U.S. Elections 2008: General Elections -- Analysis and Commentary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

It is not good to call anyone un-American unless they are un-American. Ideological affiliation is another thing entirely. You say that you don't want the government to spend much money UNLESS they spend it on stuff you can use. You say that you don't like how expensive the war is. You say that you want guards on the border.

It doesn't sound like a disciplined ideology, just a bunch of opinions. That isn't a bad thing. You don't have to describe yourself as a conservative to hold those opinions. There is an element of discipline to affiliation. You can always think outside of the box, but it means that you have a concept of how your opinions can work in tandem.

---

I object to the notion that I must conform to one person's opinion box to be a conservative, or that I have no ideology, just a "bunch of opinions". With due respect, you are welcome to criticize my specific opinions, and you have every right to say what you want, you're not an authority on who is conservative. Under many definitions of conservative, I am very much so. On some issues, I am "liberal", which is another loaded word.

Furthermore, paleoconservative, neoconservative, moderate conservative, religious conservative, small-government conservative, social conservative, economic conservative, etc are all KINDS of conservatism. There is NO ONE KIND of conservatism.

I also will prove that conservatism isn't a disciplined and consistent ideology itself. Look at privacy issues.

Conservatives want more privacy and less government intrusion, yet they supported unwarranted wiretaps, the suspension of habeus corpus, and they want more regulation of the borders and more censorship of the airwaves (for social conservatives), and they want to keep certain illicit substances banned, and they want to keep certain kinds of behaviors and lifestyles from obtaining the same acceptance and legitimacy in the legal world as others. All forms of greater government intervention, and expansion of federal power. On other issues, they support less gun control, less market control, less union control, less government regulation, more privatization, school privatization, and closing entire sections of the government and letting the market control it.

That's not a consistent or disciplined viewpoint, yet it's all conservative.

Someone is un-American when they blame everyone who doesn't agree with them on political issues for the problems in our time. It's undemocratic, it's prejudiced, ignorant, bigoted, and blindly partisan.

Quote:

---

You say that you don't want the government to spend much money UNLESS they spend it on stuff you can use.

---

Stuff I can use?

No, I don't know where you're getting that. I don't want the government to spend money unless it's absolutely essential. The rock and roll hall of fame, bridge to nowhere, grasshopper research in Alaska, pork barrel projects are one big mistake. The money wasted on defense spending for open-ended contracts which never get oversight and end up costing 10 times their original proposed funding, needs to end. Simply handing cash to the homeless is not a solution.

I can go on and on for a thousand pages if I had the material in front of me to cite each individual line item blunder. But I shouldn't have to.

I don't believe we will agree on some things, and that is fine. But I do object to the idea that I am bound by the flaws in a commonly held ideology to be able to hold most of those viewpoints, and any mischaracterization of my viewpoints.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

Are you basically saying there are a series of litmus tests for being conservative and Pizza doesn't fulfill enough of them? What would the non-negotiable hallmarks of being conservative be to you?

---

It depends on where you are. Just because you hold an opinion that doesn't necessarily "make" you something.

In new york calling yourself a "conservative" means you affiliate yourself predominately with the Conservative party in practicality or in ideology. Here is the Link

Elsewhere it means different things. If you have a particular ideological type of conservatism it helps to describe that in conjunction with the word "conservative", otherwise you might as well just call yourself "political". I can use the word and have people basically understand my opinions. I like the ideas of prominent conservative's - not necessarily the anti-intellectual conservatives like O'Reilly, Hannity or Limbaugh, but many of their basic ideas I agree with.




I just sent you the link so that you can clarify where you end up on the scale and what your answers to some main questions would be. You can call yourself whatever you'd like, but I don't have to agree with your determination.

How about this - If I had to label you in my own words by political ideology it wouldn't be "conservative". Other members of the forum with differing opinions I might label as conservative, but I've never read anything by you that I would describe as Conservative except that you don't want excessive government spending (yet you are supporting Obama).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

It depends on where you are. Just because you hold an opinion that doesn't necessarily "make" you something.

