[trombonepolitician]

Lemme try this. Lately I've found myself sitting right on the fence of some issues...

Social-
I am a cultural cosmopolitan. I love my fellow black, Japanese, Jewish, muslim. I honestly don't care what you are as long as you don't judge me back. It's the lack of recognition for cultural and American civic standards that I think should be corrected through prioritizing public service and civic education classes in order to be eligible for running for office. Immigration is fine- people should apply for citizenship, and have a path to do so. I'm uncomfortable with amnesty schemes and seem to me to be last-ditch efforts to integrate illegals within a country without outraging the population. I'm more than willing to expand the public guest worker program.

Gay marriage, polyamory, etc- I feel they are fine, not federal issues

Abortion- pro-choice, but the government should not subsidize it

Drugs- Legalize and regulate marijuana, back off on laws of harder drugs. Honestly not too big on drugs myself, but I know people will inevitably use them. It's when people choose to be idle and demand rights when there is a problem

Sex industry- Regulate, probably would keep prostitution illegal

Economic-

Health care- I want more competition between insurance (less government granted privilege and oligopoly) and doctors. At the same time, we should have universal access, but I like the ideas of Singapores system- every service requires a copayment and health savings are compulsory

Education- More funding for public education, mandate state standards while having minimal federal- vouchers only permissible to those with need (low income and/or someone finds a preferable program) and that want to go to a private school. Post-secondary should be subsidized and free, or there should be mandatory education savings

Infrastructure- must be actively maintained

I favor a land value tax for the nation and we can reduce income taxes- people can decide where they want to divert part of their tax money to (education, health, etc)

Don't privatize social security, but personalize accounts (stop raiding the trust fund), let people save privately if they want, but don't completely exempt them from social security taxes

Trade- economic nationalism and fair trade (still researching this topic), encourage reciprocity in trade

Money- nationalize the system and regulate interest rates- In favor of either a full reserve currency or a social credit system (with demurrage http://realcurrencies.wordpress.com/201 ... demurrage/)

Economics and monetary policy- Keynesian and economic liberalism- government must cut taxes, deregulate, but must also look at privileges given to private companies, also spend greatly on giving money to people to spend and infrastructure repair

Unions and guilds- I favor strong trade unions and guilds that can regulate businesses in the trade rather than government bureaucrats

Military- I favor defensive wars, but a limited united nations

Economic and political direct Democracy-

I favor it where it is viable. I think more competition between firms will allow for more unique economic arrangements to be made, including cooperatives and social enterprises. I think Direct and deliberative democracy can be experimented with on a local level as well. However, I think that national representatives should pass a test of some sort in order to make national decisions. Also, the national state should be a body of multiple stakeholders- unions, science experts, business leaders, and community organizers. Lower levels should be made up of delegates and/or representatives for decisions pertaining to the institution(s) in question.

Social philosophy-

I think that a more integrated society is a good thing, but there will be some prejudices that will be inevitable. The best we can do is evaluate violations of civil rights case-by-case (I do support the civil rights act of 1964). However, I feel the people of the US must realize that public officials and leaders must be held to a high moral, cultural, and national standard. If you are a legal immigrant, your right to vote depends on your recognition of civic values


So where does this place me? PoliComp puts me on the libertarian centre-left, but I think that misrepresents my views quite a bit. I view Fascism as too nationalistic, mono-authoritarian, and sometimes too exclusionary of other races. I view global finance capitalism as messy and tending toward the creation of a global privatized elite (as we are seeing now). "Conservative" and "liberal" are both dirty words here in the US to each respective opposite. Libertarians are very anti-state and hold this abstraction of the "voluntary individual," whereas I hold the aristotelian notion that "Man is a Political animal," however, I very much like the free market analysis of privilege.

Where would you place me?

[fuser]

Centre Left Liberal.

[Rei Murasame]

Where would you place me?

Centre Left Liberal.

Pretty much.

[trombonepolitician]

Thanks for that. Though I swore I had some elements of "the third position" in that statement

[fuser]

Abortions, Gay marriage, Drugs etc are pretty much irrelevant here in determining your ideology on a broader spectrum. Communist, Fascists and liberals can agree on these issues as well as people from same ideology can disagree over these issues.

[Rei Murasame]

Pretty much, the part I looked at really was this line here:

Keynesian and economic liberalism- government must cut taxes, deregulate, but must also look at privileges given to private companies, also spend greatly on giving money to people to spend and infrastructure repair

Takes him right back to the same place he started out.

