Political Assessment

[Immanuel]

I am curious to see how this forum is politically.

[kiba]

Nutcase ideas attract nuts?


But I believe we are the 1% nutcase who are actually right. 

[MoonShadow]

I'm just an old fashioned kind of libertarian.

[nelisky]

I'm the "uninformed type of person" that tries hard to stay that way by trying hard to make my own mind using my own ideas. I may very well be any of the options, but I don't really know any of them all that well, and many I heard about in this forum for the first time!

"ignorance is bliss"

[bober182]

Heavy Capitalist With a good chuck of lefties not many in the middle it will be a clear divide.

[Anonymous]

First they label you then they co-opt you - see Glenn Beck calling himself "libertarian" or Sarah Palin claiming to represent the "tea party". Ive even seen politicians calling themselves anarchists lol.

 

You forgot "Agorist" btw.

[tyler]

First they label you then they co-opt you - see Glenn Beck calling himself "libertarian" or Sarah Palin claiming to represent the "tea party". Ive even seen politicians calling themselves anarchists lol.

 

You forgot "Agorist" btw.

i could argue left-libertarian and agorist are the same. well rather agorist is a subset of left-libertarian

[breandan81]

definitely a subset, you can be a right libertarian agorist.  I consider myself a libertarian, currently I'm most concerned with online privacy and monetary reform, hence my interest in this project.

[tyler]

definitely a subset, you can be a right libertarian agorist.  I consider myself a libertarian, currently I'm most concerned with online privacy and monetary reform, hence my interest in this project.

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agorism:

Agorism's proponents characterize it as left-libertarian. According to Konkin,[6] it was Murray Rothbard's idea to call his and Konkin's radical free-market libertarianism "Left," the reasons being that they wanted to use a label that was appealing to the New Left to solidify an alliance with them and to distinguish Agorists as those interested in building counter-economic enterprises.

[kiba]

I started the BMAA, but I would consider myself an anarcho-capitalist.

In reality, I don't really have any favor for the two flavors of capitalistic anarchism.

[tyler]

I started the BMAA, but I would consider myself an anarcho-capitalist.

In reality, I don't really have any favor for the two flavors of capitalistic anarchism.

Baptist Missionary Association of America? (thats what google gives me)

[kiba]

I started the BMAA, but I would consider myself an anarcho-capitalist.

In reality, I don't really have any favor for the two flavors of capitalistic anarchism.

Baptist Missionary Association of America? (thats what google gives me)

The Bitcoin Mutual Aid Association.

[tyler]

I started the BMAA, but I would consider myself an anarcho-capitalist.

In reality, I don't really have any favor for the two flavors of capitalistic anarchism.

Baptist Missionary Association of America? (thats what google gives me)

The Bitcoin Mutual Aid Association.

Oh, i just joined today. cool

[JohnDoe]

I label myself an egoist / anarcho-egoist / Max Stirner guy. Not to confuse with Ayn Rand's ethical egoism, which says that people ought to do what is in their self-interest. I claim that people can only act in their own self-interest.

Basically I'm close to anarcho-capitalists/agorists except that I completely reject morality, law and the existence of rights. If I have the power to do something and it's in my self-interest to do it, then I'll do it. Kind of a "law of the jungle" approach to society.

[ribuck]

...If I have the power to do something and it's in my self-interest to do it, then I'll do it

What I like about Stefan Molyneux's work is that he demonstrates that there's little if any difference between the "law of the jungle" and "morality". In the long run, the things that are in your best interest to do, are moral.

The conflict does not exist. The confusion arises because we sometimes mix up "moral" and "things that other people tell you to do, claiming that they are moral".

[Timo Y]

Apolitical, not big on ideology, more of a practical, "whatever works" type of person.

But I probably pass the duck test for a centre-left-libertarian.

I believe that a functioning society needs a balance of collectivism/cooperation/solidarity and selfishness/competition/individualism. However, I believe that collectivism can and should be strictly voluntary.  

I'm too cynical to believe that true anarchy is sustainable. Humans are a very hierarchial species by nature, and some thug will always dominate unfortunately; that thug may as well be democratic government (the least of all evils). That government should be as small and as accountable as possible.  Utilitarian, "harm-reduction" based government interference should be minimised; if it can be justified at all it must be based on reason and empirical evidence.

[bitcoinex]

Hmm. In Russia the socialists is opposed to liberals/democrats...

Grading is as follows:

Anarchist/Left
Socialist/"Left"
Conservative
Liberal/Democrat
Anarcho-Capitalist Libertarian
Minarchist Libertarian

[FreeMoney]

Apolitical, not big on ideology, more of a practical, "whatever works" type of person.

But I probably pass the duck test for a centre-left-libertarian.

I believe that a functioning society needs a balance of collectivism/cooperation/solidarity and selfishness/competition/individualism. However, I believe that collectivism can and should be strictly voluntary.  

I'm too cynical to believe that true anarchy is sustainable. Humans are a very hierarchial species by nature, and some thug will always dominate unfortunately; that thug may as well be democratic government (the least of all evils). That government should be as small and as accountable as possible.  Utilitarian, "harm-reduction" based government interference should be minimised; if it can be justified at all it must be based on reason and empirical evidence.

Government, as everyone uses the word, always means force. Using force to solve problems is never rational.

The correct balance between collectivism and individualism cannot be known be anyone let alone forced on people. Anarchism just means letting this balance emerge naturally. If the government evaporates, most of my life with still be collective. I will still share everything with my family and work their needs into all of my decisions.

I call myself an anarcho-capitalist because I think this will be the large scale structure of a free world. But nearly all of my personal interactions will have nothing to do with acquiring capital.

[BrightAnarchist]

I chose left-libertarian, but I'm thinking I'm really an anarcho-capitalist in practice. My understanding (incorrect perhaps?) is that they're basically the same thing, except that left-libertarians actively pursue counter-economics as their strategy for achieving anarchism. Am I confusing this with agorism?

Maybe I'll just say I'm a voluntaryist and leave it at that. I don't particularly like the term "anarcho-capitalist" because it emphasizes capitalism, whereas I believe any voluntary interaction is moral, capitalistic or not (although I believe that in voluntaryism, 95% of economic behavior would be anarcho-capitalism, but my point is that it doesn't have to be, so emphasis on "voluntary" as being the overarching guide for society).

Take Linux for example. That's the ultimate example of voluntaryism. It's NOT socialism like what some people claim, because there's no force or violence involved. It's also not typically the type of thing that people think of as capitalism, even though it is strongly related due to its decentralized nature.

Voluntaryist out.

[kiba]

I chose left-libertarian, but I'm thinking I'm really an anarcho-capitalist in practice. My understanding (incorrect perhaps?) is that they're basically the same thing, except that left-libertarians actively pursue counter-economics as their strategy for achieving anarchism. Am I confusing this with agorism?

Maybe I'll just say I'm a voluntaryist and leave it at that. I don't particularly like the term "anarcho-capitalist" because it emphasizes capitalism, whereas I believe any voluntary interaction is moral, capitalistic or not (although I believe that in voluntaryism, 95% of economic behavior would be anarcho-capitalism, but my point is that it doesn't have to be, so emphasis on "voluntary" as being the overarching guide for society).

Take Linux for example. That's the ultimate example of voluntaryism. It's NOT socialism like what some people claim, because there's no force or violence involved. It's also not typically the type of thing that people think of as capitalism, even though it is strongly related due to its decentralized nature.

Voluntaryist out.

I agreed with this assessment. I think in the end, we're voluntaryists at heart.