In new york calling yourself a "conservative" means you affiliate yourself predominately with the Conservative party in practicality or in ideology. Here is the Link

Elsewhere it means different things. If you have a particular ideological type of conservatism it helps to describe that in conjunction with the word "conservative", otherwise you might as well just call yourself "political". I can use the word and have people basically understand my opinions. I like the ideas of prominent conservative's - not necessarily the anti-intellectual conservatives like O'Reilly, Hannity or Limbaugh, but many of their basic ideas I agree with.

---

I get the gist of what you're saying Tuff but in actual practice... .conservative tends to tell you very little about what someone's beliefs are. As Pizza argued at length there are a thousand definitions and what people do for the most part is just associate it with how closely you fall in line with the Republican Party in your platform beliefs and ideology. But the modern Republican Party, as we know, is almost nothing like either its spoken values or what it was like 40 or 50 years ago. If there are any conservatives out there of the "Goldwater variety", my guess is that they either vote Dem or Independent at this point, not Republican.

As a side note, Stephanie Miller, daughter of Barry Goldwater's running mate, and CC Goldwater, Barry's granddaughter, are both outspoken critics of the Republican Party today. They have spoken together on the air about how horrified they think Goldwater & Miller would be with today's interpretation of "conservativism."

Quote:

---

How about this - If I had to label you in my own words by political ideology it wouldn't be "conservative". Other members of the forum with differing opinions I might label as conservative, but I've never read anything by you that I would describe as Conservative except that you don't want excessive government spending (yet you are supporting Obama).

---

McCain has promised cuts amounting to 18 billion dollars. Peanuts. So there is no grounds upon which to say someone is not conservative enough because they're voting Obama over McCain.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

That sounds like a compliment to me. Most of the people I've known who had an ideology were morally or mentally deficient. Or both. In fact, "ideology" and "conservatism" ought to be mutually exclusive, at least if you're going to give Burke any due at all.

---

Lemur - would you call yourself a "conservative" if someone asked you what you considered yourself?

You could also think about it in the way politicians think about it - "What is the ideological average position that my constituency takes and how do I keep their loyal opinion?" This is a helpful way of deciding where you fall on the ideological strata.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I've never read anything by you that I would describe as Conservative except that you don't want excessive government spending (yet you are supporting Obama).

---

How can you say that with a straight face? After supporting the Bush administration and its disastrous expansion of government powers in all areas, how can you ding Obama for not being a fiscal conservative? How would you even know what a fiscal conservative looks like?

Of all the tropes and lines of attack, this one strikes me as the most glaringly, shockingly,tastelessly hypocritical.

-edit-

When asked, I tell people that I'm a mixed-up kinda guy. As I've said in other threads, I believe in the right for married gay couples to carry concealed handguns. I believe in small government and an end to the War on Drugs. What does that make me?

I have no idea. And I'm not bothered for half of a second about it.

What would you call people like Blue Dog Democrats or Log Cabin Republicans? There are a ton of Democrats who vote with Republicans on economic issues, and tons of Democrats who vote with Republicans on social issues. It's a bit more complicated than "you're either in groupthink1 or groupthink2."

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

It depends on where you are. Just because you hold an opinion that doesn't necessarily "make" you something.

In new york calling yourself a "conservative" means you affiliate yourself predominately with the Conservative party in practicality or in ideology. Here is the Link

Elsewhere it means different things. If you have a particular ideological type of conservatism it helps to describe that in conjunction with the word "conservative", otherwise you might as well just call yourself "political". I can use the word and have people basically understand my opinions. I like the ideas of prominent conservative's - not necessarily the anti-intellectual conservatives like O'Reilly, Hannity or Limbaugh, but many of their basic ideas I agree with.




I just sent you the link so that you can clarify where you end up on the scale and what your answers to some main questions would be. You can call yourself whatever you'd like, but I don't have to agree with your determination.

How about this - If I had to label you in my own words by political ideology it wouldn't be "conservative". Other members of the forum with differing opinions I might label as conservative, but I've never read anything by you that I would describe as Conservative except that you don't want excessive government spending (yet you are supporting Obama).

---

So, it means different things to different people in different places at different times.

