Political Discussions
Political ideology VS personal philosophy
Posted by Anok • 6/11/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: politics, self promotion
Just to get off the left/right we're all gonna die!! stuff, let's discuss our personal and political ideologies for a minute.
What is your political ideology? Do you associate with a party? An idea?
What is your personal philosophy?
Are the two one in the same? Are they at odds with each other? Does one inform the other?
Discuss your personal and political approaches to life, and how your political ideologies and personal philosohies reconcile with each other.
Please note, this thread is for OPEN honest discourse. it is NOT open season for personal attacks, flame wars, or other attacks on member's personal opinions.
Thanks.
User Comments
-
I'l start. (Juste to get things rolling)
Political ideology: Anarchist, Anarcho-communist, Libertarian Socialist, progressive. It has several different names, but generally speaking, I want no government or State control, decentralized personal governing, I am anti-capitalist and prefer a barter/gift economy with few exceptions and support collaborative efforts on all things. However, realizing that I don't live in an Anarchist world, I regularly settle or compramise for things that are at the very least in the best interest of people, even if it means embracing some government control or intervention. Usually of capitalistic enterprises.
Personal philosophy: Anarchist, Anarcho-tribalist, Pagan.
I live my life to the best of my ability in a way that coincides with my personal and religious beliefs. I avoid capitalistic trade and ventures (particularly large companies who are unethical) to the best of my ability, I live in a DIY world where I hone my skills at various trades to be as self reliant as humanely possible, I am working on becoming ecologicallly self sufficient, and as "green" as possible, and I general apply myself to Anarchist principles as much as I can. For example: I don't obey laws because they are laws. I act in reasonable and responsible ways, and in most cases that automatically puts me into a law abiding state of bieng, although for different reasons than most.
My daily life is informed by logical reasoning (if I do A, B is likely to happen, do I want to deal with B?) and I barter or trade as much as I can.
My political ideologies are different from my personal philosophies in the sense that I am far more Anarchistic in my dialy life because I can be, but on a grander scale, I understand that Anarchism will not happen in my life time, and so I work to promote the basic ideals, while also understanding and arguing, even, that some forms of government intervention are still needed at this stage.
Both ideals inform the other equally, and while they don't always reconcile, they do allow me as a person to grow and progress.
Your turn!-
@Anok - you are nutjob Anarchist!!!!!!!!! Oh wait, you said no insults...
I saw this thread and it intrigued me, unfortunately I don't have the time at this moment to give it the proper concentration it deserves. I will make my position known soon, though.
And Anok, I just wanted to throw at least ONE insult out there, and I knew you wouldn't get offended.
-
Ha! Do your worst!
I look forward to seeing your response.
-
-
As a historian I'm kind of a voyeur. I like to watch.
As a citizen I vote Democratic, whereby I vary between left and center depending on the issue. Call me pragmatic.
Philosophically? I don't usually think about politics in those terms, but I do believe that this nation could be a lot better than it is, starting with health care, which should not be a privilege. Human rights issues matter to me, such as same sex marriage, but I find myself willing to make compromises when it comes to China. Call it Realpolitik.
Culturally? I grew up in what once was a Republican state (but not like the GOP today), New Hampshire, but I blend progressive American traditions with many years of experience in Germany, whose own progressive political traditions have also rubbed off on me, despite (or because of) having lived in rather conservative bastions.-
I was thinking a bit more about this. My political pragmatism relates to my historical perspective. In foreign affairs, for example, I believe that the U.S. would be naive to believe it could impose massive changes from outside, that normally have to be the result of longer-term civilizational processes. Iraq was a prime example. Bush talked about bringing democracy to the Middle East via one little war, and he did not even consider the potential impact on our policies on one of the most significant civilizational questions of that region: the relationship of Sunniism and Shiaism.
In the domestic political sphere, I understand that some things take time. Health insurance has taken some sixty years, and maybe it will take longer. But I'm less tolerant of policies that deny people more basic human rights. And I have zero tolerance for those who believe that security trumps liberty and human rights in this country. After all, habeas corpus has a very long tradition in the United States and its constitutional forefathers, Great Britain and England. Why throw it out after 9/11? Why go back to pre-Enlightenment times on the question of torture?
I'm also a secularist. Secularism is not anti-religion. It simply focusses on things in this world, which is the only thing that politics should be involved in, not the hereafter, which is the realm of religion -
Some of you brought up economics. (Barter, trade.) I belong to a CSA (community sponsored agriculture). We support one main farmer (and a few others for specific items), sound agricultural practices, and the environment. In turn we get good food and cut out the middle man in the process.
-
Thanks Mark.
