I've never really liked the label 'conservative,' up until a few months ago I was probably the most extremely socially liberal person on this forum. Regardless, I don't think there's a more accurate term for my current views, so I guess I'll post here. Here goes:Personal DetailsCountry of Birth:
Puerto RicoCountry of Residence:
See profilePolitical ViewsSocial:
My own morals are non-traditional, but I support a traditional, family-centric society for purely pragmatic reasons, as it is the most socially optimal arrangement and the one most natural to human instincts. Regarding non-traditional lifestyles I support parallelism, meaning that they can simply exist in their own enclaves, separate from the mainstream population. I support the government intervening in people's lives wherever it is in society's best interests, but it must do so as unintrusively as is feasible, and I strongly oppose the government mollycoddling people for no good reason (e.g. seatbelt laws).
I support gay marriage (no social harm has been shown to result from gays marrying and adopting children), abortion (which is actually beneficial
as it represents a crude form of eugenics), and euthanasia (no external harm done). I oppose single motherhood, as it is a breeding ground for sociopathy and psychological diseases, and believe it should be outlawed. Soft drugs should be given the same legal treatment as alcohol and tobacco, whereas hard drugs should be legalized for consumption and distributed by a restrictive state monopoly, to stamp out organized crime surrounding the trade without allowing drug use to proliferate. Gambling and prostitution should be given the same treatment.
I am deeply nationalist. I believe that the nation in its essence is a tribe, united by a common cultural, historical, ethnic and linguistic background, and all nations have the right to self-determination. I therefore support limiting immigration to skilled people culturally and ethnically similar to nationals of old stock (essentially a points system as it's used in most developed countries, but with ethnic requirements). I additionally subscribe to racialism, in that I believe there to be significant taxonomical differences between races, with profound social and behavioral effects. I don't believe any race is superior to any other for it, however. One very unfortunate effect of this though is that some races (those that did not evolve to withstand harsh climates) do not possess the adequate human capital to succeed in an advanced industrial economy, which needs to be corrected if my nation is to succeed. I therefore support an eugenics program.Economic:
The industrial sector is the backbone of the economy, and should be protected and encouraged, though this does not necessarily preclude free trade or an export-oriented economy. The economy should be guided into the most productive, most innovative and most capital-intensive industries, and then to the extent that it is possible lead the charge in future innovation. To that end, I support an economy where production, wages and prices are dictated by profit-making entities, with some regulations where appropriate, but the government should also engage in an industrial policy to guide the economy higher into the value-added chain.
For developed countries this means securing an abundant pool of capital (via forced savings), ensuring the cost of production is low (through infrastructure development and good maintenance), and facilitating technical innovation (such as through civilian R&D investment and industry-wide research cartels).
For developing countries (such as mine) however, this means capturing marketable industries currently the domain of first-world countries, in order to converge with the industrial leaders. As said industries are not profitable in developing countries and the logistical backing for them develops areound
the industry rather than simply developing naturally, this means the industries need to be founded by the state and then developed into global competitiveness either through internal competition (in very
large countries) or forced into the international market through subsidies and the like, while protected from losses at home. Over time the industry will gain the economies of scale, skills and logistical backing to compete internationally, provided that subsidies and protection get scaled back gradually to keep said enterprises on their toes, at which point if the manufacturing output of the nation is high enough it will become fully developed.
For details on how I'd handle my nation's economy, see here
Support boot camp training in high school, mandatory one-year conscription and mandatory membership to a citizen's militia, with drilling required every six months. in the US this would be a state militia, but Puerto Rico is far too small for that, so in the island eight local militia chapters would be used, divided by senatorial district. Upon completion of military training, all citizens would be given a military-issue rifle and sidearm, and required to keep the rifle in a gun safe and the sidearm in their person at all times.
As unit cohesion is crucial to military effectiveness, military members are allowed to discriminate. Don't Ask, Don't Tell stays, with the slight modification that troops themselves can decide if they want gays in their unit (there could even be all-gay units that don't allow straight people). Women can be allowed to serve, but in segregated units and support roles only, and they should be held to the same physical standards as men.Foreign Policy:
Realism. For such a small island armed neutrality seems the best choice, but given that the land size of the island is much smaller than its population, I believe if it is geopolitically feasible expansionism would be very appropriate, and am very supportive of the idea of having my country invade and colonize other nations in the Caribbean.