Privacy rights are important to me. Keeping taxes low is important to me. Keeping spending low is important to me. Balancing the budget is important to me. Keeping jobs in America is important to me. Reducing waste and corruption is important to me. Maintaining and building alliances is important to me. Keeping troops out of harm's way unless absolutely necessary is important to me. Improving education is important to me. Improving healthcare is important to me. Reforming welfare is important to me. Reducing drug and human trafficking is important to me. Patrolling the borders and inspecting the ports is important to me. Reducing fraud in the elections is important to me.

I hold the "conservative" viewpoint on most of these issues.

I differ on the rights of gays, and I contend I'm being MORE consistent. Less government intrusion into the lives of people, telling them they cannot be married. Less government prejudice in adoption processes against gays. I'm being consistent because I don't believe it's anyone's business who marries who, who divorces who, who lives "in sin" with who.

I differ on welfare in some cases because I believe that the government, if it has any role, it's to help people in need. College students need loans, and sick patients need operations.

If the government helps educate and cure people, it's ACTUALLY doing something positive. (Omigosh!) If the government is in the business to do ANYTHING, it should START with education and healthcare, not the other way around. ("we spent 3 trillion dollars this year... we deficit spent almost a trillion dollars. No money for education or healthcare, though. Tough luck.")

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemur

How can you say that with a straight face? After supporting the Bush administration and its disastrous expansion of government powers in all areas, how can you ding Obama for not being a fiscal conservative? How would you even know what a fiscal conservative looks like?

Of all the tropes and lines of attack, this one strikes me as the most glaringly, shockingly,tastelessly hypocritical.

-edit-

When asked, I tell people that I'm a mixed-up kinda guy. As I've said in other threads, I believe in the right for married gay couples to carry concealed handguns. I believe in small government and an end to the War on Drugs. What does that make me?

I have no idea. And I'm not bothered for half of a second about it.

---

That's good. You wouldn't consider yourself conservative though? The whole purpose of declaring some sort of ideological allegiance is so that people understand your basic political opinions. Brandishing the word "conservative" for ATPG does nothing to illuminate his political outlook for us is my whole point.

However - If I were to call myself "conservative" you would have a basic understanding or could guess a few of my opinions. In this sense the word aides the readers understanding.

I must have read on every one of these pages; "I am a conservative" by ATPG. I'm going to go on calling myself a progressive just because I believe in the progress of time and its relationship to life and technology. Does that help you understand my political outlook?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Privacy rights are important to me. Keeping taxes low is important to me. Keeping spending low is important to me. Balancing the budget is important to me. Keeping jobs in America is important to me. Reducing waste and corruption is important to me. Maintaining and building alliances is important to me. Keeping troops out of harm's way unless absolutely necessary is important to me. Improving education is important to me. Improving healthcare is important to me. Reforming welfare is important to me. Reducing drug and human trafficking is important to me. Patrolling the borders and inspecting the ports is important to me. Reducing fraud in the elections is important to me.

---

This is a generic opinion that nearly everyone holds. To what degree you believe the Federal government should be involved in solving those problems is something else. I just think that it is bizarre that you consistently identify yourself with conservatism when it is clear that you don't need to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

That's good. You wouldn't consider yourself conservative though? The whole purpose of declaring some sort of ideological allegiance is so that people understand your basic political opinions. Brandishing the word "conservative" for ATPG does nothing to illuminate his political outlook for us is my whole point.

However - If I were to call myself "conservative" you would have a basic understanding or could guess a few of my opinions. In this sense the word aides the readers understanding.

I must have read on every one of these pages; "I am a conservative" by ATPG. I'm going to go on calling myself a progressive just because I believe in the progress of time and its relationship to life and technology. Does that help you understand my political outlook?

---

Tuff I think you just can't stand that there is at least one conservative that will vote for Obama, and supports gay rights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

What would you call people like Blue Dog Democrats or Log Cabin Republicans?

---

Looking at this makes me wonder how party whips exercise power in America. Anyone care to explain?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

This is a generic opinion that nearly everyone holds. To what degree you believe the Federal government should be involved in solving those problems is something else.

---

So we arrive back at question 1, you say that all his basic beliefs are just everyday American beliefs, so... what would make him conservative would be... whether he always feels the GOP presents the best possible agenda for accomplishing those things?

