Pro-Europe, pro-separation of church and state, pro-LGBT rights, pro-gun control, pro-monarchy, anti-fascist, anti-communist, for the NHS, against nationalisation.

If there's any I've missed off, do tell.

Legion X51 said
Pro-Europe, pro-separation of church and state, pro-LGBT rights, pro-gun control, pro-monarchy, anti-fascist, anti-communist, for the NHS, against nationalisation.If there's any I've missed off, do tell.

I don't see anything you missed. So do you believe in patriotism? I forgot to add being a traditionalist and pro religion in my post.

Unionist, Royalist/Monarchist. I also believe in the national dignity, honour and responsibility of the Union to its constituent countries, it's allies, oversea territories, fellow commonwealth realms, Ex-Territories etc

I would define myself as a socialist, but I cant be by definition as I support the House of Windsors right to the crown (Indeed, supporting a crown in general is technically anti-socialist). I am generally oriented in that direction however, being for the welfare state and the responsibilities of the crown towards the people. I do of course, also support the responsibilities of the people to the crown. Society is an agreement. You obey the laws, work your hardest and be generally a good person, and you get supported in hard times, protection etc in return.

darkwolf687 said
Unionist, Royalist/Monarchist. I also believe in the national dignity, honour and responsibility of the Union to its constituent countries, it's allies, oversea territories, fellow commonwealth realms, Ex-Territories etcI would define myself as a socialist, but I cant be by definition as I support the House of Windsors right to the crown (Indeed, supporting a crown in general is technically anti-socialist). I am generally oriented in that direction however, being for the welfare state and the responsibilities of the crown towards the people. I do of course, also support the responsibilities of the people to the crown. Society is an agreement. You obey the laws, work your hardest and be generally a good person, and you get supported in hard times, protection etc in return.

It's kind of like how I believe in far taxes but I really don't like liberals and their self righteous dogma. I am also a traditionalist and believe in old fashion aspects of society but I don't like the modern conservative movement, which is why I refer to myself as a centrist, traditionalist, pro government and pro patriotism. My views of patriotism is that real patriots give back to their country and its citizens as a show of their love and pride for their country. I believe that patriotism like with many things in today's world had been hijacked by greedy people who use the word to exploit their country

Yog Sothoth said
It's kind of like how I believe in far taxes but I really don't like liberals and their self righteous dogma. I am also a traditionalist and believe in old fashion aspects of society but I don't like the modern conservative movement, which is why I refer to myself as a centrist, traditionalist, pro government and pro patriotism. My views of patriotism is that real patriots give back to their country and its citizens as a show of their love and pride for their country. I believe that patriotism like with many things in today's world had been hijacked by greedy people who use the word to exploit their country

Patriotism is all too often misplaced or exploited, such as by the Anti-EU wings where I live in Britain. There's nothing wrong with patriotism, I myself have a lot of pride in my country, but patriotism is best taken with a dose of scepticism. There are plenty of snake oil salesmen around who like to exploit peoples loyalty.

Like most people, I'm a political syncretist to help accommodate my various beliefs and attitudes in regards to various things. A singular label that could best describe the things I believe in, though, is 'anarchist.'

Brief summary: I align primarily as Libertarian, with many paleoconservative views. I'm isolationist, capitalist, nationalist, firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, a supporter of the flat tax, and pro-almost everything, minus abortion and artificial drugs. Morally against gay marriage and drug use of all kinds, but I believe it is neither my place to judge others nor direct their lives.

Revolutionary said Brief summary: I align primarily as Libertarian, with many paleoconservative views. I'm isolationist, capitalist, nationalist, firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, a supporter of the flat tax, and pro-almost everything, minus abortion and artificial drugs. Morally against gay marriage and drug use of all kinds, but I believe it is neither my place to judge others nor direct their lives.

Isn't being morally against those things technically making a judgement?

Schnaps! I forgot aboot tis thread! I must say those of you who have posted in the last few hours have a odd combination of beliefs

darkwolf687 said
Unionist, Royalist/Monarchist. I also believe in the national dignity, honour and responsibility of the Union to its constituent countries, it's allies, oversea territories, fellow commonwealth realms, Ex-Territories etcI would define myself as a socialist, but I cant be by definition as I support the House of Windsors right to the crown (Indeed, supporting a crown in general is technically anti-socialist). I am generally oriented in that direction however, being for the welfare state and the responsibilities of the crown towards the people. I do of course, also support the responsibilities of the people to the crown. Society is an agreement. You obey the laws, work your hardest and be generally a good person, and you get supported in hard times, protection etc in return.

I cant help but imagine you in a top hat...

darkwolf687 said
You obey the laws, work your hardest and be generally a good person, and you get supported in hard times, protection etc in return.

