Modern Whig Party

[Northern Delmarva]

So today, while I was sick, I decided to go on teh wikipediaz because i sometimes get this strange desire to want to know about random stuff. Today that random stuff happened to be early American political parties' ideologies. So one thing led to another and I found this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_whig_party. I thought this looked like a pretty interesting up and coming party to watch, and so I decided to make this topic asking you NSG'ers what you think about this new party.

Opinions? Thoughts?

[Milks Empire]

Just what we need... another neoliberal authoritarian party.

[Northern Delmarva]

Just what we need... another neoliberal authoritarian party.

Is that what they call moderates nowadays?

[Milks Empire]

Just what we need... another neoliberal authoritarian party.

Is that what they call moderates nowadays?

Both the Democrats and Republicans are in the neoliberal-authoritarian quadrant of the political graph. A party that sits between the two would, by default, have to be in the same quadrant.

[H N Fiddlebottoms VIII]

So 30,000 members is "mainstream" now?

[Grays Harbor]

I'm one of those 30,000 members. Considering how new the party is, we're not doing badly.

[Wilgrove]

Sorry Modern Whig Party, but Libertarians are already the centralist party, and we got more people.

Go see if The Constitution Party need help.

[Yootopia]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

[Tech-gnosis]

# States' rights - "Each state can determine its course of action based on local values and unique needs."
# Social progression - "Government should refrain from legislating morality."

These two tenets are contradictory.

[Yootopia]

Sorry Modern Whig Party, but Libertarians are already the centralist party

Libertarians are not centralists.

[Tezdrian]

Also a member.

[Grays Harbor]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

right, because oil is the only reason anybody has ever gone to war.

[Yootopia]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

right, because oil is the only reason anybody has ever gone to war.

Obviously not, but it's one of the better reasons to do so today.

[OMGeverynameistaken]

So on the day the Republican party finally tears itself apart the Whigs and Libertarians can fight a battle to the death to be America's new second party?

[Wilgrove]

So on the day the Republican party finally tears itself apart the Whigs and Libertarians can fight a battle to the death to be America's new second party?

Libertarians would win, *nods*

[Maurepas]

So on the day the Republican party finally tears itself apart the Whigs and Libertarians can fight a battle to the death to be America's new second party?

Libertarians would win, *nods*

I disagree, I think the Democrats would,

[Tech-gnosis]

Libertarians would win, *nods*

If it did it would be very different from what it currently is.

[H N Fiddlebottoms VIII]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

The word "defense" would seem to be pretty key there. You know, as in, not "offense" or "mercenary."
The military also provides other services, beyond defense, such as employment, education, and looking nice at parades.

[Zeetopolis]

I'm sympathetic. Not yet old enough to vote , but it looks like I identify with a lot of their tenets.

I'll see how things are when I come of age. It looks like the Republican Party is slipping away and I don't want to be hanging on to a capsized boat while the world leaves without me.

[Yootopia]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

The word "defense" would seem to be pretty key there. You know, as in, not "offense" or "mercenary."

To quote one of our generals (whose name I forget) talking about the MoD, "Defence is the name, attack's the game".

[Lucky Bicycle Works]

Positioning the party between the Democrats and the Republicans is like trying to get between two mating jellyfish.

Fiscal responsibility and strong national defence. Yep, they've got that ground all to themselves ...

[Rhodmhire]

I've been asked to join before, although I know nothing about it and never bothered to look into it, from what I've shared on teh Internetz, it seems as though I might qualify.

However, I can't confirm nor deny that, since I haven't even bothered to look into it, and I doubt it'd change much if I did.

[Rhodmhire]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

right, because oil is the only reason anybody has ever gone to war.

No, you're wrong on that one.

It's more like a combination--oil, and a sense that a country needs to give aid to every single nation it thinks requires military intervention.

At least, so the tale is told.

[Cannot think of a name]

A little too focused on the military for my tastes. After a while you have to start justifying all that 'might' and that's where you start to get into trouble.

[Grays Harbor]

Seems like a pretty pish party. If you're developing indigenous sources of energy, a 'strong defence force' is kind of unnecessary since you're not going to be bombing the shit out of people for oil and the like.

[sarcasm]right, because oil is the only reason anybody has ever gone to war.[/sarcasm]

No, you're wrong on that one.

It's more like a combination--oil, and a sense that a country needs to give aid to every single nation it thinks requires military intervention.

At least, so the tale is told.

I'm sorry. I forgot my sarcasm tags on my statement. fixed.

Ah, ya gotta love "Big Bang Theory" moments.