Someone who wants the things Pizza listed has to vote against the Republican Party in November. There's no real way to candycoat one's way out of that, IMHO. There is virtually nothing "more conservative" about the present-day GOP except for its rhetoric insisting it's more conservative. On the issues and on the platforms it isn't. The role of government on social issues is apparently to interfere and regulate rights in home life and family decisions, from Terri Schiavo to gay couples to abortion. And the role of the government in the economy is apparently to promote and protect the interests of corporate America, while putting not a dime in education or infrastructure or the long-term financial stability of individual citizens.

The present-day Republican party isn't about small government and low spending. It's about small government for corporations and low spending for individual citizens. And big government for individual citizens and high spending for corporate America.

A down the line argument that being Republican is about small government and low spending is a joke. They don't offer that. They just offer spending on different things and big government where we don't want it and small government where we need regulation and protection.

I believe I've consistently enlightened any who are curious about my opinions, because I frankly will never shut up about them. :grin:

I "brandish" the word conservative to indicate I believe in limiting certain kinds of government power, believe in privacy rights to a great degree, believe in limiting crime and drugs, eliminating wasteful spending, and to distance myself from Republicans and Democrats. I also call myself an independent and a moderate. To conserve is to ration, to portion in moderation, to not bring to extremes, to limit.

I believe that any conservative who is not a moderate is no longer a conservative... they are now a Republican, a "neoconservative", an ultra-capitalist, an authoritarian, or totalitarian. Extremism has no place in conservative ideology. Conservative differs from liberal in some respects, but not others.

Conservative and liberal are not opposing viewpoints, contrary to popular misconception and due to poor education. Liberalism allowed such a thing as a conservative movement. Liberalism allowed freedom of thought, enlightenment, the age of reason, the boom of science, democracy, and freedom, both economic, private, and publicly protected.

Conservatism is merely an aspect of liberalism, which contends that there are limits to government intervention, and limits to personal freedoms going too far, but it's still a child of Liberalism.

The opposing viewpoints are socialism, a "centralized" form of liberal government, communism, a "totalitarian" form of liberal government (or in some cases, not liberal at all), anarchy, a "decentralized/nonexistent" form of libertarianism, and libertarianism, a "decentralized" version of conservative government. Totalitarianism and anarchy are the true opposing viewpoints, everything else is in between.

I see the "war" between conservative and liberal as laughable, sadly misinformed, and shameful, all at the same time.

_______________

Finally, in response to Tuff, I don't "need" to identify as a conservative. I do because it's the closest thing to describing myself as anything besides a moderate/independent. I tend to favor limiting government, on that side of the political spectrum, which is off-center and on the conservative side of things, especially in wasteful spending and expansion of centralized/federal power. But I'm not an anarchist or libertarian either.

Just because you disagree with me on some things, that does not mean I am not mostly conservative. I can identify as such if I want to, because it's accurate. I don't see why you have trouble with the idea that there is not one specific kind of conservative which agrees with every one of your political views.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Koga No Goshi

So we arrive back at question 1, you say that all his basic beliefs are just everyday American beliefs, so... what would make him conservative would be... whether he always feels the GOP presents the best possible agenda for accomplishing those things?

Someone who wants the things Pizza listed has to vote against the Republican Party in November. There's no real way to candycoat one's way out of that, IMHO. There is virtually nothing "more conservative" about the present-day GOP except for its rhetoric insisting it's more conservative. On the issues and on the platforms it isn't. The role of government on social issues is apparently to interfere and regulate rights in home life and family decisions, from Terri Schiavo to gay couples to abortion. And the role of the government in the economy is apparently to promote and protect the interests of corporate America, while putting not a dime in education or infrastructure or the long-term financial stability of individual citizens.

The present-day Republican party isn't about small government and low spending. It's about small government for corporations and low spending for individual citizens. And big government for individual citizens and high spending for corporate America.

A down the line argument that being Republican is about small government and low spending is a joke. They don't offer that. They just offer spending on different things and big government where we don't want it and small government where we need regulation and protection.

---

Koga, m52, and Lemur,

You guys seem to see that the black and white "Red v Blue", "liberal v conservative" dichotomy is indeed false, and that politics are more nuanced than having one of two sets of opinions.

