<p>What is your political affiliation?</p>
<p>I'm socially liberal but I'm going to be registered Republican once I turn 18 because I totally don't agree with the Democrats.</p>
<p>You?</p>
<p>Hm...
Nihilist Techno-Progressive?
libertarian who doesn't believe in free will? :p
hard to say...</p>
<p>but i guess libertarian... (but definitely not mainstream american libertarianism). my views are probably a combo of views from both Immortality</a> Institute and American</a> Nihilist Underground Society</p>
<p>neither Republican nor Democrat. i'm sympathetic to some forms of libertarianism but i really don't know what the "optimal" level of governmental inference is so I'm officially out of touch with politics. at this point both parties aren't embracing the fact that public education, social security, affirmative action, and most social programs are fundamentally flawed, but it's possible that there are ways to reform such programs without abolishing them (and by reform i mean complete and total overhaul). also, my moral axioms are different from the moral axioms of most other people anyhow (case in point: i don't subscribe to a notion of human dignity).</p>
<p>if I voted for someone, i'd cast a write-in ballot for Friedrich Nietzche (who cares that he's dead)</p>
<p>philosophically though, i'm a techno-progressive (incidentally the exact opposite position from the unabomber), as I see technology as the solution to most of our everyday problems, even if it results in the subordination of human to machine. i used to be a misanthropic environmentalist + animal rights activist, but eh, it's not in my best interests to be that way (though I still sympathize with those who are that way)</p>
<p>"Hard-core Libertarian" according to my AP US Gov't teacher. Ron Paul is the only hope. No Paul and I vote Libertarian.</p>
<p>but eh, i kind of believe that it's probably good that different countries have different forms of governments. maybe some countries are more suited to be social welfare countries. hell, they'd probably be good countries to retire to especially since they're all in the north and i'll flee to the north in case global warming gets too bad. :p i'd heard really bad things (from frrph and others) about the inflexible educational systems that some of them have, but i still had to go through an inflexible american educational system, so not much of a difference there</p>
<p>still, there should be a country that's most conducive to scientific and technological creativity (and i'd hope the US will stay that way...)</p>
<p>thus i MIGHT go democratic if it meant the difference between a pro-stem cell research president and an anti-stem cell research one (agencies shouldn't be so dependent on federal funding, but if it means that the research will go faster, then so it shall be ). otherwise i'm abstaining. oh and if the republican presidents want to squander MORE FREAKING DOLLARS IN IRAQ, then maybe i would go democrat but only for 2008</p>
<p>but really, i don't care and im not even going to try to register</p>
<p>Libertarian, definitely. It's my sincere belief that government exists only to protect the right to life, liberty, property and pursuit of happiness of the governed, and only exists by the consent of the governed (a little bit of Lockeian philosophy here). For example, government has a duty to make sure people can eat and have decent healthcare and have a roof over their heads. But they have no business reaching into the pockets of the middle class to do so. Economically, those societies where income is NOT redistributed in any way and there's a huge disparity between the rich and everyone else usually become unstable and collapse upon themselves. </p>
<p>I personally think government has no business looking into people's bank records, regulating free speech, regulating what a person can or cannot do in the privacy of their own homes (including prostitution-as long as the relationship is consensual and the financial transaction was in good faith-and extramarital sex-as long as all parties involved consent), they need to stop censoring the media, all the other crap governments keep trying to do. I'm also against gun control. Not because of NRA, but because of the second amendment, the right to bear arms. Government has no business telling doctors what treatments doctors can or can't do. And a fetus IS NOT A REAL HUMAN UNTIL IT IS BORN. And a HUMAN BEING HAS THE RIGHT TO DO AS THEY PLEASE WITH THEIR LIVES, INCLUDING END THEIR OWN LIVES, and physicians have the right to help them.</p>
<p>I say privatize all education (voucher system), get rid of school "districts", significantly amend the tax law-7 brackets ranging from 0 to 20%, no exemptions or credits, only allow adjustments for home mortgage interest and educational expenses (private school included). Get rid of social security, nationalize healthcare, but allow people to get private healthcare if they want. Get rid of the death penalty.</p>
