What is your ideology?

[Skeleton Kin 385]

right since ive been wanting to know what people's ideology is, i decided to make this thread to find out about other people's ideology (if i have not named any that you are part of or that you know please tell me)

 

anyway i am a communist due to me wanting everyone to have equal pay, but i also want taxes to go down to make it that we can actually pay for heating and food, and personal items

 

 

 

why on earth would you put nazism on the list?!

because its not illegal to be a nazi

 

 

 

i'm more inclined towards anarchist/minarchist

thank you, anarchism has now been added to the list

 

 

 

In order for the government to give one person $1, it has to take $1 from someone else

than by that logic capitalism doesn't work, because there are people who get paid millions and that means millions of pounds/euros/dollars get stolen by people who had a better advantage in life

Edited October 8, 2013 by jorji

[PlunderSteed 1,252]

right since ive been wanting to know what people's ideology is, i decided to make this thread to find out about other people's ideology

 

I'm down for a balance between socialism (looking out for each other) and responsible/regulated capitalism (since ambition is the carrot on the stick of progress).

[Fluttermena 1,223]

This forum has a few anarcho-capitalists and objectivists, so I think I'll leave my post and get out before they start showing up. My patience when dealing with these people is very limited.

I picked "not listed" because my ideology, while somewhat communist, is more of a syncretic blend. Suffice to say I believe in unconditional kindness and compassion towards any and all, and I consider anyone who willfully refuses to care for the well being of others to be evil.

That being said, I realise that it's not always possible to help everyone without causing any harm, so I always advocate wisdom and caution when trying to determine what can be justified and what cannot be.

[Galen 1,354]

This forum has a few anarcho-capitalists and objectivists, so I think I'll leave my post and get out before they start showing up. My patience when dealing with these people is very limited.

I picked "not listed" because my ideology, while somewhat communist, is more of a syncretic blend. Suffice to say I believe in unconditional kindness and compassion towards any and all, and I consider anyone who willfully refuses to care for the well being of others to be evil.

That being said, I realise that it's not always possible to help everyone without causing any harm, so I always advocate wisdom and caution when trying to determine what can be justified and what cannot be.

 

I fully agree with this. I wouldn't outright say I'm leaning toward communism, tho my ideals are centered around how best to help others who are in need. If there are any political models that I hope society achieves, it is that which is presented either in Star Trek or MLP.

[crazitaco 596]

why on earth would you put nazism on the list?! O.O i sincerely hope there aren't any neo-nazis around here.

 

well, if i have to choose an extreme political ideology, then i'd have to say i'm more inclined towards anarchist/minarchist ideaology myself. mostly minarchist, meaning i support the idea of government at its absolute weakest form. i support giving the government just enough power enforce punishment for crimes such as murdering, stealing, etc. and other really necessary functions, like organizing aid during disasters.

Edited October 8, 2013 by crazitaco

[Malinter 3,064]

Pretty sure being a nazi IS illegal at least in germany. Nothing can stop a person having the views of one, you just can't have any political power and have them.

 

While I like the idea of communism where everyone gets equal pay and such it doesn't quite work in practice. Someone will always want more.

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

Nazism is socialism. They were called National Socialists. I find that people who are ignorant like to call themselves socialists. It's very trendy for young, dumb people to say that they "care" about everyone, and everyone should be "equal." So they think they are so enlightened by calling themselves socialists.

 

The truth is, socialism and communism amount to slavery. In order for the government to give one person $1, it has to take $1 from someone else. It all comes down to stealing from one person to give to another. Stealing is wrong. Forcing people to do something they don't want to do is wrong.

 

Where do you draw the line? From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs. Who determines this? If you have the ability to work 18 hours a day to provide for the collective, then the government can force you to do it. If all you need to survive is bread and water, and a single room apartment, then that's all you get. Socialism always has the elite who are very rich, with the mass of the people very poor.

 

Slavery is the perfect model of socialism. The slave masters know best. The slaves are guaranteed food, housing, work, and care. Socialism makes people into expendable pawns. If you aren't pulling your weight then you are eliminated. I can guarantee that all you self described socialists would change your tune if you were forced to give up your luxuries to provide for the "common good."

[34908734bdjofh73 61]

Capitalist. INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS!

 

"Economically, when such freedom is applied to the sphere of production its’ result is the free-market."

[PlunderSteed 1,252]

Nazism is socialism. They were called National Socialists. I find that people who are ignorant like to call themselves socialists. It's very trendy for young, dumb people to say that they "care" about everyone, and everyone should be "equal." So they think they are so enlightened by calling themselves socialists.