I am a moderate, an independent, and I am mostly conservative. I'm also nonpartisan and I see the big spending under present republicans to be wasteful, and no clear conservative option. Frankly, to spend this much is shameful.

I'd rather have healthcare and a broken budget than a broken budget and no healthcare. That's the choice I am being offered in this election. The conservative votes "liberal" this time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Finally, in response to Tuff, I don't "need" to identify as a conservative. I do because it's the closest thing to describing myself as anything besides a moderate/independent. I tend to favor limiting government, on that side of the political spectrum, which is off-center and on the conservative side of things, especially in wasteful spending and expansion of centralized/federal power. But I'm not an anarchist or libertarian either.

Just because you disagree with me on some things, that does not mean I am not mostly conservative. I can identify as such if I want to, because it's accurate. I don't see why you have trouble with the idea that there is not one specific kind of conservative which agrees with every one of your political views.

---

No form of Conservatism agrees with all of my views either.

Now I am curious - will you please fill out the questionnaire and post your location on the 4 point chart. I'd love to see where you come out. I would bet that you come up in the lower left quadrant - within 20 squares of the center.

We can all manipulate conservatism to mean whatever we'd like it to mean. We all want to conserve something. Maybe we want to conserve a spirit of radicalism in American political life and throw off tradition - or maybe we want the opposite.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

Koga, m52, and Lemur,

You guys seem to see that the black and white "Red v Blue", "liberal v conservative" dichotomy is indeed false, and that politics are more nuanced than having one of two sets of opinions.

I am a moderate, an independent, and I am mostly conservative. I'm also nonpartisan and I see the big spending under present republicans to be wasteful, and no clear conservative option. Frankly, to spend this much is shameful.

I'd rather have healthcare and a broken budget than a broken budget and no healthcare. That's the choice I am being offered in this election. The conservative votes "liberal" this time.

---

I think most people here know that I'm just about as liberal as they come, for most things. One thing I've never been with most liberals when it comes to raising the minimum wage. I want to see a balanced budget, or at least have pay as you go put into law. I'm a hunter, or use to be, so I fall in line with most conservative republicans regarding hunting rights.

There it very little that is black and white, it all just shades of gray.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

No form of Conservatism agrees with all of my views either.

Now I am curious - will you please fill out the questionnaire and post your location on the 4 point chart. I'd love to see where you come out. I would bet that you come up in the lower left quadrant - within 20 squares of the center.

---

Tuff, Pizza is a conservative, he does not need to take a test to prove himself. Deal with it.

I think he'd end up in the lower right, near where Lemur is.

I love this forum. We always get into fights about classification and how communicating accurately is or isn't important. Words mean nothing if they don't convey a definitive meaning. It is interesting that a "conservative" would vote for Obama. If you take Conservative to mean the least radical in society on a bell curve, then it isn't that surprising or amazing that that a centrist voter would fluctuate between two populist parties. People on the relative left love to hear of defections from the relative right. ATPG is attempting to sensationalize his support for Obama using the word and association "conservative" when it is not sensational.

Sounds like everyone is curious as to what your answers will be and where you will locate on the chart. Of course there is no requirement that you fill it out, but I always find it to be enlightening to have a starting point on each member.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

No form of Conservatism agrees with all of my views either.

Now I am curious - will you please fill out the questionnaire and post your location on the 4 point chart. I'd love to see where you come out. I would bet that you come up in the lower left quadrant - within 20 squares of the center.

---

The 4 point chart is an inherently simplistic and flawed system. I don't believe that it's in any way scientific, and like the ridiculously generic and oversimplified terms "left" and "right", being "plotted" on a diagram reduces the philosophy, ideology, politics, and unique ideas of a person to a single dot on a chart.

I refuse to submit to such a ludicrous and base system of judging a person. You may as well be asked to choose a color to paint yourself as, and that color will forever represent your entire viewpoint.

"From now on, you are beige-gray. None of your unique ideas or arguments, or disagreements with the mainstream, matter anymore, because you are beige-gray. You are at war with the brown-pinks. Declare war on the brown-pinks and never marry one, because your simplified ideologies are forever in conflict."