Does your personal life, philosophies, religion (or belief structure) help you to inform your political view, vice versa, or none of the above? Do you find that you live life more towards your political ideas (no matter how non partisan ) or do your political ideals just come as a natural consequence of your personal life?
I guess i'm just trying ot get more into how we live our own lives, and how we percieve progress or life in the political arena, and if they are the same, different, or some variation thereof. -
I'm not 100% clear on what the link is, but the private and political are more or less in sync. If I started thinking out loud here in any detail, however, I would have to bring my family into it, which I shouldn't be doing on the web.
-
There should be some link - I would be hard pressed to believe that someone with A personal philosophy would be inclined to be politically active in a way that negates their own personal beliefs.
Like...an Anarchist on a personal level who campaigns for the ultra right conservative party. It just doesn't make sense
But I'm sure there are differences, too. Like i mentioned in my own explanaition - I practice what I believe in my private life as much as humanly possible, but politically I have to scale back a bit because on a grand scale, my personal philosophies are not always feasible.
And so, I tend to get crap from both sides at various times for my seemingly different points of view -
Yeah, I don't have to live with those kinds of disparities. Using your terms, my political ideology and personal philosophy are more or less in sync. Of course, they cover separate areas of life, so I suppose they wouldn't have to be, but they are. The former has to do with my public and civic self. The latter more my private self, or my public self in the workplace and in social settings where politics play no role.
-
Oh c'mon Anok. Is it really that far fetched to see a anarchist/atheist running for the Constitution party? -
Yeah, I think a lot of my philosophy comes from being a populist conservative who has lived in a liberal bastion (Seattle, WA) that is also oddly libertarian at times. I still love reading "The Stranger" though.
-
-
Anarcho-Communist, Mutualist. I am against the state in all of its forms, as they are all varying ways of oppressing people, whether that is psychologically, economically or physically. I have no reliance or faith in a state to do anything really and truly good, or I would be a Marxist. I believe that Marx's economic ideas are great (collectively run manufacturing and other mass public works projects run in a decentralized way) but the idea of a dictatorship by the proletariat doesn't sit well with me at all, so I reject Marxism as applicable in that respect.
Living the Anarchist Revolution that I desire to see in my daily life has made me a far better and more caring person. Counter-Economics, bartering, mutual aid and more make up daily practices of living how I want to live, out from under the thumb of the people who have the guns and the property.
I identify with no party, and I pledge allegiance to no flag, only the flag of everyone, everyone as a human.-
Thanks Wrench.
Do you find that as you live your personal life more and more on an Anarchist -off the grid - level that your political ideas become more extreme, more mellowed or not affected?
I know with me, some of my life experiences help inform my political ideas in the sense of experiencing something to an extent where I know it can work - or even expereincing something so that I know it won't work (yet). -
The problem is that this kind of economic policy (Marxist) doesn't really work. To try to put it in more understandable words and not entirely boring to people... Producers lean on consumers buying habits which are signals that tell them what to produce and when, etc. When the government takes over they now have to do the work of all producers to accurately watch the signals of consumers. This means government must be at least 100% the size of all businesses or they perform this ineffectively which then otherwise results in the wrong things produced in the wrong quantities at the wrong times.
-
-
I have a couple blogs on the subject -
Shameless self-promotion..:-) -
I've been over this subject before. Ultimately people become confused, and I refer them there anyway.
-
Feel free to discuss any of it if you want to here, though. An dyes, you can link drop if you have posts that are the brevity challenged version of what you're saying in here
-
"brevity challenged"... lol
rightsofman1789.blogspot.com/2009/04/jacobin.html
rightsofman1789.blogspot.com/2009/04/king-numbers-new-clothes.html
really, anything from my "Righs of Mankind" blog is essentially an extrusion of my political philosophy
-
-
Politically = Libertarian / Traditional (in the tradition of the founding fathers) Conservative
Personal = may be I'll get to more later, but as far as far as spiritual beliefs go I'm a Christian in a sort of neo -/Kierkegaard mishmash.
That's all from me for now.-
That was supposed to be neo-Kant/Kierkegaard
-
Interesting, I'd like to hear more about your political and philosophical beliefs, and how they inform/influence each other. (If they do!)
-
I'm going to keep this in a nutshell for here as to not flood the darn thing and this can go further if you wish otherwise in an email or something.
As far as Kant goes when it came to his reasoning of God, etc. I agree in that there is no logical proof for God or against it in the sense of God itself. It's history of influence on peoples there is a load of archaeological evidence, but as far as making an absolute between that and God directly is entirely thin if not absent. So in my mind you logically might call me a Kantian agnostic. But at the same time when you take the need to apply that logic to experience I find this: If I take one stance and I am right my afterlife goes well, but if I am wrong and there is no afterlife what did I lose. So it only makes logical sense to choose the position which is there most beneficial. As far as Kant and politics go I believe that we should be using enlightened studies and true critiques to pursue policy and studying those of the past. I think we have strayed too far from intellectuals in legislation as the founding fathers strived for.
