Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

Attach:
Help (Clear Attachment)
(more attachments)
Allowed file types: doc, gif, jpg, jpeg, mpg, pdf, png, txt, zip, rar, csv, xls, xlsx, docx, xlsm, psd, cpp
Restrictions: 4 per post, maximum total size 192KB, maximum individual size 128KB
Note that any files attached will not be displayed until approved by a moderator.
Verification:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview


Topic Summary

Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 29, 2009, 05:01:30 pm »

Does this look like a christian fascist forum? I mean to my knowledge Alia is the only fascist here, and she's an atheist. Lenny maybe but he's more of a neo confederate.

Anyway, I just want people to have a sanctuary. I'm trying to encouraged the formation of factions. I want gangs of right and left wingers to set up shop here and go at it in the debate forum. Under my light but fair moderation.

That way we can get some real meaningful debate going.

People of all ideologies are welcome here. In time I may expand and give other parties their own categories. In fact I am considering making a separate libertarian one, at least 3 people here belong to that already.
Posted by: SandStone
« on: April 28, 2009, 10:47:13 pm »

She also will not be permitted to go off topic.

To clarify, my intention was to give different partisan groups separate forums for them to talk amongst themselves without being attacked.

Something every other forum I have ever been part of has been sorely lacking.

The general topics for everyone are debate, and theory.

I'll allow people who aren't part of a given group to post there only provided that they don['t argue against the political philosophy that forum represents.

You are arguing against centrism and that is not permitted in this particular board, that belongs as I said in debate.

Oh I don't blame you, that's a very good idea in theory. Though the last such forum I saw that institute such a policy was a **** christian fascist apologetics forum.

Although, I wasn't attacking I was just giving my view on the thread title I don't think they've gone anywhere because I don't think they really exist in the form their title seems to suggest. ;)
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 27, 2009, 09:56:37 pm »

Well that might be part of the answer. I prefer to think centrists are the true silent majority, because if they weren't I should be a lot less popular than I am considering how openly political I am and the fact that I lean right in Massachusetts.
Posted by: Alia
« on: April 27, 2009, 09:12:59 pm »

I think "there might not be any" is a legitimate answer to, "Where have all the Centrists gone?"
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 26, 2009, 02:54:54 pm »

She also will not be permitted to go off topic.

To clarify, my intention was to give different partisan groups separate forums for them to talk amongst themselves without being attacked.

Something every other forum I have ever been part of has been sorely lacking.

The general topics for everyone are debate, and theory.

I'll allow people who aren't part of a given group to post there only provided that they don['t argue against the political philosophy that forum represents.

You are arguing against centrism and that is not permitted in this particular board, that belongs as I said in debate.
Posted by: SandStone
« on: April 26, 2009, 02:45:40 pm »

Yes but of the major political ideologies a moderate is one who takes a stance in between apposing view points.

Its not a philosophy or an ideology, it is a category.

And this forum was intended to be centrists only, meaning you shouldn't be posting here if you don't consider yourself a centrist.

If you want to debate the legitimacy of centrists, we have a debate forum. If you want to discuss political ideology we have a theory forum.

Please respect the rules of this forum.

Everyone else posting in here is a centrist? O.o

I think you'd be hard pressed to call Alia a centrist. And I thought this place was just a section for discussing centrist philosophy not that you had to be a centrist to post in here, that seems a bit dubious to me. But whatever...
Posted by: BuddhasWench
« on: April 26, 2009, 01:35:40 am »

There's a very large difference, whether it's recognised here or not, between having watered-down ideals and having a strong, mixed set of ideals.

Just because someone is socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative doesn't make them Lord Neutral of the Neutral Planet.


Well by centrist I don't mean neutral, that implies lack of resolve or opinion.  I usually just think of beliefs that don't land them firmly on one side of the political spectrum or the other, which overall could land them close to the middle (of course leaning one way or the other). 

