iwillspankyou wrote:looks like all the right wing nuts are joining this tread. Well do not feel alone @fightinfrenchman you are maybe one of the Bois here
I'm not right-wing! I'm center-left
you support Biden, and he is senter RIGH, right If you support him, you also support that elections can be bought off. That is pretty right-wing, even from UK standards
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
I've no idea, tbh. I don't identify with any of the political leanings that were created as a result of the French Revolution (left, centre, right), though temperamentaly some people might place me on the right on some issues, on the centre on others and on the left on yet others.
Having actually worked a few years for the government, then for an EU institution for a short while, I tend to have a more pragmatic view on things and not get sucked in ideological dogma. For example, I find some ideas from different forms of anarchism to be interesting, but my pragmatic instinct tells me they are probably pie in the sky that would not work with the cunning and tricky human nature we know. So I don't think we are going to see the end of state or a significant shrinkage of it too soon.
Assuming that our species will not split into factions eventually, I think there is no particular system that would work best for everyone. Political systems tend to have a certain lifespan, they go through paradigm shifts (much like Thomas Kuhn's description of paradigm change in science). So rather than leading to some future optimised system, they tend to shift political emphasis from one way of organising political power to another. Like it happened after the French Revolution, when political power went from being concentrated in the hands of a monarch and an hierarchic nobility system to the opposite direction of distributing power across the general public. I think now we're seeing again the pendulum shift back from democracy to an attempt to concentrate power in the hands of a few. People still have the illusion they are forming their own opinions and voting based on that, but most of the time they are using arguments that are ready-mades taken from the media. Or maybe it's more accurate to say people seek ready-made arguments in the media that fit their political temperament.
This points to a failure of democracy as a promise of political emancipation. People are free to have a say in the political process but they respond to this challenge by choosing to be followers. And so, society has stealthily developed new kinds of monarchies and aristocracies (or maybe oligarchies would be a better term) that keep people voluntarily captive.
Another interesting development in this century is a return to primitivism and tribalism. It's already noticeable even on this forum how people tend to gravitate to one camp or another and entrench themselves in this tribal identity that validates their political temperament.
So what are my political leanings? I follow facts and side with what works or can be made to work and so far historical experience has shown that some political systems tend to fail faster than others. For example, Nazism has failed pretty quickly, Communism took half a century to fail, while democratic capitalism has outlasted both, but it's starting to show some deep cracks in its structure. I haven't even brought the cultural dimension in the discussion, which complicates things even more. For example, I don't think Western systems necessarily work equally well everywhere (Asian political systems for example tend to be more collectivistic). So if you lived in another culture, how would you form your political leanings and what kind of system would you think worked best for your country? If I were Asian, I'd probably think differently about this question.
That's on level with your democratic party, i hope you know that. Also he's the Member of Parliament that represents the constituency i used to live in :)
iwillspankyou wrote:@Googol why would Nazy Germany kill every red/communist, if they were the same?
Because in Hitlers mind the bolsheviks/reds/communists were created by his mortal enemy the Jews to undermine the German Aryan nation. Think of it like this way.
You have the communists in the USSR which collectivise the wealth based on the class in which they strive to create equality and socialist utopia. In Nazi Germany, basically the same thing happens but not based on class, it is based on the idea of race, hence why i call them racist communists. Or atleast, thats my point of understanding it.
iwillspankyou wrote:@Googol why would Nazy Germany kill every red/communist, if they were the same?
Because Marxists/communists were direct political competitors for Nazis. They both promised revolution that would "heal society" and bring people together under one banner, whether that banner had a swastika or sickle & hammer on it.
geesus @Googol you must know that communists, and reds. got a neck shot by the nazi's, just for being reds. I guess when you are 20 years old, the war is far away.
Hippocrits are the worst of animals. I love elifants.
If you want to understand it in detail, you will most likely need to read mein kampf @spanky4ever. I havent read it myself i only know some basics around it. But in regards to Nazi German econmics, there are plenty of books about it.