US Politics Conservative or liberal

[tryptakid]

So you’re saying people should have voted for Kamala cos she was the lesser of two evils. Okay, I kinda agree. Hate it but reals is reals.

I just don’t see where the Trump stuff being no biggie fits your point. That shit was kinda buckwild tbh.

 

[tryptakid]

You raise an interesting point, which is that among conservatives, and among liberals, they also accuse each other of being too conservative or too liberal. As a moderate/centrist, I have experienced this!

The conservatives of today would be considered very liberal 30-50 years ago.

I find that conservative/liberal dichotomies are too restrictive to really mean anything for me. I consider myself liberal, but I take issue with authoritarian liberalism (the US democratic party/new labor) almost as much as I take issue with conservatives. I find, on the whole, that far-xxxx on either side tend to be intolerable, yet my personal views would be considered somewhere in the broad 'far left' sphere. I don't try to be an activist, and I also feel like I learn more by listening to conservative views and seeking commonality between us as this is the way to bridge gaps and get beyond the pop-politik.

I'd define my views as: fiscally liberal, socially liberal, anti authoritarian, and pro community based solutions (bottom up vs. top down). Mutualism, libertarian socialism, and democratic socialism are the things I would be most likely to feel comfortable associating with, while fascism, communism, corporatism, MAGA, technocracy, and oligarchy are the perspectives I disagree most with.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

the problem is that we would still have a police state and a genocide that we fund, not much of a change besides being placated

 

[paranoid android]

I find that conservative/liberal dichotomies are too restrictive to really mean anything for me. I consider myself liberal, but I take issue with authoritarian liberalism (the US democratic party/new labor) almost as much as I take issue with conservatives. I find, on the whole, that far-xxxx on either side tend to be intolerable, yet my personal views would be considered somewhere in the broad 'far left' sphere. I don't try to be an activist, and I also feel like I learn more by listening to conservative views and seeking commonality between us as this is the way to bridge gaps and get beyond the pop-politik.

I'd define my views as: fiscally liberal, socially liberal, anti authoritarian, and pro community based solutions (bottom up vs. top down). Mutualism, libertarian socialism, and democratic socialism are the things I would be most likely to feel comfortable associating with, while fascism, communism, corporatism, MAGA, technocracy, and oligarchy are the perspectives I disagree most with.

How can Liberalism be anything but authoritarian though? All capitalism is by it's very nature authoritarian

 

[tryptakid]

I think of things like public benefit corporations as an example of value based capitalism -

 

[Shambles]

You raise an interesting point, which is that among conservatives, and among liberals, they also accuse each other of being too conservative or too liberal. As a moderate/centrist, I have experienced this!

The conservatives of today would be considered very liberal 30-50 years ago.

That is indeed true. However, the Liberals of today are also considered to be very right wing by the Leftists of today. And I think we have a point…

Whilst the Conservative has been dragged forward to have to accept basic decency like gay marriage and (in theory) equal rights for women and even POC, the Liberal hasn’t changed at all. They are still fiscally Liberal (ie Neocon) whilst also being socially progressive.

This false binary excludes the true Leftist which, whilst generally being socially progressive, is most focussed on economic Leftism. Proper Keynesian economics that created the post-war boom. Everything since then has been managed decline at best, borderline fascism at worst.

 

[nepalnt21]

conservative/liberal dichotomies are too restrictive

i find it to be a misconception that they're opposite... progressive and conservative are more opposite, there are conservative liberals and left- liberals. neoliberalism is a pretty conservative concept, many republicans can be described as neoliberals.

and many democrats have shown themselves to be quite the neocons in the last week (re: iran)

 

[tryptakid]

i find it to be a misconception that they're opposite... progressive and conservative are more opposite, there are conservative liberals and left- liberals. neoliberalism is a pretty conservative concept, many republicans can be described as neoliberals.

and many democrats have shown themselves to be quite the neocons in the last week (re: iran)

Aye - I'm a mutualist humanist and egalitarian. I'm socialist and democratic and I believe in personal autonomy as well as collective accountability. The world seems to be headed in the other direction sadly, so I will just do my part to beat against the storm.