I simply won't plot my brain as a dot on a grid. There's more to philosophy than that. And my viewpoint hates oversimplification, as it reduces everything to either an enemy or a friend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I love this forum. We always get into fights about classification and how communicating accurately is or isn't important. Words mean nothing if they don't convey a definite meaning.

---

• # resistant to change
  # having social or political views favoring conservatism
  # cautious: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate"
  # button-down: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-grey world of business"- Newsweek
  # a person who is reluctant to accept changes and new ideas
  # bourgeois: conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality"
  # a member of a Conservative Party

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy

The 4 point chart is an inherently simplistic and flawed system. I don't believe that it's in any way scientific, and like the ridiculously generic and oversimplified terms "left" and "right", being "plotted" on a diagram reduces the philosophy, ideology, politics, and unique ideas of a person to a single dot on a chart.

---

I can verify this is true. Last night I read every single post in the entire Political Leaning thread. What I expected to see after seeing the numeric scores (i.e. -5.67 social, -3.52 economic or whatever) rarely corresponded with what they actually wrote about their views on specific issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sasaki Kojiro

• # resistant to change
  # having social or political views favoring conservatism
  # cautious: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate"
  # button-down: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-grey world of business"- Newsweek
  # a person who is reluctant to accept changes and new ideas
  # bourgeois: conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality"
  # a member of a Conservative Party

---

I like change - make new words. That is change too.

Create new distinctions based on how you could best describe yourself.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I If you take Conservative to mean the least radical in society on a bell curve, then it isn't that surprising or amazing that that a centrist voter would fluctuate between two populist parties.

---

Least radical? Wow, half the GOP would no longer be conservatives.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

I like change - make new words. That is change too.

Create new distinctions based on how you could best describe yourself.

---

Hmm...

So you like to change and conserve? Or do you just like to conserve the concept that we must always change? :inquisitive: Or perhaps changing what the idea of conserving is?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by makaikhaan

Hmm...

So you like to change and conserve? Or do you just like to conserve the concept that we must always change? :inquisitive: Or perhaps changing what the idea of conserving is?

---

exactly. It's a meaningless buzzword that only describe things based on a common understanding. If that understanding is no longer common then it isn't communicating the point effectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

exactly. It's a meaningless buzzword that only describe things based on a common understanding. If that understanding is no longer common then it isn't communicating the point effectively.

---

There's no such thing as a conservative party in America anymore, unless you're talking about obscure third parties. I have always viewed it as there is only a big social/domestic and big business/aggressive foreign policy party. At the most crude level, that is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m52nickerson

Least radical? Wow, half the GOP would no longer be conservatives.

---

Right. Not all of the G.O.P. is conservative. There are many conservatives in the Democratic party already.

We all know this, therefore it isn't much of a shocker.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff

exactly. It's a meaningless buzzword that only describe things based on a common understanding. If that understanding is no longer common then it isn't communicating the point effectively.

---

Then why are you demanding the Pizzaman prove his "conservative-ness", if its nothing but a useless buzzword?

As a follow-up to my previous statement, I will offer a suggestion on top of my criticism of the superficial system.

My distaste for the generic and ugly partisan terms "left" and "right" does not diminish when you are tested for both economic and social libertarianism versus economic and social authoritarianism.

To truly get a feel for my viewpoint, and crudely predict "me" on a "chart", you'd need thousands of dimensions, one for each viewpoint. Then, you could arrange the dots on that chart as something similar to an electron probability cloud. You could almost predict me with a chart so dynamic.

People are bigger than two dimensions, and frankly, even with a thousand plotted points along a thousand different dimensions of political viewpoints, you still could not accurately predict me or anyone else. Unless of course, they adopted every position on the Republican, Democratic, or other partisan platform, precisely, without exception.

I do not see the world in black and white, in red versus blue, in stark terms of authoritarian versus libertarian, or in 2 dimensions across a graph, dividing us and separating us and classifying us like insects. I believe we have so much more unique things to offer than a generic dot on a generic graph about generic concepts. To even come close to describing the unfathomably complicated matrix that is the human mind, you cannot simply list two coordinates on a graph.

