Poll: Republican or Democrat? (or Moderate)

Commy

musicismylife78 wrote:

radical anarchist commie.

The entire system is corrupt. The government gets in no matter who the winning party is. The system is not fixable.

I am a registered socialist

like anarcho syndicalism? or libertarian socialism?


that's where i am.

kenny olav

Our system of democratic-republicanism is not working like it should, and probably never will, but I don't think there's any other workable system that could create the relative stability and freedom we have in a country like the USA. I once worked for the Green Party, but it was going nowhere fast. Since 2006, I've decided to vote for the Democrats and try to do whatever little I can do to keep them accountable.

dimitrispearljam

is there any difference on those 2 in the states..???as i see politics is the same..in Europe is complitly diferent,,see what i vote in europe
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id= ... 1154506885

Gern Blansten

technically I am a republican but I don't believe most of the platform they run on so I don't vote party line

The current GOP has been taken over by christian war mongers....I have never understood how a party that was founded on less government intervention could embrace the "pro-life" or "anti-gay marriage" stances they currently hold. To me a true republican should support pro choice and gay marriage based on the simple fact that the government shouldn't be able to peer into our lives and exert that control.

JaneNY

democrat. (Doesn't mean I'm thrilled with the democrats right now - they've got the presidency, the congress AND senate and I wish they'd get more done)

SolarWorld

Loony Liberal...

I'm for insane stuff like single payer health care and nationalized banks, choice for women, gay marriage, decriminalization of pot, re-writing the "rules of capitalism"... but also think people need to have a bomb dropped on their heads once in a while too.

musicismylife78

Commy wrote:

musicismylife78 wrote:

radical anarchist commie.

The entire system is corrupt. The government gets in no matter who the winning party is. The system is not fixable.

I am a registered socialist

like anarcho syndicalism? or libertarian socialism?


that's where i am.

i definitely have been influenced by both, but I am as radical as can get on anarchism/socialism. My hometown houses John Zerzan, during the 1999 WTO riots, he was called the "new leader" of the antiWTo movement.

Anyways Zerzan along with myself, are influenced by Green Anarchy. Which advocates complete destruction of the system and destroying civilization. It advocates a return to the hunter gatherer society and way of life.

For me, this seems to make the most sense.

catefrances

musicismylife78 wrote:

...I am a registered socialist

actually so am i.

Jeanwah

musicismylife78 wrote:

Anyways Zerzan along with myself, are influenced by Green Anarchy. Which advocates complete destruction of the system and destroying civilization. It advocates a return to the hunter gatherer society and way of life.

For me, this seems to make the most sense.

1st time I've heard of Green Anarchy, but brings to mind Ishmael, for sure. Interesting. Realistically though, only those uncivilized would be able to sustain that hunter/gatherer lifestyle. Surely, 100% destruction of the civilized world would hardly be a progression of anything but death. It would wipe us out almost completely.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

musicismylife78 wrote:

Commy wrote:

musicismylife78 wrote:

radical anarchist commie.

The entire system is corrupt. The government gets in no matter who the winning party is. The system is not fixable.

I am a registered socialist

like anarcho syndicalism? or libertarian socialism?


that's where i am.

i definitely have been influenced by both, but I am as radical as can get on anarchism/socialism. My hometown houses John Zerzan, during the 1999 WTO riots, he was called the "new leader" of the antiWTo movement.

Anyways Zerzan along with myself, are influenced by Green Anarchy. Which advocates complete destruction of the system and destroying civilization. It advocates a return to the hunter gatherer society and way of life.

For me, this seems to make the most sense.

i know i will regret asking but isn't anarchism diametrically opposed to socialism? Since socialism requires some form of government control to function.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

VINNY GOOMBA wrote:

Opening Band For The Sun wrote:

Illuminati, Bilderberger, Shadow Government supporter.


the sooner we get you people under control the better!

I'm more of a Trilateral Commission, UN, CFR guy myself...

now you're just being ridiculous

Those trilateral guys might steal my vote next time though.

_Crazy_Mary_

I don't like to call myself Republican because that's what Bush calls himself and he's further left than Clinton. I'm a conservative.

Commy

Opening Band For The Sun wrote:

i know i will regret asking but isn't anarchism diametrically opposed to socialism? Since socialism requires some form of government control to function.

not even.


a libertarian anarchist society would be run by the people. anarchists are of the mind that the people can do what government claims it is needed to do. so under a socialist economic plan, the distribution of resources, for example, would be carried out by elected individuals on a community level. they are not an institution, they are are not government, they are simply a group of citizens gathered to make a decision, voted into that position by the majority. and ideally the next harvest would see a copmletely different group of individuals, gathered to make the decisions. or its a true democracy, where everyone votes on every issue, where the people really do rule, not a representative structure but truly democratic.


but it works because the people are educated. obviously you need to be informed to make educated decisions.

LikeAnOpeningBandForTheSun

Commy wrote:

Opening Band For The Sun wrote:

i know i will regret asking but isn't anarchism diametrically opposed to socialism? Since socialism requires some form of government control to function.

not even.


a libertarian anarchist society would be run by the people. anarchists are of the mind that the people can do what government claims it is needed to do. so under a socialist economic plan, the distribution of resources, for example, would be carried out by elected individuals on a community level. they are not an institution, they are are not government, they are simply a group of citizens gathered to make a decision, voted into that position by the majority. and ideally the next harvest would see a copmletely different group of individuals, gathered to make the decisions. or its a true democracy, where everyone votes on every issue, where the people really do rule, not a representative structure but truly democratic.


but it works because the people are educated. obviously you need to be informed to make educated decisions.

thats what i figured. i would say a group of citizens gathered to make a decision is government, but i know anarchy isn't really about the total absence of government. i doubt it would stay anarchic and democratic for very long, but whatevah.

everything seems to break down without education. people are idiots.

i still think socialism requires massive government to survive, despite Marx's prediction to the contrary.