<p>The government SHOULD proactively seek an alternative to oil, the government SHOULD provide for environmental regulation so that companies can't spew out toxic crap all over the place, the government SHOULD regulate food and product safety. The government SHOULD NOT declare wars on other countries until all other avenues have been exhausted over and over again, the government DOES NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to draft people into military service, the government SHOULD NOT be immune from lawsuits, the government SHOULD NOT restrict the right of people and ideas to move freely. The government SHOULD also proactively encourage scientific research.</p>
<p>Find me a candidate that fits all of these views and I might start to care.</p>
<p>I honestly think all the candidates are politicians and I don't care.</p>
<p>Basically, I think everyone should have the right to do whatever the hell they want. Including entering into contracts with individuals or groups of individuals (some of these "contracts" are called "societies" or "governments"). So as long as each person in a society either</p>
<p>(a) explicitly consented to join a society before joining it, OR
(b) is free to leave at any time</p>
<p>I view all forms of government as equally valid (including, say, monarchies or theocracies), and think how good a government is depends on the needs of the people living in it. Just as Adam might hang out with jocks but Betty might prefer nerds, Person A might like living under a democracy, while person B would prefer an absolute monarchy. Just as there are certain people I'd rather not hang out with, and certain contractors with whom I'd rather not deal, there are certain types of governments I'd personally prefer to live under. But nonetheless -- all (consensual) governments are valid (to different people). To claim otherwise would be to prevent people from entering into that sort of contract, and that would be wrong.</p>
<p>I guess you could call me "libertarian," but it's not how most people think of the label. So you should really just ignore it.</p>
<p>Nietzsche wasn't a true nihilist. Read Part III of On the Genealogy of Morality if you haven't already. I'm convinced that most people read Parts I and II and decide to call it a day (at least this is what happened in my phil class). Part III is the section on asceticism/nihilism - and he is really quite critical of it. He sees nihilism as an inevitable part of man's struggle for his humanity, and that this phase must be overcome.
(But I would vote for him too). </p>
<p>Politically?
I'm a moderate - it depends on the issue really.
I suppose I subscribe to the views of E. H. Carr when he tells us that "sound political thought contains elements of both utopia and reality". I also don't believe that he's a positivist, and I like that critical aspect of his thinking, but that may be because I've grown up in the post-positivist generation. I've been conditioned to think that way, ironically enough. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Nietzsche wasn't a true nihilist. Read Part III of On the Genealogy of Morality if you haven't already. I'm convinced that most people read Parts I and II and decide to call it a day (at least this is what happened in my phil class). Part III is the section on asceticism/nihilism - and he is really quite critical of it. He sees nihilism as an inevitable part of man's struggle for his humanity, and that this phase must be overcome.
(But I would vote for him too)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I know - Nietzsche wasn't a true nihilist in his sense of the term. Although he is popular among nihilists. :)</p>
<p>Libertarian/classic liberal</p>
<p>Unaffiliated, I have so many differing views on things. Give me the candidate that I agree with most on either side of the political spectrum...and thats who I'll be voting for.</p>
<p>Social: liberal.
Economic: conservative.</p>
<p>Oh god, I'm surrounded by populists. By socially liberal do you people mean that you're pro-choice, pro gay rights, or something like that. Or by socially liberal do you mean, what I was taught in school, that you support increased government involvement in personal affairs?</p>
<p>By the way I'm probably a social democrat but I have no doubt that the system would fail in America in its current state.</p>
<p>Oh, god. lol. Definitely the former.</p>
<p>Anarcho-socialist. I believe the social institutions of society should have as little hierarchy as possible, if any at all. (including an opposition to capitalism, a pre-requisite for anyone that I would call an anarchist) This comes from my beliefs about ethical philosophy and other related subjects.</p>
<p>Socially liberal, fiscally moderate with a liberal tinge</p>
<p>Moderate, leaning to the right</p>