In my heart I definitely am inspired by Kierkegaard and truly feel that my beliefs are correct. "The present age is essentially a sensible age, devoid of passion ... The trend today is in the direction of mathematical equality, so that in all classes about so and so many uniformly make one individual". That is a very classic Kierkegaard quote and I have found that this stance will generally always be true. Most people are apathetic or moderate in views which applies for the lack of passion. Modern day math is replaced by science and the uniformity comes with reverting back to uniform governments and social policies. To me as a Christian it is a way of life, not a religion. The church is the body of Christ not an institutionalized buildings/organizations in which is religiously transformed out of original intent. The organization is only meant for congregation and the obvious benefits that come from there, at the same time you put that kind of power into peoples hands and the imperfection of humanity takes hold, therefore corrupting it. Yes everything I do is influenced by God and Christ, and where you think that might be controversial this is where I have to wrap this up.
To far right conservatives who justify our wars scripture proves Christ taught love and "turning the other cheek". Turning the other cheek meant offering up the other to your adversaries rather than striking back. In direct contrast to this, it does not mean turning a blind eye while you bomb the **** out of them. This also ties well into philosophies of the founding fathers. In a previous post I put up a quote from Henry Clay which clarifies that point it what it means to truly be free and present that hope to others.
I'm done for now. -
Another person who likes Kant, we should start a fan club!! Critique of Pure Reason anyone??
-
Liberty, why are you not in the religion debate group?!
That was a lot, I'll have to digest - but very interesting. It's time to go now, fo rme. So as Tigger would say Ta-Ta for now! -
I do not have a problem with Jesus's teachings... or the individual beliefs of individuals. Far be it from me to condemn such. What I do take issue with is the doctrine of propagation, which preys on the unfortunate and uneducated, as well as the excess of public officials who seek to become the Ayatollah of a Christian Republic
-
-
Anok and I have had this discussion before, but for everybody else on the board:
Political ideology: Right Populist. I believe in limited constrained government that wields enough power over the business sectors to prevent the most crippling abuse while still being crippled itself by extensive legal entanglement and overcomplicated procedures. I believe in low taxes, gun rights, unlimited freedom of speech, religion and assembly, local government and a powerful defense sector. I don't believe we should get rid of the government, I just believe we should tie it up and leave it to the handful of things it is truly neccesarry for.
Eventually I hope this tie up will trade out our current federalist system to a bottom-up system of local support for national government, hence my confederate (confederation) flag.
Personal Philosophy: Mildly Tolstoyan Christian who believes in loving life, loving God (in Tolstoy's eyes they are equivalent), loving your neighbor, checking historical forces, and really excelling with your life. I do not believe in pacifism but I do believe that the love of violence is wrong. I believe that God is active in the world and if we receive the Spirit in to our lives wholeheartedly we will live purposefully, joyfully, and succesfully beyond our wildest imaginations. I believe in the resurrection of the dead and hope that God will love my actions, and I'm always searching for a better heart, humillity, and those aspects of goodness I am missing.-
Thanks Jeremy. That was a nicely summed up overview of many of our conversations, well done!
-
-
"What is your political ideology? Do you associate with a party? An idea?"
My political ideology is conservatism. I don't really associate with the Republican party of today. Actually, I vote both Dem and Repub, so I guess you would have called me a Reagan Democrat were this the 80's. I come from southern parents who came from the Great Depression and my dad fought in WWII in the Pacific Theater. He was a Marine in the first invasion of Okinawa and is to this day, a dyed-in-the-wool Democrat. He is 83 and cannot understand my "conservatism," even though we share the same values. He and I are both Christians, believe in the family as a cornerstone of society and also that the best way to judge a man is by how he keeps his word. He is 83, though and gets testy with me when I say he is a conservative, lol.
I suppose this also explains my personal philosophy as well.
I believe that a strict interpretation of the Constitution should always be adhered to. If it comes up short, then that is what the amendment process was invented for. So far it seems to be a pretty amazing document that has held up quite well.
I believe in being skeptical of my government and contrary to what has been said about me on BC, I do not think Bush was correct in every thing he did. I disagree with many of his policies. Suffice it to say, he kept us safe after 9/11 and I shudder to think what I would have done had I been faced with that as an American President. No one saw it coming, and I am not referring to the intelligence community, I mean you and me and the average citizen. I keep remembering the days immediately afterward when I kept looking up at the skies and didn't see any of the jet contrails that normally litter the sky. It was an eerily empty sky.