 

I'm one of the oldest people here, and if anything, my views have become more socialist over the decades.  This gradual change has been brought about by seeing societal and economic conditions first-hand in dozens of nations.  In short, it's rather a dismissive over-simplification for you to say that ignorance is the only path to socialist ideals.

 

On a tangentially related note, it's worth mentioning that there's a big difference between the belief that "everyone should be equal" (your words, describing the supposed ideals of others) and the idea that everybody should be given equal rights/opportunities (...of course, whether or not they do anything with that is another matter entirely).

[websterhamster 203]

As a Mormon, I believe that communism cannot work until after Jesus returns... mostly due to the fallacies of man. Stalin and Chairman Mao have really given communists a lot to make up for.

 

I personally believe in limited government, with a free and open market. Does that make me an "anarcho-capitalist"? Maybe. I think capitalism is where you try to make the most of your life your way without other people dictating what you may and may not do. This is good, within reason.

 

And yes, I am a Tea Partier.

[Scootalove 10,689]

I actually believe in a capitalist government, since you get the freedom to sell what product you want without having to abide by the government's control on how much you must sell for your product or the number of products that you must sell.

[websterhamster 203]

I fully agree with this. I wouldn't outright say I'm leaning toward communism, tho my ideals are centered around how best to help others who are in need. If there are any political models that I hope society achieves, it is that which is presented either in Star Trek or MLP.

 

Note that Equestria has a Diarchy, with two monarchs, who, as far as we know, have the power to be both judge, jury, and hangman (Celestia banished Luna to the moon... not much more to it than that). This is fine if you have infallible leaders, like a god, but if you have human men/women (or immortal alicorns) that are by definition imperfect, you're going to get some serious abuse of the system.

 

And also note that Equestria has a very laissez-faire economic system. I don't even think they have taxes in Equestria! It really is an everypony for his/herself system, not at all like communism, where the state pays you for what you do. If you don't believe me, just consider all the times Applejack talks about money in regards to Sweet Apple Acres.

[GhostPony750 959]

I don't care-ism.

 

As long as they don't bother me, I guess I'll be fine. I don't need a government to tell me how to live, with strict rules. Some people need all this, but not me.

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

I'm one of the oldest people here, and if anything, my views have become more socialist over the decades.  This gradual change has been brought about by seeing societal and economic conditions first-hand in dozens of nations.  In short, it's rather a dismissive over-simplification for you to say that ignorance is the only path to socialist ideals.

Nations like Russia, China, North Korea, the bastions of freedom? So you're saying that, as you got older, you believed more and more that people should be less free, and controlled more by the government? I'm not sure what you're saying, so I don't want to put words in your mouth. The point is, socialism = control by government. I've heard many people from former soviet countries, and NOT ONE of them has ever said it was good under communism. Have you ever heard of anyone trying to sneak INTO a communist country?

 

Communism means a few people at the top control everything. It is the exact opposite of freedom. Communism is packaged and sold to uneducated young people in colleges as some utopian idea that everyone will get along and be happy under some all powerful State. Philosophically, communism and socialism necessarily lead to the idea that people are expendable and the collective is all important. The sacrifice of one for the good of all.

 

Consider this question: Is it moral to kill one person to cure all disease, even if that person doesn't want to be killed? From a freedom perspective, the answer is an obvious no. From an illogical, ignorant, communist perspective, the answer would be yes. That is the ultimate conclusion of communism.

 

If you can justify stealing a loaf of bread from someone, then you can justify stealing two. You can always take away more freedoms, and control people more and more under the justification of "the greater good." So where does it end? Kill one person to harvest his organs to save 5? That would be the logical thing to do. So where does the human element come in? When is a human being a valuable entity, with a right to live?

[verycreativeusername 1,800]

Communism would go well if humans weren't so imperfect, but because humans aren't perfect, I believe in capitalism, even if it has a lot of flaws coming with it.

 

I also want the freedom to buy what I want, apply for a job I want to do, and such. But as well, I also believe others should help others in need in a capitalist society.