 

[Fire&Water]

Id rather be called a normie

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Aye - I'm a mutualist humanist and egalitarian. I'm socialist and democratic and I believe in personal autonomy as well as collective accountability. The world seems to be headed in the other direction sadly, so I will just do my part to beat against the storm.

I also consider myself an egalitarian and I believe in the power of greater degrees of democracy

that's why believe in unions, that is a mechanism in which everyday people can work together and advocate for their needs and interests directly which I think is in the true spirit of democracy

the power of the people over the power of the anointed whether that anointment be through money or appointment

the idea of a body of representatives was to have appropriate representation for the people without the system being over encumbering and slow

if we think about the state of technology and communication when the constitution was drafted, communication and organization was many orders of magnitude slower and less omnipresent than it is now

if they were to say "all people in a district will propose and vote on bills for their area" they would need to communicate by mail, periodically meeting in person, research takes much longer due to the need for physical books and physical retrieval

but now we can do that, we could have systems which allow people to actually have more say in what happens rather than extrapolating what people want from polls with questionable methodology

people who work in companies can communicate and vote on what the company should do, vote on marketing initiatives, participating in interdepartmental communication to work together as a cohesive unit in order for the company to make better decisions for the people who make it run and the community that the business exists in

I would rather have that over a CEO or board making decisions which only serve to maintain quarterly profits which all get sucked out of the community and company. instead workers can use those profits to make their jobs easier and more ergonomic, more supportive with good benefits and pay

we all know a CEO don't do that, same with representatives whose election results depend on the money from current CEOs which equate to bribes in order to further enrich themselves and their stock holders

I'd say get rid of the stock market entirely, nobody can own a part of a business that they do not work in. the workers should own the companies because they make them run, not the CEOs

to me egalitarianism means that nobody is above or below anyone else, we work together because we all share the same struggles

 

[tryptakid]

I also consider myself an egalitarian and I believe in the power of greater degrees of democracy

that's why believe in unions, that is a mechanism in which everyday people can work together and advocate for their needs and interests directly which I think is in the true spirit of democracy

the power of the people over the power of the anointed whether that anointment be through money or appointment

I agree with you about unions - and unions can be a double edged sword in that collective bargaining can create an imbalance where a powerful group controls a large bloc and influences that bloc to their own ends. Police unions are an example of this type of corruption. Also, unions can sometimes go so far to protect the member in a way to protect actual poor performance on the part of a member. In Boston we have strong unions in construction that create a monopoly of control on public works. Unions will always win the most favorable contracts, and they retain the capacity to stretch out contracts while failing to deliver on their work in a timely manner. As there are not alternatives to union contractees, the city must continue to use unions whose members can no show jobs and collect paychecks. That isn't to say that all unions do this and all members are lazy - but they are part of a system that allows these things to perpetuate.

the idea of a body of representatives was to have appropriate representation for the people without the system being over encumbering and slow

if we think about the state of technology and communication when the constitution was drafted, communication and organization was many orders of magnitude slower and less omnipresent than it is now

if they were to say "all people in a district will propose and vote on bills for their area" they would need to communicate by mail, periodically meeting in person, research takes much longer due to the need for physical books and physical retrieval

but now we can do that, we could have systems which allow people to actually have more say in what happens rather than extrapolating what people want from polls with questionable methodology

people who work in companies can communicate and vote on what the company should do, vote on marketing initiatives, participating in interdepartmental communication to work together as a cohesive unit in order for the company to make better decisions for the people who make it run and the community that the business exists in

I would rather have that over a CEO or board making decisions which only serve to maintain quarterly profits which all get sucked out of the community and company. instead workers can use those profits to make their jobs easier and more ergonomic, more supportive with good benefits and pay

we all know a CEO don't do that, same with representatives whose election results depend on the money from current CEOs which equate to bribes in order to further enrich themselves and their stock holders

I'd say get rid of the stock market entirely, nobody can own a part of a business that they do not work in. the workers should own the companies because they make them run, not the CEOs

to me egalitarianism means that nobody is above or below anyone else, we work together because we all share the same struggles

