Monday, February 1, 2016

Where do you fall?

Got one of those infernal political phone polls today, but since it was some poor schmuck student from my alma mater doing it for a Poli Sci credit, I relented and answered insane questions for 30 minutes. What do I care? I'm on cold meds and Jack.

So I was asked a simple question, how do I identify politically? Pissed off was not one of the choices.

I'm a fiscal conservative, which basically means a small government with very limited powers. I saw a meme during the last east coast blizzard that mentioned 80% of "nonessential government employees were told to stay home" and I thought, "Why the fuck are we paying these people? We should not have one nonessential government employee, let alone millions of the fuckers." If we get back to a Constitutional Republic, a lot of the bureaucracy and redundancy will be eliminated. Fewer salaries and bennies, less office space, less energy consumption. Fewer tax dollars wasted, therefore fewer tax dollars required.

Small government spends less money. Move to the right.

I'm a social meh. I don't care who you love, what you smoke, or how you live your lives as long as you do no harm (I care deeply about child molesters) and don't infringe on my rights (if I don't want to bake you a cake, I shouldn't have to, period). We are litigating up to the Supreme Court issues (same sex marriage) that should be handled by the States. And I'll go a step beyond, no marriages should be overseen by the government. Civil unions covered by government, marriages governed by religious entities. There are thousands of people in prison over a weed. Legalize marijuana like alcohol, and regulate it the same as alcohol. So I understand there needs to be minimal rule of law to keep society from spinning apart, but I think the Founding Fathers did a pretty good job of framing all that up for us.

We just need to get back to it. Move up a little from anarchy.

And there you have it, Libertarian. Sadly, I was the first person young Muffy talked to who identified as Libertarian. After we completed the survey, she asked if I minded answering a few personal questions for her about my political philosophy. We talked for another 45 minutes, and I may have made a convert. If nothing else, I convinced her not to vote Democrap.

So I proudly stand before you a Libertarian. Where do you stand?

25 comments:

wirecutter said...

Our political views are pretty much in lockstep but you never stated your position on chihuahuas.

hiswiserangel said...

As long as the chihuahuas are here legally, I'm fine with them.

J Bogan said...

Anarchist pretty much. No one I have ever run across is fit to rule me. And the fact that they would want to is an instant disqualifier

Chris said...

I second what J Bogan wrote. If people are so bad, incompetent, or whatever that they need to be ruled, who among us are so damn capable that they get to rule us? Certainly not the power-hungry, narcissistic criminals that actually *want* to be a politician!

cannon said...

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ukEoajeZbYg/VCWyVYic0oI/AAAAAAAAj7E/W4LcEhS4vWI/s400/system.jpg

commoncents said...

Live Streaming - Iowa Caucus Results (updated)

http://commoncts.blogspot.com/2016/02/live-streaming-iowa-caucus-results.html

Rob said...

Yeah, pretty much libertarian - with a small "l". Once those idiots organized themselves into a party they stopped noticing the inconsistency of wanting the G to get into the marijuana business. Duh.

What's tremendously noticeable about that graph is that apparently its designers recognized that Fascism is a leftist philosophy, the first time I've seen that in 70 years. So there's that.

James William said...

Hello! everyone out here,I am James William from Portland Oregon United state.It has been my desire to help people out with their problems no matter how little my contribution may be.

As regards to the promise i made to BABA ARUOSA if he could help me get back my girlfriend,i'm using this means to fulfill my promise and also let everybody know there's solution to your problem no matter how difficult you think it is okay.

I loved a girl for more than 2 years and she told me she was going to marry me.But she would change her mind and tell me she didn't love me anymore and was seeing a guy,which i found out.I begged her to accept me and also tried every means possible to make her know i can't live without her because i really love her but she would pay deaf ears to me.

We were working in the same company and each time i see her,i wish all this weren't happening.This pain continued till a friend of mine led me to BABA ARUOSA whom he told me was very extremely powerful and has helped with a problem.

Soon as i contacted him,i knew he was the exact answer to my solution because i felt his powers from his carefully selected words and calmness.I explain all that happened to me and he told me what to do.I did as i was instructed and never doubted him.To my greatest surprise what i felt was almost impossible within the twinkle of an eyes was over.

She called me pleading for my forgiveness for how she has treated me and that she loves me so much and will never cheat on me again and will marry me.And from that moment till now all we've been experiencing is happiness in our relationship.We'll be getting married soon........lol

I would advice anyone with problem to contact him via email : templeofsupernaturalcontact@gmail.com for his help.

RabidAlien said...