To conform to such simplicity, is to diminish humanity itself. There's a whole universe, between the reds and the blues and the greens and the yellows, there are metallics and and shades and hues and shapes and textures and flavors and sounds, all of them unique, all of them worthy.

When I hear people speak up and say "I am a Republican or I am a Democrat", I shudder. Chances are, they do not conform to two-thirds of their own party's platform, yet they will become emotionally attached to this large conforming group, and begin to criticize wholesale anyone who disagrees with their party, even if they happened to agree on the issue itself!

I might have a lot of views similar to TuffStuff, for example, on limiting federal power and cutting spending. Yet, if I were to criticize his party, there's a chance he might take it personally. Or his candidate, he might identify with and take it personally. Perhaps Tuff himself is better than that, but many people are not. They cling like frightened monkeys to the hides of giant monolithic organizations that couldn't give two centipede turds about them, short of obtaining their vote and their money. This is why I dislike conformity... it diminishes the human being into a square block, another brick in the wall of a castle, the occupants of each castle firing cannonballs at one another.

Organized religion, nationalism, racism, sexism, partisanship... it all flows from the idea of mass conformity, so that those at the top can control us, predict us, and criticize us and keep us all in line, conforming to their shape.

I refuse. Dang it, I believe in many so-called conservative viewpoints, and language dictates that I might have to come up with labels to identify myself with. But I refuse to bend to a defect in our thinking, our language, simply to mollify my critics and fit in with my friends. I differ on some issues, and I refuse to register as a member of a party, I will listen to the opposition and those third parties as well, I will form my own opinion. I will not wave a flag unless it includes anyone who wants to be my friend, nor will I ever be "proud to be white", nor will I join any group claiming to represent my spirituality whilst dictating it for me.

I won't be plotted on a map, nor will I become a Red or Blue American. I won't find just one generic opponent to criticize, nor will I defend people who I agree with when they are wrong. I won't become another cog in the system, I won't dehumanize myself or my opponents by advocating groupthink. If you identify with a party, that's your business... if you identify with a candidate, thats your business. If you follow a major religion or philosophical movement, kudos for you.

However, when it becomes such a part of you that you immediately trust anyone who identifies with the same things you identify with, if you begin to form ideas about people you don't know because they identify with some group or person, if you begin to assume and criticize someone when you don't really understand them, if you become part of the machine and lose yourself to your ideological overlords, and become just another soldier in the great war of ideas between two or more great powers who could not care less about you... I feel sorry for such a person. That is where assumption, misconception, misinformation, propaganda, groupthink and ignorance deteriorate humanity to the point where there is at least one channel on TV that has lost all sense of reality and will continue to spout ideological talking points and spin news stories no matter what the circumstance, and will remain ignorant, loyal followers until the bitter end.

In short, I think it's insulting to diminish a person to a mere label, or a one-dimensional or two-dimensional measure. Plus a lot of blah, blah, blah that followed.

:soapbox:

:clown:

EDIT: bonus points/

# resistant to change
# having social or political views favoring conservatism
# cautious: avoiding excess; "a conservative estimate"
# button-down: unimaginatively conventional; "a colorful character in the buttoned-down, dull-grey world of business"- Newsweek
# a person who is reluctant to accept changes and new ideas
# bourgeois: conforming to the standards and conventions of the middle class; "a bourgeois mentality"
# a member of a Conservative Party

Resistant to what KIND of change??? Too generic to be useful. To change "back" to a conservative ideology from a progressive one would be "progressive". It's direction-neutral. In this instance, conservative or progressive have no compass bearing!

Conservative: having views favoring conservatism. Insertyourphrase-ism: Having views favoring insertyourphrase-ism. To define something by itself is not a definition.

Cautious: In all circumstances, or in some? For what purpose? Avoiding excess: By whose measure? What defines excess, and who does?

Unimaginatively conventional: describes moderates... am I a moderate? Does not describe me... am I unimaginative or too conventional?

Reluctant to accept change: Similar to resistant to change. Repeating earlier definition.

Bourgeois: I'm not middle class... yet I aspire to be. What am I?

Finally: I am not a member of the Conservative Party and I'm betting most "conservatives" aren't either.


Conclusion: even the definition of conservative defines nothing.