Political philosophies that don't fit in today's pre-baked boxes...

[Budoka]

Now, I'm sure some of you are probably already thinking that this thread is a horrible idea, but since the ones on constitutionalism and religion have been going fairly well on the whole, I'm hoping this one can work too.

I guess I'm just going to describe my own case. I'm a progressive libertarian, but with a strong environmentalist side and a strain of cultural nationalism. I don't necessarily believe in government as an efficient tool to promote the latter two, but on the other hand I care about them too much to simply put them on the back-burner.

Although, when I say I'm a progressive, I'm only talking about the current political understanding of the word. On a more universal level, I don't believe in any sort of end point to the odyssey of human history, which is to say that to me there is no such thing as progress. In other words, "progress" is neither good nor bad, it just doesn't exist as far as I'm concerned.

Similarly, when I say I'm an environmentalist, a more accurate way to put things would be to say that I have a strong interest in scientific ecological preservation, which is sometimes very different from political "green" activism.

As for cultural nationalism, that describes a desire to preserve the traditions and particularities of my country (France), and in particular a love for what we call "high culture". Which isn't to say that I deride manual labor, like a lot of French right-wingers unfortunately do, and, for that matter, so does a particular strain of well-to-do left-wingers who I'm not going to expand on. In fact, I've done my own fair share of public street garbage cleaning (for free at that).

Now, having read this previous paragraph, some might be tempted to put me in a fairly usual conservative box, but that doesn't work, since I despise conventional religions such as the various strains of Christianity and Islam, and consider most of their so-called moral teachings to be outright toxic, hence my identification as a progressive libertarian.

So, with all that in mind, where do I fit on the French political spectrum? The honest answer is that I don't fit at all. French political parties, from the most radical socialists to the most radical conservatives, have a visceral hatred of free market economy and liberal philosophy as a whole, which is, yes, quite the irony. Well, that's excepting a minority of business-obsessed individuals who view the tool that is capitalism as a self-contained ideal, which I would say is actually an even more vain mentality.

Left-wing environmentalists are somehow convinced that fossil fuels like coal and oil cause less pollution than up-to-date nuclear power (in which they are wrong), while right-wing environmentalist insist on defending a "country lifestyle" and a strong agriculture as their form of nature preservation, which is basically the equivalent of labeling a chalk-white brick "pitch black".

The political class as a whole has no literary or historical culture to speak of. Listening to those people, you'd think that the world of before World War I never even existed. Things aren't much better on the civilian side, where we're apparently convinced that spending your time in novels and newspapers makes you a serious reader, which... talk about a displacement of standards.

Thus, I continue to vote my favorite manifesto at every election, and in most cases I end up getting exactly what I expected from that, which is to say nothing of value.
So, does anyone else here feel like they're in a similarly fringe situation relative to their own national politics, or, for that matter, international politics?

[Li'l devil]

I would tell you my political views, but they're too controversial... so controversial, in fact, that political parties, that share my views are banned all over the world.
So, yeah, my ideology is 'out of the box'.

[Xerge]

ChekaAgent said:

I would tell you my political views, but they're too controversial... so controversial, in fact, that political parties, that share my views are banned all over the world.
So, yeah, my ideology is 'out of the box'.

88?

[Li'l devil]

Xerge said:

88?

No, not exactly. Ok, in the same direction, but not exactly that. 88 is way too radical, but I'm not radicalist. I actually don't know how my ideology is called.. I will probably look that up now.

[june gloom]

"I'm not a neo-nazi, but I'm in that direction..."

This explains so much about the both of you.

[Xerge]

dethtoll said:

This explains so much about the both of you.

You know, the fact that I'm familiar with neo-nazism doesn't necessarily mean I am one.

I also wonder what "direction" ChekaAgent is refering to, because there are different neo-nazi ideals, I mean it's not like they are all unified in one single political party or philosophy and there are actually different ideas of what being an "aryan" means.

[PureSlime]

[june gloom]

A+ image, stealing

Xerge said:

You know, the fact that I'm familiar with neo-nazism doesn't necessarily mean I am one.

This is true, as I also know what "88" stands for, but I find it a little suspect that you didn't just outright say "neo-nazi." I admit I may be grasping at straws, but then there's this:

Xerge said:

there are different neo-nazi ideals, I mean it's not like they are all unified in one single political party or philosophy and there are actually different ideas of what being an "aryan" means.

A neo-nazi with slightly differing dogma is still a neo-nazi.