Is that not what police are for? And what did the Monarch have to work for to gain her position? Nothing but climb out of te womb

Yog Sothoth said
It's kind of like how I believe in far taxes but I really don't like liberals and their self righteous dogma. I am also a traditionalist and believe in old fashion aspects of society but I don't like the modern conservative movement, which is why I refer to myself as a centrist, traditionalist, pro government and pro patriotism. My views of patriotism is that real patriots give back to their country and its citizens as a show of their love and pride for their country. I believe that patriotism like with many things in today's world had been hijacked by greedy people who use the word to exploit their country

As for my opinion on Patriotism, I believe there is nothing inherently wrong aboot it but is used by todays Media to cloud the minds of the people and turn us against our foreign comrades, which at that point is just pure Jingoism

Revolutionary said
Brief summary: I align primarily as Libertarian, with many paleoconservative views. I'm isolationist, capitalist, nationalist, firm believer in the 2nd Amendment, a supporter of the flat tax, and pro-almost everything, minus abortion and artificial drugs. Morally against gay marriage and drug use of all kinds, but I believe it is neither my place to judge others nor direct their lives.

Not very "Revolutionary" of you!

Darcs said
Isn't being morally against those things technically making a judgement?

I think he means that he doesn't outright complain about gay people. I don't have a problem morally with homosexuality, but that doesn't mean I hate people who do, as long as I'm not being forced to do anything I don't care if a person's ignorant unless they're in a position to dictate someone

To reiterate my own views:

Government: The purpose of the government is to mostly to manage security and some other services I call "non-excludables" like the fire department. Things that the benefit an entire public rather than individuals. The government has to follow the same rules as individual citizens.

Religion: The government should not be officially affiliated with any church or doctrine, nor vice versa. Having said that, I don't think religion and politics should be separate things. I believe that people should vote fairly in accordance with their religious views.

Economics: The government should not control any "private businesses" (aside from safety regulations), or vice-versa. Megacorporations controlling the government are bad, but a communist government more or less IS a megacorporation. Thus, the truth lies in the middle...which is actually pretty close to where America is already at.

Some more specific views:

1. Gun Control: All weapons (aside from WMDs, of course. At best, they're environmental hazards) should be legal at the state and federal level. Cities can ban whatever weapons they like, as long as their ban applies to EVERYONE. This includes their own police forces, and any state and federal forces entering.

2. Gay marriage: I'm a unionist. I think homosexuality is morally wrong, but at the same time I'm opposed to the state controlling marriage. Thus, I think gay marriage should be legal.

3. Drugs: Particularly addictive drugs that render people dysfunctional beyond reason need to be controlled. Pot is acceptable, but meth is not. Selling someone meth is somewhat tantamount to drugging them and stealing their money. It's not acceptable.

4. Abortion: Firmly against. There might some cases where it's acceptable, but it's legal all the time at the federal level, so there should be at least some restraints.

Darcs said
Isn't being morally against those things technically making a judgement?

Not necessarily. I don't like homosexuality as an attribute. That doesn't imply that I dislike homosexual people. I never judge anyone wrongfully, but I will be honest with you if I don't like you. I know a couple of gay people who are cooler than most straight people, when it comes down to it. But I suppose it'd be more accurate to say that I do not act upon my judgments of people.

Vortex said
Schnaps! I forgot aboot tis thread! I must say those of you who have posted in the last few hours have a odd combination of beliefsI cant help but imagine you in a top hat...Is that not what police are for? And what did the Monarch have to work for to gain her position? Nothing but climb out of te wombAs for my opinion on Patriotism, I believe there is nothing inherently wrong aboot it but is used by todays Media to cloud the minds of the people and turn us against our foreign comrades, which at that point is just pure JingoismNot very "Revolutionary" of you!

Actually, since I support a third party movement, it'd be pretty revolutionary if my party won the Presidential office.

Revolutionary said
.Actually, since I support a third party movement, it'd be pretty revolutionary if my party won the Presidential office.

Well unless your party engages in a bloody war with the establishment then technically it still isnt Revolutionary

Do you mean " third party" as in "third positionist"?

Vortex said
Well unless your party engages in a bloody war with the establishment then technically it still isnt RevolutionaryDo you mean " third party" as in "third positionist"?

Revolution doesn't always imply bloody conflict against an established power. Just massive change. And the Libertarian Party is a third-party group, basically meaning not Democrat or Republican. Your term works just as well, though.
EDIT: And I know the definition of revolution implies violence, but it is used to describe massive peaceful changes as well, i.e. the Industrial Revolution.