I've slid down past Conservative and am rapidly approaching Libertarian. I agree with JBogan in that anyone who *wants* to be a politician should immediately be disqualified. The position should also pay a small stipend *while the post is filled*, enough to get by on for a bit but not enough to make a fortune. The post should be filled by someone who doesn't want the job, but has the work ethic to do the job to the best of their ability and leave when they're voted out, and leave the office a better place than when they arrived. But there's only one Mike Rowe (R. Lee Ermy for Sec of State!!!), unfortunately.

ccbpc said...

it's funny: i used to be just slightly right of center. now i'm just slightly above anarchist. i am so sick and tired of EVERYTHING happening in this country that i'm ready to see it all burned to the ground. and hopefully, like the phoenix, a better and stronger constitutional republic will rise from those ashes.

Anonymous said...

There is one flaw. Communism should be to the left and above facism. Facist economic policy allows for private ownership of business, the state controls the production of goods and services. Communism owns all means of production including capital, equipment and even labor. Both are destructive to the liberty of humanity.

Glen Filthie said...

I may get egged for it but what the hell: I question those that defend the illegal drugs and sexual degeneracy. I know what libertarians are saying and what they want - I get it. But there is a point where libertarianism starts flirting with moral apathy. that in turn creates a political vacuum that draws in the control freaks and big gubbermint types. Personally I have no use for queers and pot - and my rights are not violated one iota when stupid people are forced by law to act like responsible adults. YMMV.

Mark Jewell said...

Used to be conservative Republican, now consider myself a libertarian.

Angel eyes said...

Glen F. just about covered my stance, too.

genericviews said...

The left-right model is inherently flawed as a way of dividing up the political spectrum. A simple text description works best. But in most cases, the descriptions themselves cover a spectrum and not just a single point. But I do enjoy seeing Fascist off to the left where it belongs. Traditionally, conservative should be nearer to the middle since the heart of conservatism is "keep what you got".

Anonymous said...

One foot each side of anarchy, so let its legions march and consume the Demented Slaves of Allah for the good of us all. Anarchy is recoverable from; Islam is not.

Seneca III.

Gregg said...

Glenn, that's a cultural issue rather than an issue that government should be involved in, it's the same as the marriage issue.

How does someone smoking a weed, or having the butt s3x Impact you if you are not a participant?
The answer, is, it does NOT impact you. The minute that you decide to impose your moral standards on someone else they are free to do the same to you.


Ideologically I am a hardcore Anarcho Capitalist. However, I do understand the difference between a utopian ideology and reality so I default to a minarchist / libertarian, the smallest government necessary to ensure fair courts and a skeletal framework for national defense.

genericviews said...

I'm a libertarian Calvanist. I want all people to manage their own affairs, but I recognize that all men are depraved and some are depraved enough that they need to be stopped from managing their own affairs.. I am satisfied with the current system of adjudicating the boundary between the two, though not always satisfied with the results of that adjudication.

Unless you are one of those rare individualists in history with a middle name like "Grizzly", you are sharing my lifeboat and we are going to have to come to some sort of accommodation. Anarchy is not on the menu and you should thank God it isn't, because I am way better at it that most people and without the civilizing influences of Jesus Christ, society, law enforcement, and custom, few of you would survive.

Anonymous said...

Wise Angel One.... I am with you...march on!......

vaquero viejo

Gregg said...

Genericviews, it sounds like you have confused Anarchy (without government) with Nihilism. Anarchy is not every man for himself, it is a state where each person manages their own affairs without a governing body. If you are incapable of behaving in a civilized manner without the threat of force then it is best that you stay in a system where someone else governs you. Some of us do not need that and in fact govern ourselves.

Roger Ritter said...

Instead of a line slanting across a plane, Jerry Pournelle in 1963 worked up a better chart using the XY axes. The original post on the Baen website seems to have gone away, but Wikipedia has a good write-up: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

The Infamous Oregon Lawhobbit said...

Fiscal conservative/social meh. I am *so* stealing that.

Personally? Anarchist. That which governs best, governs least. Can't get more "least" than "zero."

That said, I recognize, sadly, that (nature or nurture - you decide) some people simply cannot or will not self-govern, and so some sort of minimal government is unfortunately necessary. Which means "minarchist," which thus means "libertarian."

Anonymous said...

Anarchy won't work for humans until faster than light personal space travel becomes as cheap and common as automobiles. Then available resources become effectively unlimited, while the reach of governments becomes effectively negligible.

Basically, anarchy needs enough resource opportunities and space that government control becomes so inefficient to maintain that people's own self-interest, the free market, and personal firepower is sufficient to make everyone behave properly towards one another.

Until then, libertarianism is the way to go.

Sevesteen said...

The Pournelle Chart (I've known about the chart for years, didn't know it was his) fits a lot better. I don't think libertarian is merely farther along the line beyond conservative, it is off in a different direction. Maybe that's what Classical Conservatism should be, but not in modern usage. There are also some who complain that Classical Liberal was libertarian, but wound up drifting so much that a new name was needed for the original philosophy.

I think I'm a moderate libertarian--we need some government. I'm not sure how much, but 75% less seems a good place to start, we can see how much more to cut once we get there.

Anonymous said...

Check this out: https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/quiz.php