[Li'l devil]

Xerge said:

I also wonder what "direction" ChekaAgent is refering to, because there are different neo-nazi ideals, I mean it's not like they are all unified in one single political party or philosophy and there are actually different ideas of what being an "aryan" means.

When I said "that direction", I meant that I'm rightist (i think).
And I'm not neo-nazi in any way, because this movement promotes things like racism, antisemitism etc. and I'm not racist. I am xenophobian in some way, but that doesn't mean that I hate other nations.

Upd: And I don't worship Hitler.

Upd: Shit, I knew posting in this thread would be a bad idea.

[june gloom]

There's a difference between being right-wing and being a neo-nazi, if only as a matter of degrees. To be perfectly honest though, while academically I acknowledge the difference, I find it to be rather irrelevant in practical terms.

[Budoka]

Aryan means Indo-Iranian (as in, Persia), so all them are pretty uninformed anyway. Not that we didn't know that. Actually, speaking of that, I've seen sources claiming that the Phoenix is either of Greek, Chinese or Persian mythological origin. The latter seems the most credible, so if that's the case, how does Iran not have a Phoenix as their national symbol? I mean come on.

Other than that, I would rather like to hear about ideological strains of a less... kooky variety.

[Jon]

dethtoll said:

There's a difference between being right-wing and being a neo-nazi, if only as a matter of degrees. To be perfectly honest though, while academically I acknowledge the difference, I find it to be rather irrelevant in practical terms.

Umm, there's an *enormous* difference between being right-wing and being a neo-nazi. For a start, the 1D left/right axis is not enough to adequately define something as hateful as nazism. Consider spending some time at politicalcompass.org/faq]politicalcompass.org.

[Budoka]

My favorite quiz for political self-appraisal actually has THREE separate left-right axes, but there's no English-speaking version of it. But even three axes is still very reductive, as demonstrated when it couldn't find a proper fit for my ideas as of recently (I even tried it twice). Yet there are no unsolvable contradictions in my positioning that I can see, which means it's a perfectly legitimate positioning.

By the way, before someone points it out, I know that representational art is forbidden in Islam. But Persian civilization has existed for centuries before becoming yet another Middle-Eastern theocracy, so one would hope there are traces of that left in today's world.

[Xerge]

I think that all the people who can actually exercise political power (or any kind of power for that matter) won't do anything they don't want to do in spite of how much they appeal to democracy and the interests of the people, so I'm more inclined to a sincere and open authoritarianism, because at least it gives you the possibility of confrontation and rebellion when politicians decide to do something.

[Budoka]

Woah, Xerge, and I thought I was old-school. To re-use the French example, I've always felt like I didn't care whether we use the current Republican model or a Constitutional Monarchy model so long as the Catholic Church stays far away from it. But since the current - Republican - state has been consistently using tax money to feed Jewish, Christian and Muslim worship grounds in spite of our proclaimed national secularism, I suppose the point is moot.

Truth be told, you might have something going here. An autocratic government would at the very least make daily life a lot more eventful, although weighing the pros and cons of that, I'm not sure I genuinely want it.

I feel closer to those who favor direct democracy as the alternative, but considering some of the points I made in my opening post, that's a can of worms in its own way... It all reminds me of this quote from Napoleon:

"A Republic of thirty million men!...With our manners, our vices! How is it possible? That is a fancy of which the French are at present full, but it will pass away like all the others. What they want is Glory and gratified Vanity; but as for Liberty, they do not understand what it means."

I don't know that I believe that, but it's certainly worth thinking about.

[VGamingJunkie]

I'm a Constitutional Conservative, I'm a heavy believer in the Bill of Rights and believe that electing our representatives with a free market system based on Capitalism is the best system mankind has ever come up with as it provides the most freedom and the most opportunity. The only flaw is misinformed/lazy voters but no system is perfect, you'd have to have totalitarian control to overcome that and it isn't worth it.

[esselfortium]

Can we just elect this guy to every available office? He has a great election pitch: He hates everyone and wants to annihilate everything, but if you call the phone number on his posters he'll let you help him overthrow the government.

[CARRiON]

esselfortium said:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=df7jOd6HcIY

Can we just elect this guy to every available office? He has a great election pitch: He hates everyone and wants to annihilate everything, but if you call the phone number on his posters he'll let you help him overthrow the government.

Hmm, considering I'm misanthropic, cynical and nihilistic he sounds perfect-o!

[VGamingJunkie]

esselfortium said:

Can we just elect this guy to every available office? He has a great election pitch: He hates everyone and wants to annihilate everything, but if you call the phone number on his posters he'll let you help him overthrow the government.

