|
|
#11
10-20-2007, 07:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It would actually be better IMO for the libertarians to try and take over the Republican part, but I suspect they're too stubborn for that. [/ QUOTE ] It's ironic that ACers admit that the GOP is as close to home as anywhere else (LP excluded). But don't call you far right-wing or you'll claim to be off the scale and have far-left anarchist roots. Yeah, okay. [/ QUOTE ] They're fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It's not hard to get. [/ QUOTE ] They worship at the altar of capitalism. Which is as far from left roots as you can get. [/ QUOTE ] If you define "left" as "socialist" sure. We're talking about Democrats and Republicans though, each of which are just as pro-corporation as the other. Of course, true capitalism is anti-corporation, so worshipping at the altar of such would be about as far from Democrats and Republicans as you can get. We also "worship at the altar" of peace and nonimperialism, which puts us even further from the right than capitalism does from the left. 
|
|
#12
10-20-2007, 08:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
The Montagnards sat on the left of the French assembly, where all this comes from, and they were all about the laissez-faire.
The ACers on this board say things every day that would make a Republican's blood boil. It may be easy to put ACism into a 'right-wing' category, but it's not at all correct.
|
|
#13
10-20-2007, 08:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It would actually be better IMO for the libertarians to try and take over the Republican part, but I suspect they're too stubborn for that. [/ QUOTE ] It's ironic that ACers admit that the GOP is as close to home as anywhere else (LP excluded). But don't call you far right-wing or you'll claim to be off the scale and have far-left anarchist roots. Yeah, okay. [/ QUOTE ] They're fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It's not hard to get. [/ QUOTE ] They worship at the altar of capitalism. Which is as far from left roots as you can get. [/ QUOTE ] If you define "left" as "socialist" sure. ... [/ QUOTE ] Which would be a pretty standard definition.
|
|
#14
10-20-2007, 08:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It would actually be better IMO for the libertarians to try and take over the Republican part, but I suspect they're too stubborn for that. [/ QUOTE ] It's ironic that ACers admit that the GOP is as close to home as anywhere else (LP excluded). But don't call you far right-wing or you'll claim to be off the scale and have far-left anarchist roots. Yeah, okay. [/ QUOTE ] They're fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It's not hard to get. [/ QUOTE ] They worship at the altar of capitalism. Which is as far from left roots as you can get. [/ QUOTE ] If you define "left" as "socialist" sure. ... [/ QUOTE ] Which would be a pretty standard definition. [/ QUOTE ] Not really, but if you want to make it so, then both the Democrats and Republicans are more "left" than they are "right" and still neither are remotely close to libertarianism. I do like how you cherry picked out the least important part of my post to respond to though. Very classy.
|
|
#15
10-20-2007, 09:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] It would actually be better IMO for the libertarians to try and take over the Republican part, but I suspect they're too stubborn for that. [/ QUOTE ] It's ironic that ACers admit that the GOP is as close to home as anywhere else (LP excluded). But don't call you far right-wing or you'll claim to be off the scale and have far-left anarchist roots. Yeah, okay. [/ QUOTE ] They're fiscally conservative and socially liberal. It's not hard to get. [/ QUOTE ] They worship at the altar of capitalism. Which is as far from left roots as you can get. [/ QUOTE ] If you define "left" as "socialist" sure. ... [/ QUOTE ] Which would be a pretty standard definition. [/ QUOTE ] Not really, but if you want to make it so, then both the Democrats and Republicans are more "left" than they are "right" and still neither are remotely close to libertarianism. I do like how you cherry picked out the least important part of my post to respond to though. Very classy. [/ QUOTE ] Nah, the rest of your post was just not as relevant. I view traditional left versus right beyond just todays GOP and Dem parties. Doesn't matter, it's a nit either way. But this does beg the question: Why do you say Libertarians/AC should work to take over the Repub party if you don't think their ideologies are more suited/palatable to the right wing?
|
|
#17
10-20-2007, 09:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If you define "left" as "socialist" sure. ... [/ QUOTE ] Which would be a pretty standard definition. [/ QUOTE ] Not really, but if you want to make it so, then both the Democrats and Republicans are more "left" than they are "right" and still neither are remotely close to libertarianism. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know how you came to this conclusion. Compared to the political parties in most of the rest of the developed world, both the Democrats and the Republicans are right-wing. The US has no major party that explicitly embraces socialism, and in that we are very unusual.
|
|
#18
10-20-2007, 09:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
But this does beg the question: Why do you say Libertarians/AC should work to take over the Repub party if you don't think their ideologies are more suited/palatable to the right wing? [/ QUOTE ] Go back and read my first post to you in this thread, to which you never replied. The answer is there.
|
|
#19
10-20-2007, 09:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
Why is libertarian all of a sudden able to be included with AC by a slash? Not nearly the same thing, at all The former is very right wing in my opinion. [/ QUOTE ] They're not too far apart, and no libertarianism isn't right wing at all. Ron Paul's version of libertarianism is a bit though.
|
|
#20
10-20-2007, 09:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Question about RP \"legacy.\"
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] If you define "left" as "socialist" sure. ... [/ QUOTE ] Which would be a pretty standard definition. [/ QUOTE ] Not really, but if you want to make it so, then both the Democrats and Republicans are more "left" than they are "right" and still neither are remotely close to libertarianism. [/ QUOTE ] I don't know how you came to this conclusion. Compared to the political parties in most of the rest of the developed world, both the Democrats and the Republicans are right-wing. The US has no major party that explicitly embraces socialism, and in that we are very unusual. [/ QUOTE ] And we don't have one that explicitly embraces free-market capitalism either. The poster I was responding to seems to define socialism as the left end and free-market capitalism as the right end. The Republicans and Democrats both support more socialist policies than free-market capitalism policies, which makes them more left on this scale. On my scale, this isn't the case, I was just using the scale of the poster to which I responded. Socialists are certainly on the left, but "the left" is most certainly not defined by socialism!!!
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