I know it can also mean peaceful change but for the sake of this topic and my poor taste of humour I used it in the other way

Third postionism is basically this

Not sure why there is a cross in the background however, think it may be because a lot of Third Positionists are Roman Catholics but thats just a guess

I'm a centrist, traditionalist, pro government and pro religion

The problem with centrist movements is that they don't necessarily get the best of both worlds. For example, Anarchism and Fascism can both be considered centrist viewpoints. Though this also because the single-axis system doesn't really work, you really need two axis, ala, the political compass.

on such a scale, my views fit right here:

Yog Sothoth said I'm a centrist, traditionalist, pro government and pro religion

Booooooooriiiiiiiing!

---

Protagonist said To reiterate my own views:
Government: The purpose of the government is to mostly to manage security and some other services I call "non-excludables" like the fire department. Things that the benefit an entire public rather than individuals. The government has to follow the same rules as individual citizens.

That will only realistically happen at a town or city level though. When an entire public IS individuals that you distinguish and see, 'murca's too big to ever benefit the entire public.

Protagonist said Religion: The government should not be officially affiliated with any church or doctrine, nor vice versa. Having said that, I don't think religion and politics should be separate things. I believe that people should vote fairly in accordance with their religious views.

Why shouldn't religion and politics be separate?

Protagonist said Economics: The government should not control any "private businesses" (aside from safety regulations), or vice-versa. Megacorporations controlling the government are bad, but a communist government more or less IS a megacorporation. Thus, the truth lies in the middle...which is actually pretty close to where America is already at.

What about the whole issue of having your citizens essentially becoming debt slaves to a declining imaginary fiat currency based off of a paper fiat currency based off of nothing?

Protagonist said Some more specific views:
1. Gun Control: All weapons (aside from WMDs, of course. At best, they're environmental hazards) should be legal at the state and federal level. Cities can ban whatever weapons they like, as long as their ban applies to EVERYONE. This includes their own police forces, and any state and federal forces entering.

I agree that people SHOULD be able to have whatever gunz they want, but why the hell does anyone need a machine gun? I like the idea of cities having their own personal weapon statues.

Protagonist said 2. Gay marriage: I'm a unionist. I think homosexuality is morally wrong, but at the same time I'm opposed to the state controlling marriage. Thus, I think gay marriage should be legal.

That's really all anyone can ask.

Protagonist said 3. Drugs: Particularly addictive drugs that render people dysfunctional beyond reason need to be controlled. Pot is acceptable, but meth is not. Selling someone meth is somewhat tantamount to drugging them and stealing their money. It's not acceptable.

That's a slippery slope. What is the scientific measure of "particularly-addictive-drugs-that-render-people-dysfunctional-beyond-reason-need-to-be-controlled" drugs? Neurochemistry, like DNA, is always different, and how people respond to drugs relies on that, environmental factors, personal experiences and opinions, and more chemical and psychological stimuli. Someone's 'meth' could be another person's 'pot' and vice versa-- and this isn't even counting the millions of people with addictions to actions and substances you wouldn't even consider "drugs." You can't cherry pick which drugs are okay, and which drugs aren't. Give adults the options to try whatever it is they want to try and trust that they won't all become addicts.

(DMT is pretty great though, I don't see a problem if literally everyone in America was addicted to it, hue hue hue)

Protagonist said 4. Abortion: Firmly against. There might some cases where it's acceptable, but it's legal all the time at the federal level, so there should be at least some restraints.

Why?

Also, to clarify on one of my views, the church should not be forced to do homosexual marriages. Churches should have that right to choose if they want to, or the state should do homosexual marriages one.

Vortex said
Schnaps! I forgot aboot tis thread! I must say those of you who have posted in the last few hours have a odd combination of beliefsI cant help but imagine you in a top hat...Is that not what police are for? And what did the Monarch have to work for to gain her position? Nothing but climb out of te wombAs for my opinion on Patriotism, I believe there is nothing inherently wrong aboot it but is used by todays Media to cloud the minds of the people and turn us against our foreign comrades, which at that point is just pure JingoismNot very "Revolutionary" of you!

I would very much love to wear a top hate, but being working class is pretty much mutually exclusive. One day, perhaps, and when I get there I will most definitely buy a top hat in celebration.

As for the police, of course. Thats what they are there for, to ensure you do not break the social contract you sign by living in the country, and to help uphold the Crowns end of the agreement

As for the monarch, well, what have the children of the rich, or even the children of the first world, done but pop out of the right vagina? Lets not pretend that the children of the rich arent in a position of power and advantage by luck alone, and that the children of the first world arent at an advantage by luck alone. Luck, I suppose, played a part to be born with this specific genetic pattern, decided by factors outside out control, in a place outside our control, to people and circumstances outside our control. Some are more lucky than others.
As long as we are allowed to inherit the property of our parents, and share their successes, then it would be a double standard and hypocritical to stop the monarchy claiming whats left to them based on a "You did nothing but pop out the right vagina" argument.
Besides, the British Royal Fanily have done a lot for my country since they first took the throne centuries ago. The House of Windsor has won my respect for what they've done.