 

I as well agree with these posts:

 

http://mlpforums.com/topic/75475-what-is-your-ideology/?p=1913512

http://mlpforums.com/topic/75475-what-is-your-ideology/?p=1913520

Edited October 8, 2013 by Franklin Clinton

[Skeleton Kin 385]

freedom perspective

stop calling capitalism the freedom option (because its not), when Russian workers were poor as the homless because of a capitalist king to turned Russia into hell (by printing money), the people revolted and put in communism as it seemed like a good idea and for a while it was, Stalin was the one who gave communism a bad name

Edited October 8, 2013 by jorji

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

stop calling capitalism the freedom option (because its not), when Russian workers were poor as the homless because of a capitalist king to turned Russia into hell (by printing money), the people revolted and put in communism as it seemed like a good idea and for a while it was, Stalin was the one who gave communism a bad name

I don't recall using the term capitalism. Please show me where I did. Explain to me what Capitalism means? I say freedom because that is what is paramount. The freedom to keep what is yours. The freedom to engage in a mutual contract with another person. As I said, it is trendy for people bash on capitalism. It is human nature to seek out a scape goat to blame. Complex problems with complex origins can easily be explained away by the catch all "capitalism," and the catch phrase of "communism" is the solution. Don't think, just repeat the popular slogans. Don't question the moral foundations or the ultimate conclusions.

 

Stalin gave communism a bad name the same way Ted Bundy gave serial killers a bad name. Communism is by its nature evil. It is evil to control another person without his consent. The communists were starving and killing people long before Stalin came around. Besides which, Stalin wasn't in charge of the killings in China, Cambodia, North Korea, or any other society that tried to control people with an oppressive government.

[ReverseFaller 2,483]

None of them are too great.

 

I was never really a fan of Socialism. A Winston Churchill quote is always fitting.  "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery"-Winston Churchill

 

When I hear Communism I think of very bad things. Stalin was a Commie, and I'm pretty sure under his leadership a vast amount of people were killed...just like Hitler. Then you have Communist China, with the whole Tiananmen Square event happening. I'm sorry, Communist countries just seem very crappy to me. In a Communist society shouldn't everyone have enough money, and or food?

 

Capitalism is my favorite as it seems to have the most freedom in starting up businesses, and purchasing goods, ect. However, like the others it has its flaws too. 

 

Forgive me if my views on the following Ideologies are flawed, or ignorant. I'm in an Economics class in my high school at the moment, so hopefully I can learn more about these said Ideologies so that I may further expand my knowledge on this topic. 

[Foreigner And Lover 207]

I'm a firm capitalist who believes that people who work hard should be rewarded. I'm all for universal healthcare, but social security and welfare should be privatized. Also, I think the government should work harder to ensure that corruption and insider trading are kept at a minimum to ensure the invisible hand works its magic.

 

I'm going to go out and say that I find communism morally reprehensible as well as unfeasable.

Edited October 8, 2013 by Foreigner And Lover

[Skeleton Kin 385]

Explain to me what Capitalism means?

"capitalism is the ideology that everyone can trade of goods and work to make money and that people can have the freedom to have jobs to earn this money"

the problem that your not getting is that people are born higher than other meaning they have a higher chance of getting higher jobs and with the statement you made earlier saying that every quid made is stealing off another person, need i remind you that people get paid millions (like the British footballer) doesn't that mean that plenty of families get robbed everyday? i mean there are people who work hard and don't get any promotions and only get six quid an hour, don't use logic in one area and not in the other and there is a name for that, its called hypocrisy, in this day and age capitalism (or as you say "freedom" and i say it like that due to the fact that many people are being put against their will due to them no being allowed to follow their ideology) has stopped working due to many people in america being poor and many countries are having economy issues

and while you call communism "evil" i say no, it is only evil depending on its leaders (Stalin is the lead example, he was insane when he became leader of Russia) and your refusing to read my example where capitalism was bad like i said the king ruined Russia by printing money rendering money worthless it costed a huge wheel barrel just to buy bread.

 

thank you for reading this (unless you ignored it and continued to bring up the same example of a bad leader that was insane)

Edited October 8, 2013 by jorji

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

"capitalism is the ideology that everyone can trade of goods and work to make money and that people can have the freedom to have jobs to earn this money"

Is there supposed to be a point? Ok, so some people make more than others. What's your point? The world isn't perfect? Is that your point? I run into this problem all the time. People don't really make arguments, they just point out problems. As if the existence of a problem is proof of a proposed solution. There is no logic there, so I'm not sure what I'm supposed to say.

 

It is impossible for everyone to be equal. If you were to "redistribute" all the wealth and had everyone start out exactly the same (by whatever metric you measure "sameness") then the very next day people would be unequal. Some people would work harder than others. Some people will spend their money wisely, some won't. Some ventures will succeed, others will fail. Some people will be smarter, others dumber. And sometimes plain old bad luck will strike. It is impossible to impose a vision of society from the top down. Everyone's desires and abilities are different.