Maybe this would be a good time for me to plug Post-Keynesianism: [Link]

[trombonepolitician]

I am definitely very interested in post-keynesian theory. I think what differentiates me from orthodox liberal theories, though, is that I think many underlying causes of inequality in wealth and opportunity must be undertaken individually and collectively. You can't just raise taxes on the rich, raise the minimum wage, and think that you have a better capitalism. I think we need to address land monopolies, trade rules, and our entire centralized and privatized credit system, as well as make people more self-reliant to create their own needs for living. I also would like to iterate this "Unions and guilds- I favor strong trade unions and guilds that can regulate businesses in the trade rather than government bureaucrats"

[mikema63]

I think we need to address land monopolies, trade rules, and our entire centralized and privatized credit system, as well as make people more self-reliant to create their own needs for living. I also would like to iterate this "Unions and guilds- I favor strong trade unions and guilds that can regulate businesses in the trade rather than government bureaucrats"

Interesting list you got there. Read any stuff about communism or syndicalism lately?

[trombonepolitician]

I've read a little bit about it. Trade unionism and guilds are a huge thing for me. It holds the workplace responsible for ethical workers and a safe workplace. I like ideas that have been posed on market socialism, and I myself am interested in cooperatives and socialized finance. However, I often question how realistic a "market socialism" might be. People would still compete for the best wage, and leaders would still emerge depending on merit. I guess the best thing is to organize workers' councils where viable in businesses. If we reformed patents and money, capitalist companies would not have as much of a chance to grow and parasite off of the state.

[mikema63]

leaders would still emerge depending on merit.

That is not a bad thing.

People would still compete for the best wage

There is no wage under market socialism, eliminating wage slavery is kind of a "thing".

People would be paid according to their production and every worker would have a vested interest in the organization, thus the more productive they are the more they "make".

Of course, end goal is the total elimination of the monetary system all together, usually with some type of accounting method for the purposes of coordinating production.

If we reformed patents and money

What do you mean when you say reform?

[trombonepolitician]

When I say reform, I mean either abolish the patent and instead give financial awards for R&D, or shorten the patent period over time. Might I ask how people would be "paid according to their production?" Meaning, how would you put an arbitrary value on the amount of someone's production? I'm in a group with libertarians and find the need to justify it to them

[slybaldguy]

Mikema makes ignorance an art form. You have no frame of reference here.

Warning issued for this post - SD

[mikema63]

Meaning, how would you put an arbitrary value on the amount of someone's production?

Things in the workplace Are determined democratically, because everyone has a share. Pay would be no different.

Mikema makes ignorance an art form. You have no frame of reference here.

Rudeness is not an argument.

[trombonepolitician]

Let's not get frisky here, fellas!

I don't consider myself an anarchist, but I definitely believe that when the system doesn't work for you, you link arms with others and create a new system that works for those involved!

[mikema63]

Like revolution wise?

You sure you aren't considering communism.

[trombonepolitician]

Like revolution wise?

You sure you aren't considering communism.

I want to read more from Marx, but I don't really consider myself an orthodox communist, since I am fond of theories put forth by Proudhon, Rocker, and the guild socialists. I'm not opposed to markets, I just think that they can be better regulated through unions, guilds, and/or syndicates

[mikema63]

Well Marx actually meshes really well with them too, but his stuff is a little on the heavy side.

Try Engle.

And maybe look up kropotkin as well.

[trombonepolitician]

I was reading a bit from an anarcho-syndicalist the other day named William Z. Foster. I very much like the hypothetical nature, and know that it works with several counter-federations in other countries. I support liberal welfarist policies, but I think it is unwise for governments to put strong restrictions on market forces unless absolutely necessary (insurance companies have captured governmental privileges in the 70s to negotiate payment of medical bills, driving up the cost of health care- plus, corn subsidies completely annihilated the domestic sugar cain industry). Ideally, I'd have minimal government that stays out of personal affairs, provides national defense, a minimum amount of health care and education for all, would place national tariffs on countries that do not meet our trade standards, and would delegate regulation of teaching, doctors, food, etc, to regional NGOs, Unions, and/or guilds. Economies should be much more decentralized than they are today. I'm not against small business or bosses, just the capitalist monopoly on who controls production and investment. I'm also interested in employee ownership and cooperatives. I want more equal opportunity and access to the means of production (land, soil, means to improve or build houses, plant and grow food, etc). Perhaps one day, markets can coexist along with resource-based societies, but I'm still learning about such hypotheticals.

I'd say I'm pragmatically socialist with libertarian leanings

[mikema63]

Actually so long as you say you mustn't interfere in market forces you aren't a socialist.

Socialists by definition must be anti-capitalists.

[trombonepolitician]

Actually so long as you say you mustn't interfere in market forces you aren't a socialist.

Socialists by definition must be anti-capitalists.

I know there is the position of left-wing market anarchism. Markets aren't exclusive to capitalism. Perhaps I'll have to further familiarize myself with "market socialism."