this post was submitted on 26 May 2024
405 points (100.0% liked)

politics

22813 readers
3705 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 14 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

Go ahead and draw a line that encompasses these ideologies:

Libertarians support high social liberty and low economic support

~~Democrats~~ Liberals support high social liberty and high economic support

~~Republicans~~ Conservatives support low social liberty and low economic support

Edited to clarify ideology vs. party. My original labels caused a lot of confusion.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Republicans support … low economic support

Except for when it comes to GOP public office holders and corporations. In both those cases Republicans support high economic support.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Low economic support means lower taxes and minimal social programs, along with minimal subsidies and regulations on business.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Except Republicans fucking love subsidies if it's for their donors.

Corn? Oil? Fracking? Tanks for police? Make it rain!

The poors? Fuck them, let their kids starve. Ohh, and let's take away their ability to prevent or terminate pregnancies too, so more kids can starve.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

If there’s money to be had, sure, they want a piece. Conservatives would rather a lower tax and no subsidies and let the free market shake things out. They align with Libertarians on economic policy. Minimal taxes and maximum free market with no purse for social programs or subsidies.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Only if you buy their dating profile pic. What they do in reality is the opposite. Red states take a LOT more subsidies than blue.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Again, it’s not that they won’t accept them. Conservatives prefer limiting government in free enterprise. There would be no money for subsidies if the taxes were as low as they’d like them to be. There would also be no money for social services like welfare, SNAP, Medicaid, Medicare, emergency housing, etc.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)

That's adorable. I bet you think they're about family values and personal liberties too.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

That’s the high social legislation I was referring to. That’s where they differ from Liberals and Libertarians alike. Conservatives support restrictive legislation on social liberties. Christian Nationalism is a great example.

[–] [email protected] 10 points 10 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (2 children)

I’m assuming that means you’re not capable of defining those ideologies on a line.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 10 months ago (1 children)

It's kind of silly to think that all political ideologies can be defined on one line isn't it?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Yes. It’s why political scientists don’t use one.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Which is a different thing than a spectrum, right? Putting your little data points on a line, assigning number values to seizing the means and chattel slavery?

[–] [email protected] 3 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I’m sorry. If conceptualizing political ideologies bores you, then why did you reply to my comment about exactly that?

[–] [email protected] 5 points 10 months ago (1 children)

Because I was challenging your assumption that it is something you can or should do to derive a meaningful understanding of political beliefs and how they interact with each other, or for that matter, concepts of ethics and morality.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Beliefs and ideology are very different. I was talking about the defining characteristics of established ideologies. Adding personal beliefs only further increases the need for a more robust graph than a line.

I don’t make assumptions about an individual’s beliefs based on their political alignment. I know too many single-issue voters to make that mistake.

My assertion about progressives supporting censorship of speech applies to the ideology, not each and every individual that supports the ideology. Many don’t recognize that as authoritarian, because of its good intentions.