

Just my two cents.

Sigh too true. But it wasn't always this way!

Once upon a time, a "political conservative" would have been apalled at the
notions expounded by religious zealots. Today, these terms of come to be
hopelessly intertwined. Annoying.

Similarly, once upon a time "democracy" was a liberal idea. Today,
"liberal" appears to carry all sorts of unrelated baggage.

What we really need are better labels.


WWW.LP.ORG

Take the World's Smallest Political quiz there.

YOu get a two axis political spectrum that describes your place better than
left/right

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

Take the World's Smallest Political quiz there.

YOu get a two axis political spectrum that describes your place better than
left/right


I am WAY Libertarian . . . 80% on social issues and 100% on economic.


www.Rosspilot.com

Martin Hotze opined

"Ash Wyllie" wrote:

Weren't you the guys that with the Hungarians conquered a large chunk of
Europe?

we conquered half of the world.

Anybody checked Bush's ancestry?


-ash
Cthulhu for President!
Why vote for a lesser evil?

"Rosspilot" wrote in message
...
Take the World's Smallest Political quiz there.

YOu get a two axis political spectrum that describes your place better
than
left/right


I am WAY Libertarian . . . 80% on social issues and 100% on economic.


Most of us probably are, but it's moot as they aren't even close to getting
into any important federal positions.

I am WAY Libertarian . . . 80% on social issues and 100% on economic.


Most of us probably are, but it's moot as they aren't even close to getting
into any important federal positions.


So?

Join your local chapter anyway and work to build the party and steer the
country back toward the Constitution.

Here in Tidewater, our chapter is working with select Republican delegates to
fight eminient doamin abuse by local governments, and we are working for the
FairTax on the national level.

Just because we don't hold any seats in Congress doesn't mean we can't do some
good.

--
Wm. Donald (Don) Tabor Jr., DDS
PP-ASEL
Chesapeake, VA - CPK, PVG

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 at 12:42:48 in message
ne.com, Andrew Gideon
wrote:
Wdtabor wrote:

The Nazi Party was the National SOCIALIST Party, fascsim is a left wing
philosophy, it never has had anything to do with the political right. It
is only characterized as such by entertainers with no knowledge of
history.

And what was East Germany's actual name?

Always seems to me that there is no adequate definition of left and
right in politics. There are certain policies that seem to be associated
with one or the other but there are significant variations in even that
classification. Mostly they are just insults that one party throws at
another.

Sometimes I feel it is a circle and left and right meet around the back
of the circle anyway. Any definition that I try seems to present my own
ideas in the most favourable way. :-{

Fashions change; once the cry of the British Labour party was 'No Means
Testing' for benefits. Now there are more means tests on income for
benefits than ever.

The only thing I have tried as a separation is that the left always
believes in centralised control and planning and the right sometimes
does!

Left and Right can also be attempted as a definition as a distinction
between the left who believe that 'most people do not understand their
own best interests' and the right who believe 'most people do understand
their own best interests'. :-)

That usual collapses as well.

It seems to me that labels such as socialist, fascist, dictator,
liberal, national, peoples. communist, monarchy democrat, republican and
despot only give a very slight clue to a regime. They can be combined in
almost any way you choose.

Most important is probably a structure of a nation that limits the
power of different factions.

In some cases communism has gone directly to a form of monarchy! In
others a popular revolution has finished up with an Emperor..
--
David CL Francis

James Robinson wrote:

Right wing philosophies tend to be conservative, want to retain
traditional values, and often advocate the establishment of an
authoritarian political order.

Simple labels just fail too quickly. A political conservative in the US
would be a strong advocate of church/state separation. A social
conservative would want his/her own religious morals encoded into law.

It's all a matter of which values you consider "traditional".

- Andrew

Brian Burger wrote:

They aren't mutually exclusive, the larger one (freedom of...) should
automatically include the detailed one (freedom from...).

Of course. The set of subsets of any set includes the empty set.

The problem is that C.J. Campbell believes that "freedom from" implies that
religion is kept away. Others on this thread apparently read this as
"freedom from imposition of".

- Andrew

Bob Noel wrote:

Waffle is "like us"? guess again.

"Waffle" like opinions about nation building, free trade, states' rights,
etc.?

- Andrew