Conversely I do not agree with everything Obama has done or is doing. I have agreed on his ending the corporate tax credit for overseas operations. That was a tool to help spread capitalism during the Cold War and it is high time it ended. Also I agree with his wanting to reform the credit card companies and their practices.
I dunno, how is that Anok? -
It's crap! All crap!
I had to laugh about your cantankerous father and you on politics, because my father and I are the same, only reversed roles. His childhood was just into the end of the depression, he is a veteran, and a traditional conservative, although non religious. He calls me "his little bleeding heart liberal"
But we do like the same cigarettes, whiskey, and cigars, so it's all good
I wonder though - I wonder how many of us broke from our parents political affiliations and went the opposite direction? I did, both parents of mine are conservatives - although my mother in her aging years would fit nicely in with the blood curdling extreme right neo-con crowd at the moment. (And even as an atheist, she supports religious doctrines being made into law *headdesk*). Every child in the family though - all 7 of us - have turned into liberal/progressives or left leaning political activists of some sort. Me being the farthest left, of course, but some of my siblings are not too far behind me
It's an interesting theory/question - unlike religion, I wonder if the constant shift in political alignment has to do with the affiliation of parents... -
Well, I'm not sure. That would be a good psychological study, I think. I know that as for my Dad, he and I aren't that far apart, it is just that the Democrat party of old held a lot of what are now considered conservative values, God, family, country, etc...
-
This is true, the role and/or parameters of the parties have shifted quite a bit.
I feel the need to research...but I don't have the time
Maybe someone else would? *wink wink* -
sure... a good example is the right to keep in bear arms. It was a Democratic idea... a toned down version of the "right to revolt" from the French "Rights of Man And Citizen"
-
-
They say that every generation reverses political poles, and there may be some truth there probably due to the percieved errors of the parents (children are exposed to hypocricies and inconsitencies firsthand). Often a person's ideology will change between their coming of age, and when they experience real life.
A quasi-related factoid: Laura Bush (then an 18 year-old Laura Welch) campaigned for Lyndon Johnson in 1964. An 17 year-old Hillary Rodham was a "Goldwater Girl" ("We got to wear cowboy hats. We had a sash that said, you know, I voted AUH2O. I mean, it was really a lot of fun.") for the Barry Goldwater campaign.-
It could be true! I know that my political ideologies started changing in college, and then took a full turn about after college, in fact, it took some very hard life lessons to get me to change my opinions on some things (much to my husband's delight, I might add. He really had a go at me with the "told you so's" )
Just for poo and giggles, how many people on the board here changed political ideologies some time between highschool/college and adult life? How many people have a different political outlook than their parents?
I can count two already - me and Antics. Who else? -
yours changed in college huh? Darned commie professors
my own veiws have changed continuously to some degree. If one doesn't consider new information, one ceases in growing as a person. -
Ha! Actually it was the exposure to a very diverse group of students, in age, race, and nationality that did it Damn that international exposure! (My professors, at least in art school, were slightly weird, drunk, or just outrageous.)
I totally agree with you last sentence though, and I tend to catch a lot of crap about my ever evolving ideas and opinions from both sides -
just giving you crap/perpetuating stereotypes
-
-
Here's an overview of my political philosophy, in as much brevity as possible:
I believe that the porpose of government is to protect the Rights of its citizens. That individuals are--for better of worse--born into the Social Contract which is imposed by society, through which their Natural Rights for Civil Rights as defined by a legal framework.
In that it can hardly be said that one gives consent to such an arrangement of ones full volution, every practicable measure ought to be in place that gives the individual a porportionate say in the terms of the said contract during the days one's life. This however must be mediated by equal rights of all.
Such rightsfall into the following categories:
1) Life: that constraints must be imposed upon threats to an individuals life and physical body; that it can not be the perogative of society or state to deprive the individual of such, so long as one does not impede upon this right in others.
2)Liberty: That arbitrary power over the individual should be neither imposed by the state, nor delegated to any other agency.
3)The Pursuit of Happiness: that to whatever degree practicable, the duties of governing the individual should be delegated to the individual, so long as such power does not greatly impede this right in others.
To some degree, these are inseparable from my personal ethical doctrine of reciprocity, responsibility, and free will -
Wow, I think that's the most concise description I've read from you yet
Thanks! -
thank the good cup of coffee i drank
-
Coffee, the sweet nectar of the Gods
-
-
Sorry I realized my last post didn't save. Anok I'll look into it
-
Awesome!
-
-
Politically, I'm for policies that promote a strong middle class. Personally, I'm against government intervention into our personal lives.-
So would that make you a left-center-rightish person? Or just a libertarian socialist?
-
No, that makes me a democrat.
-
-
Or a Burkeite?
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