To find a true centrist would be hard to do, you can really only get close.
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 25, 2009, 11:34:00 pm »

There's a very large difference, whether it's recognised here or not, between having watered-down ideals and having a strong, mixed set of ideals.

Just because someone is socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative doesn't make them Lord Neutral of the Neutral Planet.


No one said we were arguing for watered down ideals alia. You should know full well just how black and white my positions are.

They just happen to contradict the extreems of right and left in this country, and for that matter the extremes of anarchy and totalitarianism.
Posted by: Alia
« on: April 25, 2009, 11:29:35 pm »

There's a very large difference, whether it's recognised here or not, between having watered-down ideals and having a strong, mixed set of ideals.

Just because someone is socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative doesn't make them Lord Neutral of the Neutral Planet.
Posted by: BuddhasWench
« on: April 25, 2009, 10:15:16 pm »

A lot of the people you hear from (The people who make the news that is) are generally from one end of the other, there aren't really any centrist.  A lot of people I just think are idiots in the house and wonder how on earth they got into the house or senate.

Personally I would say I like Brad Sherman from California, I actually don't know to terribly much about him but when I was watching CSPAN during the first bail-out he made a real impression on me as a democrat that was against it, and not in a Kucinich sort of way either.

I don't believe in that many politicians but he seems pretty consistent from what I've read about him and seen on the senate floor.  I've not much more to add he seems socially liberal and fiscally conservative to me, so possibly he could count, but as he doesn't seem to have that much pull in the house, as I think people tend to go with one side or the other and just vote for a (D) or an (R) and not really on issues.

Anyway this is just the first time I saw him and was impressed.

http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77531&id=8902076
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 25, 2009, 05:21:59 pm »

Yes but of the major political ideologies a moderate is one who takes a stance in between apposing view points.

Its not a philosophy or an ideology, it is a category.

And this forum was intended to be centrists only, meaning you shouldn't be posting here if you don't consider yourself a centrist.

If you want to debate the legitimacy of centrists, we have a debate forum. If you want to discuss political ideology we have a theory forum.

Please respect the rules of this forum.
Posted by: SandStone
« on: April 25, 2009, 05:17:14 pm »

moderate as in one who falls in the middle of the political spectrum. Moderates of any ideological lean generally have more in common than they do with any extremist.

I disagree with the validity of a comprehensive "political spectrum". I think different political ideologies are separate and unrelated to most other political ideologies because they stem from different sets of modus operandi.

And I think the use of terms such as centrist and extremist, moderate and radical are misleading.

Since anything strongly opposed to any one modus operandi could be classified as extremist or radical from the point of view of the individual. As well anything opposed yet not totally in disagreement with any one modus operandi could be classified as moderate or centrist.

And since these things  (to me at least) seem to all stem from different modus operandi the use of moderate and centrist extremist and radical seem quite misleading (from my perspective).
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 25, 2009, 04:06:41 pm »

moderate as in one who falls in the middle of the political spectrum. Moderates of any ideological lean generally have more in common than they do with any extremist.

Posted by: SandStone
« on: April 25, 2009, 01:32:27 pm »

Well since you are a radical libertarian I'm not sure you are the best judge of moderation.

Not everyone thinks Ayn Rand and Milton Freedman's vision of a capitalist society is either desirable or feasible.

I'm not sure why an ad populum defense makes you right and me wrong but whatever.

And really? Just because I'm a libertarian I can't propose that "moderation" is a misnomer when it comes to politics?

All political ideologies start with different and varying premises, which means they are not inherently related. The dichotomy between "left" and "right" is false. Because there are plenty of political ideologies that do not fall within this narrow band of political philosophies. They all start from different origins.

So again, I ask moderate in relation to what?
Posted by: Giuliano Taverna
« on: April 24, 2009, 08:13:32 pm »

But you haven't effectively argued that it is not possible, your argument states that it is not politically possible in America. And I agree with you in theory, which is why a lot needs to change.

Real change, not Obama's change, which is the noun not the verb.