I’m just curious for the new or existing people? Lemmy.ml has taken a hard turn to the right since the reddit exodus. There’s been a lot of pro-imperialist propaganda being posted on world news, and a lot less diversity of opinion. It feels more neoliberal and neo-con to me.
Does anyone want to share what their political leanings are?
I’ll start; I’m anti-imperialist pro-state regulated capitalism. I believe we should have usage based taxes (toll roads, carbon tax) and luxury taxes, and I disagree with wealth taxes for people with less than $250 million. The state should spend more money on consumer protection in all industries (environment, health, finance, etc.) I believe in multipolarity vs. US hegemony.
Syndicalist. A federation of industrial unions could run society as a whole in a way that benefits all.
I’m just gonna call myself a “leftist” and leave it at that
Social Democrat.
Lots of anti monopoly pro consumer regulations. But freedom to have private enterprise. High income and corporate tax. Free healthcare & education. Even rare diseases and university. Corporations can only lease and never own land. Govt ownership of essential industries like electricity, water, gas.
I am a Social Democrat in the European sense. There is nothing wrong with the free market per se, but it is the responsibility of the state to intervene with regulation where necessary (e.g. safety), and the responsibility of the state to provide a stable system of social services, e.g. health care, education, housing.
I’ll point to Austria as an example, where social housing is widespread and high quality and public health care is exceptional and pensions are reasonable. With this backdrop, the market economy is appropriate.
I don’t think the unregulated capitalism of countries like the US is sustainable nor would I want to live under that dysfunctional system.
Be glad that you don’t. It’s as bad as you think. Also, same (regarding ideology).
Uhhh…
Uhhh…
fluid is good except that it also means easy for politicians to manipulate. and zero loyalty for longterm goals that require patience and sacrifice.
I am libertarian.
Less government. Less rules. Less restrictions.
I don’t give a rats ass if you want to smoke pot, get abortions. etc. I support individual rights and freedoms.
I appreciate your point of view, where you didn’t do the common thing of strawmanning the left, especially on gun rights, in an effort to put yourself “in the middle”.
I believe in all those things you do (for a certain definition of “less government”), as well as gun ownership, but I consider myself a Marxist. There’s something really admirable about “old-school libertarians”.
I think things like Right to Repair and Net Neutrality are the line between Libertarians who are good at heart, and the nut jobs. To an Anarcho-Capitalist, a company has the right to license their products under whatever conditions they want; an ISP can give preferential bandwidth to big companies. But a real Libertarian believes that not even companies and contracts can limit a person’s freedoms.
Pretty much somewhere between a centrist and a libertarian. I think government has a bit too much overreach in people’s lives and they screw with people who aren’t harming anyone or just minding their own business.
I won’t go full libertarian or anarchist, because I do recognize the need for government funded services in some areas.
In terms of economics, yeah pretty much a centrist. I think capitalism is the best way of giving everyone an equal opportunity, but also it needs to be regulated here and there with government intervention.
TL;DR Centrist who is a bit more libertarian than others.
i’m a radical extremist voluntaryist anarchist. I believe that if it’s not voluntary, it’s slavery, thus government is slavery. I believe that all transactions between people should be consensual. I believe that people have a right to do what they want as long as they don’t cause damage to anyone. I don’t believe anyone has the right to attack anyone else, to force them to do something they don’t want to do or force them to stop doing something that they want to do if it’s harming no one. but I believe that it is every person’s right and duty to protect themselves against aggression, to whatever extent is necessary to make the aggressor stop.
these principles are timeless and are so simple that even a child can understand them. if everyone started living this way, the world would be set free.
Just conservative not a republican because I feel they’ve lost their way as much as democrats did.
Elephants and asses, screwing the masses.
💀
As I’ve gotten older I find myself being more of a conservative in the true definition of the term: a preference for slow and steady change, caution towards new ideas, and some amount of reverence for tradition.
The issue is that the Republican party is not a Conservative Party. Joe Biden is a Conservative. The Republican party is a party for Reaction and Neoliberalism.
Yeah, very much this. As a scientist, my place on the political spectrum ought to be looking at a proposed change that is supposed to help and demanding “prove it” (and providing said proof when possible within my field). The hard part is then being ready to accept proof when given and swap my stance accordingly from opposition to agreement. This is where conservatives have failed. (People also need to accept that in the real world it’ll probably be imperfect proof and come up with reasonable expectations for what counts as adequate proof, ideally based on expert review.)
But at this point there are many good ideas (like housing-first approaches to homelessness) that are well supported by data but are being held back because of “common sense” and emotions (we can’t just give people free housing!). So instead my place is sitting with the Progressives and saying “holy shit, how can we get conservatives to listen to reason?”