This is where I am a fan of public benefit corporations as part of a free market approach to capitalism - organizations form around values and must operate in line with those values above their shareholder profit interests. They provide a fiscally liberal, socially conscious paradigm for business that limits authoritarian bureaucracies which have been part and parcel to every communist regime we've ever built.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

I also agree with the issues you listed concerning unions, that's why I'm an advocate for worker owned corporations public benefit or otherwise. removal of the top-down hierarchy is essential to prevent abuse of power, anything else is a bandaid

having the decision making more distributed would prevent abuse of power within the org simply because many people would need to agree to abuse the power

 

[notsmokeymcpot42088]

Liberal on most issues.

Kind of conservative on the economy, weapons, and gov staying tf out of your biz. (economically gov spending at least) They hit the nail on the head with government overspending than completely looked in the absolute wrong places.
"Conservatism is a bit like communism; sounds good on paper till you start watching people starve in the streets"

I do not see myself ever voting Republican with the trajectory they have been on since Cheney gave this ultimatum (thanks AI) Cheney agrees to join the ticket on a condition: he will be granted significant executive responsibilities, particularly concerning foreign policy and energy.

The supreme court can be pre-bribed (or post I forget but it doesn't really matter).

I say liberal but I don't see much of a plan on the Democrat side and I frankly question if they are not taking dives lately so I guess I am being pushed towards Independent.

 

[tryptakid]

I also agree with the issues you listed concerning unions, that's why I'm an advocate for worker owned corporations public benefit or otherwise. removal of the top-down hierarchy is essential to prevent abuse of power, anything else is a bandaid

having the decision making more distributed would prevent abuse of power within the org simply because many people would need to agree to abuse the power

I will say that starting my own business with my wife has been fucking awesome.

 

[notsmokeymcpot42088]

I will say that starting my own business with my wife has been fucking awesome.

I don't mean to pry but did you go LLC or bigger than that --- Almost started an LLC than realized I would lose my Medicaid and it was basically an "Lets test the model on a small scale" woulda made a couple hundred a month if I was lucky. (Amazon seller lol)

If this Medicaid slasher goes through (think it did already) and my Medicaid runs out that is the plan. (The world does not need one more guy turning a profit off of knives don't get it twisted conservatives).

I mean why would I work when I have all these cushy healthcare benefits. (Heavy sarcasm, unless your GOP than I mean that ish sincerely) lol

 

[tryptakid]

I don't mean to pry but did you go LLC or bigger than that --- Almost started an LLC than realized I would lose my Medicaid and it was basically an "Lets test the model on a small scale" woulda made a couple hundred a month if I was lucky. (Amazon seller lol)

If this Medicaid slasher goes through (think it did already) and my Medicaid runs out that is the plan. (The world does not need one more guy turning a profit off of knives don't get it twisted conservatives).

I mean why would I work when I have all these cushy healthcare benefits. (Heavy sarcasm, unless your GOP than I mean that ish sincerely) lol

Initially we made an LLC but we're now an S-corp. We have payroll and retirement setup through it as well as a line of credit we use specifically for purchases to through the business.

 

[notsmokeymcpot42088]

Awesome!! if I understand correctly that indicates a measure of success --- Congrats to the Mrs. and yourself!!

 

[tryptakid]

Awesome!! if I understand correctly that indicates a measure of success --- Congrats to the Mrs. and yourself!!

Right now it's mainly my private practice for psychotherapy, but yes it's been successful. We also look to offer life coaching, tutoring, notary services, psychedelic integration, consultation, and training on things like risk reduction, drug user health, and psychedelic care/integration work. Slow build but it's great to be able to offer everything under one umbrella that we decide how to craft.

 

[notsmokeymcpot42088]

Good for you guys!! My father was a doctor in psychology and told us flat out he could not deal with the psychotherapy -- so he became a prof. "If you can't do teach" -- Really though that takes a great deal of fortitude and generosity to listen to ppl's problems.

(Hell full disclosure he didn't even like when students came to him with psych issues -- which he had to accept dept standards)

 

[jasperkent]

"If you can't do, teach"

"...and if you can't teach, teach Phys Ed"