• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What relationship does your political ideology/philosophy have with reality?

Einzige

Elitist as Hell.
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 21, 2012
Messages
2,655
Reaction score
942
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
A vague question, so let me explain what each possible answer means in fullest detail:

1. "My political ideology/philosophy is a direct mirror of reality" - You believe that there is an objective reality outside of your senses, and that your political philosophy is the correct way to interact with it at all times. All others who disagree with you are either mistaken about the basic nature of the world as it exists outside the borders of their perception or are delusional.

2. "My political ideology/philosophy is a direct mirror of my material circumstances" - You hold that your philosophy is rooted in your own life-experiences, and that it is the correct way to deal with problems that arise in your personal life; you prefer governments that support your interests and oppose those that do not. At the same time, you do not necessarily hold that your philosophy is suitable at all times and all places for all men everywhere.

3. "My political ideology/philosophy is purely a personal expression; it does not bear any relationship to reality" - You accept that you have no particular access to a higher order of things, but instead base your views on your own inner reality. And you do not fault those who feel differently from you - you likely feel that all social interactions are ultimately expressions, neither driving nor driven by a material reality.

It would be very helpful to me if, in answering this poll, you could make a post explaining whether or not you feel you belong on the broad political Right or Left.
 
Last edited:
I have a political philosophy/ideology/idea for all these situations...

The first is the ideal or goal.
The second is the practical one in which how I apply my ideal to this system to make it work.
The third often comes out when you really get to the very basics of an arguement of what I value more or less than what other people value more or less.

To answer you last question, I don't think I belong to any known political ideology, but i am probably the closest to right wing as far as role of government and economics, but a lot of the right wing doesn't follow my views on this either in practice.
 
Last edited:
These distinctions are mostly artificial, as all ideologies in practice mingle the three. Besides that, nobody would be a reliable narrator of which spectrum they belong to.
 
Well, this is one of those questions that cannot be really answered with satisfactory clarity, but for what it's worth:

Yes, I do derive my political philosophy from certain first principles that appear to be in agreement with observable reality. Two central (interrelated) components are: (1) the morality based on freedom of choice, and (2) the realization that our ability to know, predict and control complex systems is limited. The former comes from our observable nature as reasoning beings that possess volition, the second from emprical data and simple logic.

But yes - it is "rooted in my life experiences". Why bother to have any moral system - or any political philosophy, for that matter? Well, because my experience (and experience of people close to me) strongly suggested that discarding morality and/or refusing to pay attention to political workings of society leads straight to hell, to living our lives in deprivation and suffering.

And also yes - I do not "fault" those who "feel differently", and certainly do not claim to "have particular access to a higher order of things". The very (also observable) subjectivity of our perceptions demands for freedom of choice to be treated as the central moral value: People are all different, they see things from different points of view, they come with different experiences and abilities - but their freedom to choose is one common demoninator.

The ancients understood it already: "Do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you". And by definition, nobody wishes to be coerced. "The rest is commentaries", as Rabbi Hillel said.

Where do I belong in the broad political spectrum? All those labels are of limited value, but I could say: a libertarian (small "l"), rather moderate, and trying to be pragmatic. Take Gary Johnson and Bill Weld in equal proportions, mix into a thick Hayekian broth, add just a little Ron Paul for flavor...something like that :)
 
Last edited:
Everybody believes their own beliefs and conclusions are valid.

Ya, it is kind of a loaded question. Why would you pick 2 or 3? Wouldn't that be admitting you know you are wrong? This is like asking "are you delusional?" I don't think a delusional person would know they are delusional. Let's ask a liberal and see what they say ;)
 
Ya, it is kind of a loaded question. Why would you pick 2 or 3? Wouldn't that be admitting you know you are wrong? This is like asking "are you delusional?" I don't think a delusional person would know they are delusional. Let's ask a liberal and see what they say ;)

Choosing 2 or 3 is not the same as admitting that you are wrong. Its more like admitting that you don't know that you're right.

My beliefs are somewhere betweeen 2 & 3 with a very small bit of 1. I believe that there is an objective reality, and that we might even be able to perceive accurately in some small way, sometimes, but we have no way of knowing when we have done so, and when we have failed.

I am on the left of the political spectrum
 
Everybody believes their own beliefs and conclusions are valid.

So, if I believe, for example, that it is possible to get myself (and my horse) out of a swamp by pulling my own hair up, up, up [see "Hieronymus Carl Friedrich von Münchhausen"] - conclusions would be valid?

(To appease the moderators: This is exactly what the "Neo-Keynesian" economic policies boil down to)
 
Mine is pretty much based on my thoughts that people should be responsible for themselves, and for their decisions, and that as long as you don't step on my toes, I won't step on yours. Mutual respect for property rights and the right not to be physically harmed by my fellow citizens is the cornerstone of my political beliefs. I don't believe the government owes an individual anything except for a strong system of laws which protect the rights of citizens.
 
How is answering "helpful" to the OP?
 
I would be number 3:
3. "My political ideology/philosophy is purely a personal expression; it does not bear any relationship to reality"

My ideology won't work in reality. I keep it just the same. My philosophy is closer to working in reality. Just not close enough.

I'm left-wing.
 
These distinctions are mostly artificial, as all ideologies in practice mingle the three. Besides that, nobody would be a reliable narrator of which spectrum they belong to.

This.

And I hope I'm not hitting the language barrier here, when I say that I don't think I follow a coherent ideology. There are some convictions I use as orientation points, marking the playing field, but generally believe political decisions that are pragmatic are more useful than those which are based on ideologies.

I think when you base your entire view on a particular book or author, and try to trace every question back to the ideology outlined there instead of judging it from different angles, no matter if that is Karl Marx, Adam Smith, Charles Darwin or Milton Friedman, you will inevitably lose perspective and make mistakes.

For example, I am not fond of ideological generalizations, such as "market solutions are always preferable over big government" or "the market will always screw poor people up". I believe it really depends on the topic in question. Sometimes, the market is better suited to yield a good outcome, sometimes the government is.

Likewise, I believe the mainstream political ideologies or leanings all have their merits: Conservatives focus on stability of society, on morals, law and order, which certainly is important. Libertarians focus on the merits of market and individual freedom, which is important too. And liberals/left-leaning people focus on equality (at least of opportunities), fair distribution of wealth and social cohesion, which is important too. Depending on your individual experiences and preferences, you place more emphasis on one of these aspects, than on the others. But a good policy should always try to maintain a good balance between these ideals, IMO.
 
no vote, as usual..
Is there anything wrong with TRYING to be in the center.
And, my political philosophy is futuristic, in my opinion.
We may be in a computerized world, but only the surface has been scratched..
For instance, I think there should should be computerized 100%, complete background checks on gun owners...maybe , within the next 20 years we will have the quality of people for this....but, sadly, not today, or tomorrow.
Something of this nature will take cooperation....not and American trait.
 
compared to the body politic I am NOT a political ideologue. I exist in stark contrast to most political ideals. my philosophy on politics, Poly meaning many, ticks meaning blood sucking parasites.

my philosophy I think more like number 1
 
Back
Top Bottom