As funny as it seems to say, I feel that “Conservativism” is unfairly maligned. Most of the bad things about what is called “Conservativism” are not really parts of Conservativism at all but are ideologies associated with Conservativism - “Rugged Individualism”, Neoliberalism in general, religious fundamentalism.
We’ll probably disagree on this point (and that’s okay), but you can look at China. China is a very conservative country, with strong cultural values regarding family, social conformism, and civic nationalism. It is Conservativism without Capitalism, Individualism, or Religion.
I have no idea what box I fit into.
- I am generally anti-capitalism. The current system does not benefit human. We are constantly exploited in the name of profits
- vital industries and services need to be nationalized. Capitalism is a race to the bottom when it comes to providing the bare minumum, cutting corners etc.
- people should be free to do what they please as long as it doesn’t hurt other people. To this end, I am pro-inclusion of all walks of life, except for bigots.
- we are rapidly running out of time to prevent an ecological apocalypse. Everything must be done to avoid it
I’m with Track_Shovel on this. No particular political orientation, but I agree on all the issues listed.
Welcome, marxist!
I believe that a social democracy is the best compromise we can make. The market should be able to innovate but rules set in place to protect workers and the environment. Social safety nets so people do not fall into despair - happy people equals less sickness and more productivity.
I believe UBI can play a role but I’m still not sure how exactly, luckily I’m not a politician.
In the end I’ll always vote more to the left, even though I’m well paid I think a society is healthier when there are less major differences in wealth.
With more automation showing up in all different fields, I’m warming up to the idea of UBI or something like it.
Theoretically, more production is happening per human being, so everybody should have a higher standard of living. But (among other issues) people at the top are hoarding an unfair portion of the profits, and UBI seems like a straightforward way to help offset that.
It’s tricky because yeah in theory more production should be happening. I listened to a podcast recently that talked about how kitchens changed during the years. That the initial idea for stuff like washing machines and ironing boards was that women (in that time) would have to spend less time on chores and could be more free (it was argued from a feminist point of view). The reality was that the expectations just went up. Suddenly people expected the towels to be ironed etc.
What podcast? I like a good podcast.
Yeah, I feel like that phenomenon happens elsewhere too. I read the book B.S. Jobs last year, and it talked about is all the (debatably) useless positions popping up at companies - extra layers of management, assistants to make the managers feel important, corporate lawyers that are only there to cause trouble for the other team’s corporate lawyers. Just a whole lot of man-hours spent not making products/services/whatever.
(I wouldn’t say I’m 100% on board with all the book’s arguments, but it sure made me think)
Sorry for the late reply! It was an episode from 99% invisible: https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/the-frankfurt-kitchen/
I lean hard centrist.
Some of my friends think I’m an idealist but I’d argue that’s the point. I vote for whatever would allow us to get to the Star Trek: TNG version of earth. A Post Scarcity society where humans want to better themselves and their communities through each individuals pursuit of their interests unrestricted by any “system”. To get there, I care about improving the lives of the entirety of humanity equally while doing away with the disparity inequality we see. It is undoubtedly true capitalism did raise the average QOL of many many people of the entire world, however, others it put into modern slavery.
I like this idea, but I disagree with the last sentence. The improvement in the average quality of life does not come from the capitalist system, but from technological and scientific progress.
But was that also spurred at least in part often times for the pursuit of profit? I don’t disagree, you have a good point!
Consider how quickly USSR developed after the revolution. It went from an agrarian society to being the first in space while doing most of the work in WW2. USSR accomplished a century’s worth of capitalist development in a few decades.
Working class, independent, American nationalist.
The government should be working for the people, not for corporations. Sadly both parties would rather continue shipping out manufacturing jobs while pretending a few chip factories are a major victory for the working class.
It’s crazy how we spend billions on relief for people in poor countries, but when it comes to helping the American citizen we either “can’t afford it” or are supposed to go on welfare, as if that’s something desirable.
I’m a trans woman and the stuff that affects my life the most deal with are affording food, shelter, healthcare and bills. I’m going to guess that’s the same for the majority of Americans.
I think the “billions on relief in poor countries while we can’t afford helping Americans at home” bit is a false dichotomy. The money spent on other countries isn’t to help their people, it’s to curry favor with foreign governments and advance American empire.
Really, the people who are stealing our rightful wealth are not poor people in other countries (or “welfare queens” at home) but the rich and powerful who aren’t paying their fair share.
It’s not a dichotomy, it’s just an observation of fact. We give corporations so many breaks and benefits, help feed billions across the globe, but can’t seem to focus on giving people worthwhile jobs that they can thrive on. There’s no reason it must be this way.
We clearly do not disagree on where the problem lies.
I just don’t think framing the issue as “Us, the first-world middle class vs. Them, impoverished third-worlders” is a helpful one. We are both victims of Imperialism. Nationalism can be important for these third-world countries but I think it’s counterproductive in America as it exists.