Yeesh, and I thought American politics were cynical. XD

[Decay]

We, the fundamentalists of the Enlightenment, are no better than any other movement, we just have a different direction, one that we proclaimed to be the best.

There is no mosaic of cultures, no melting pots, as our beliefs are centralized around value, and our god is the dollar. There is nothing that cannot have a price. Your petty squabbles over semantics and 1 dimensional labels are nothing in the face of centralized value. If you desire to fit yourself into a label, you are as 1 dimensional as that label, if you still belief in left/right, you are as 1 dimensional as that very concept.

[Li'l devil]

Decay said:

if you still belief in left/right, you are as 1 dimensional as that very concept.

Well, I believe there's also up and down, so... I'm 2 dimensional, I guess.

[Tarnsman]

I'd like to take a moment to congratulate EE for having actual neo-nazis in it.

dethtoll said:

There's a difference between being right-wing and being a neo-nazi, if only as a matter of degrees. To be perfectly honest though, while academically I acknowledge the difference, I find it to be rather irrelevant in practical terms.

That's like saying "there's a difference between being left-wing and being a Stalinist but the difference is so minor it's irrelevant". Especially considering that left and right are all over the place depending on what country you're in. If I lived in Europe I'd be considered right wing but in American political terms I might as well be an actual communist.

[Budoka]

Decay said:

if you still belief in left/right, you are as 1 dimensional as that very concept.

I define myself as left-wing on some issues but right-wing on others for the same reasons I define myself as a progressive while not believing in any kind of progress. I just use those terms the way people usually understand them for the sake of convenience.

@Esselfortium: Heh, I forgot all about Toyama. I don't remember how I first found out about him for that matter. There is nothing for me to admire in the perspective he presents, but he sure is entertaining. Giving the middle finger to a Japanese audience... I can't begin to fathom what that implies.

[Graf Zahl]

I believe the entire political system has become far too rigid, where 'conservative' means some things I fully agree with but also others I utterly despise (that'd be 'conservative' in the sense it was originally meant, not the right-wing extremist bullshit it has devolved into in the US. - that I utterly despise in its entirety) Same for the left side of the spectrum. Even communism has some ideas I like, but the ideology as a whole is a recipe for disaster and should be abandoned.

An even bigger problem, of course, is that most politicians are just idiots, regardless where they stand.

[Linguica]

Love to see white supremacists / alt-righters using these forums to subtly try and connect with one another while staying under the radar!!

[Li'l devil]

"Not exactly a Neo-Nazi, but in the same direction"

Seriously?? And now my title is this??

[Wovenloaf]

ChekaAgent said:

I would tell you my political views, but they're too controversial... so controversial, in fact, that political parties, that share my views are banned all over the world.
So, yeah, my ideology is 'out of the box'.

I'm interested to know what you're referring to here, unless you were just being funny. So far you've claimed to be rightist without being a neo-nazi, so that doesn't explain how your views are so controversial that the according parties are banned all over the world. Seems like standard conservatism to me.

[Kontra Kommando]

Jon said:

Umm, there's an *enormous* difference between being right-wing and being a neo-nazi. For a start, the 1D left/right axis is not enough to adequately define something as hateful as nazism. Consider spending some time at politicalcompass.org/faq]politicalcompass.org.

According to Polticalcompass.org Hitler is considered to be more of a centrist than a radical on the left or right for economics. Though he was a hardcore authoritarian when it came to matters of order.

Edit: site link

[kuchitsu]

Why do people even claim that they are left or right or whatever? That sounds like a very good way to make yourself an easy target. "I'm with libertarians!" - "OK, here is something a libertarian said\did, now defend it". You see this all the time, especially in debates on religion. Who wants to deal with questions like that? Better just stand by yourself, don't take any sides.

[Li'l devil]

Wovenloaf said:

I'm interested to know what you're referring to here, unless you were just being funny. So far you've claimed to be rightist without being a neo-nazi, so that doesn't explain how your views are so controversial that the according parties are banned all over the world. Seems like standard conservatism to me.

Well, I really felt like a nazi when I typed that post, but disregard that; I was just being stupid. My actual views a not really controversial, maybe just unusual. You see, I want there to be a strict hierarchy and a strict division into classes in the society.
Well, most capitalist states have practically similar system (rich people rule over poor people), but I believe it's not pronounced enough. Classes hierarchy should be like in medieval, where there's a strict division between social classes and one class completely rules over another. So, yeah, maybe I'm a bit conservative.