 

As for the printing of money, the nature of a fiat vs commodity backed banking system is a huge topic. A centrally controlled bank is the primary tool used by the power brokers to control people. In fact, it is called for in the Communist Manifesto. Centrally controlled banks have ruined nations. The Federal Reserve of the US is a privately owned banking cartel. Since its creation in 1910 the US dollar has lost 95% of its buying power. Do not confuse capitalism with whatever is going on in the US today.

 

A free banking system would allow for competing banks to issue notes, backed by whatever they wanted. The free market (meaning people) would choose which banks notes they want to support. Commodities and gold backed bank notes would be redeemable upon request. This was done up until the 1970s when the US was taken off the gold standard. The role of government in a free banking situation would be to make banks adhere to their promise to back their notes. This would prevent banks from printing money without backing. Again, the solution is more freedom, not less.

[Skeleton Kin 385]

 

 

If you were to "redistribute" all the wealth and had everyone start out exactly the same (by whatever metric you measure "sameness") then the very next day people would be unequal

I agree with this point, but then again I'm not a socialist, I say you either work hard to earn the money you need to survive or die (what i mean by this is that if you live in a communist country you earn the money and spend it wisely)

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

I agree with this point, but then again I'm not a socialist, I say you either work hard to earn the money you need to survive or die (what i mean by this is that if you live in a communist country you earn the money and spend it wisely)

Yes and no. And I don't think you understand the definition of communism. There is, what I call, soft and hard morality. It may be the (soft) moral thing to help someone in need. But it is (hard) immoral to force someone help. For example, it is wrong for me to steal your food. It is still wrong even if I'm stealing to feed the hungry. Free market (capitalism) does not mean the poor will die. Rather, people donate the charities all the time. I do. So there will be (as there is now) a voluntary system of charity. But it is wrong for a government to force you to do something.

 

Everyone wants to help starving grandma, and it might be the (soft) moral thing to do. But what about the welfare mom who has kids for the sole purpose of getting more welfare? The morality of helping must be dictated by your own conscience. A charity (often a church) will help the needy. But the charity will demand that the needy try to better themselves. This encourages people to work harder, thus contributing to the system by being productive. I will help you if I think you really need it. But I won't let you take advantage.

 

Not only is free market, free choice the only moral and logically consistent system, it is also the most successful. Is the down side that lazy people will starve? Maybe, but that's an over simplification.

[Skeleton Kin 385]

Yes and no. And I don't think you understand the definition of communism. There is, what I call, soft and hard morality. It may be the (soft) moral thing to help someone in need. But it is (hard) immoral to force someone help. For example, it is wrong for me to steal your food. It is still wrong even if I'm stealing to feed the hungry. Free market (capitalism) does not mean the poor will die. Rather, people donate the charities all the time. I do. So there will be (as there is now) a voluntary system of charity. But it is wrong for a government to force you to do something.

 

Everyone wants to help starving grandma, and it might be the (soft) moral thing to do. But what about the welfare mom who has kids for the sole purpose of getting more welfare? The morality of helping must be dictated by your own conscience. A charity (often a church) will help the needy. But the charity will demand that the needy try to better themselves. This encourages people to work harder, thus contributing to the system by being productive. I will help you if I think you really need it. But I won't let you take advantage.

 

Not only is free market, free choice the only moral and logically consistent system, it is also the most successful. Is the down side that lazy people will starve? Maybe, but that's an over simplification.

communism doesn't say you cant be charitable, if you cant support yourself (disability, mental illness etc.) than that's when you can be charitable 

Edited October 8, 2013 by jorji

[Brony Number 42 10,069]

communism doesn't say you cant be charitable, if you cant support yourself (disability, mental illness etc.) than that's when you can be charitable 

Communism is the government control of the means of production. Basically meaning that the government decides what gets done. It means people don't have private property. Different levels of his have been tried, but that is the basics. Government control means control by a few people, the opposite of what communist supports say the believe. What gives the government the moral authority to dictate such things, or anything for that matter? How can something be immoral for one person to do, but moral for a group of people to do?

 

If I am entitled to food and shelter, then what if I refuse to work? The government takes it away? But aren't I entitled to it? If you say I have to pull my own weight then isn't that free market? Besides, who dictates what my contribution should be, and what I'm entitled to? Shouldn't I decide my own value, and decide what becomes of the fruits of my own labor?