Please describe in some detail how it is better than the others, and hopefully we can get some discourse and perhaps see issues in a different light.
Despite this score I have a lot of leftist and liberal stances, pro-choice, pro-equality, universal healthcare, marijuana-legalization, environmental control, free speech, etc.
My grief with liberalism is mostly that it puts too much trust in humanity, as black friday has shown people are stupid and unfit to be left alone.
My grief with socialism is mostly that it pretends to be for justice and equality but wants to tax talented and successful people to oblivion.
My grief with conservatism is mostly that it restricts freedom in victimless crimes and often puts faith before facts.
My grief with lassiez-capitalism is mostly that it allows corporations to get away with things that affect everyone, like destroying the environment.
My grief with centrism is mostly that it doesn't really stand for anything.
So I guess I disagree with everyone.
Based on the responses I have gotten so far I will start to compile a list of different stances and arguments for and against them.
Welskerland wrote:Prior to Hitler and the National Socialists, fascism had nothing to do with racism. Fascism promoted nationalism based on citizenship. I am white, you are black, she is Muslim, and he is a homosexual, but we are all citizens of the State.
Fascism advocates the power of the state and that it will act in the best interest of the nation as a whole. Fascism is neither a left-wing or right- wing ideology, it instead merges the best of both systems (the self- motivation and free market advocated by capitalists, and the basic rights and access to resources as supported by socialists.) I am against the redistribution of wealth since it is unfair for someone who has worked harder and contributed more to society to be forced to give up their earnings.
Businesses can do as they please as long as there are health and safety regulations for workers, no monopolies, jobs are not sent overseas, and the business does not seek to gain a profit off of immorality (slavery and pornography would be illegal, for example.) As long as they above criteria are met, the company can do what it wants.
Communal Ecotopia wrote:Surveillance only works moderately well and can be no replacement for a loss of civil liberties, and armed police escalate confrontations as much, or more, as defusing them.
The army need not be so large as we suppose, but the actual answer relies on philosopher John Rawls' notion of overlapping consensus. We need not share every, or even most, identities, in order to believe in the same large-order goal.
Republic of Coldwater wrote:I believe in free markets, laissez-faire and low taxes. I also oppose the government holding debt or having deficits. I support rolling back Dodd Frank, ObamaCare and other laws that are regulatory, sustain monopolies or prevent unlimited, unregulated competition between private companies to ensure that costs will be driven down, and quality increased through competition. I also support privatizing most government services in a realistic world (healthcare, welfare, education, infrastructure etc.) and in an ideal world, privatizing everything into numerous businesses to let them freely compete in a free market to keep costs down.
I oppose any laws on drugs, and supporting legalizing all substances on the grounds of property rights.
I am also pro-life, given that abortion is basically the unneeded murder of a child and that there are choices, such as adoption for those who cannot afford another child.
The bases in Europe and East Asia are unnecessary for the safety of our highly developed allies there, or our safety.
