Hay!
PDid wanted to deny it.
I <intoning with squinty eyes> named names!
This isn't a global liberal endeavor---just based on what is right and left in this little microcosm. I sort of wanted to see it for myself.
Good grief!!! I'm on the list of the usual suspects!!!!!
LOL, ehBeth. No, you're just fine the way you are.
I'd be very interested to know what policies in Canada you consider too left, ehBeth. I've always been really curious about members here, who explain that they are to the right of the political spectrum in their countries, but who I consider liberal. What on earth are *those* lefties espousing that you disagree with?
Any global right-leaners, who would take that up? Discussing the platforms and policies of the Left in countries other than the US?
There aren't any righties she's named yet, Crave.
So I'm still waiting for the comparison which, to any casual observer, would meet the definition of of 'overwhelming' and/or 'handily outnumbered'.
Soooo, let me help with the counting...
I just glanced at the home page, and there are 17,363 registered members. How many of those do you choose to eliminate as a result of being unable to decipher their political bent?
(I'm not choosing; you are, since you appear to be taking over for timber).
Would you consider an overwhelming percentage to be 75%, or a ratio of three to one, of the remaining "politically identifiable" members? I will accept that as meeting the definition of 'solid majority', but not quite 'overwhelming' or 'handily outnumbered'. (It seems to me like 10 to 1 or 20 to 1 comes closer to meeting that standard, but why quibble?)
You may, BTW, identify members as liberal or conservative by any method you choose; I won't quarrel with it. I'll leave that to those (some have done so while I have composed this) who may read your list and say, "Hey, I'm not a liberal!" You may even enjoy the satisfaction of finding one who's willing to write "I'm a liberal and ashamed of it", thus meeting a criterion in the other thread where you're also IMO talking out of your ass... :wink:
I don't think we have an authentic Conservative here.
Timber and I are very liberal socially--but I guess we would count.
Bird
Me
McG?
Brand X
Fox
We've lost most of the others I'm thinking of...
(More thinking)
Roger, Craven and Thomas, I don't categorize...
Sofia wrote:I don't think we have an authentic Conservative here.
Egads. I'm sure you're wrong about this also.
[quote=""Sofia"]Timber and I are very liberal socially--but I guess we would count.[/quote]
Any chance either of you are ashamed of it? :wink:
Sofia wrote:This isn't a global liberal endeavor---just based on what is right and left in this little microcosm. I sort of wanted to see it for myself.
What definition of right and left are you using, Sofia?
anything like this?
tons of options out there.
This site has some interesting definitions/ideas.
Quote:What is the popular concept of "Liberal" in America today?
The current popular concept of "Liberal" is often "Leftist" and is associated with "big government," economic regulation, progressive taxation, and progressive social policy, such as support for gay rights, unlimited free speech, and Affirmative Action.
With the exception of gay rights and free speech, none of these other issues are actually "Liberal" policies in the classical sense. Furthermore, liberalism in the classical sense is not "Leftist" in a full political spectrum.
This is critical to understand if one is to understand the political landscape of the 20th century.
Liberalism was of course initially opposed by the major feudal establishments: the aristocracy and the clergy. The Liberal movement embodied the movement for the overthrow of aristocracy and the establishment of secular government with separation of Church and State. Capitalism was also directly related to Liberalism, as merchants and industrialists sought to do away with the feudal systems of economic control, such as mercantilism, family ownership of land rights, and oppressive taxation used to fund the living expenses of royalty.
During the late 19th and early 20th century Liberalism came under attack from all sides, both Left and Right. Though "conservatives" continued to oppose Liberalism all along, "conservative" opposition to Liberalism was rapidly diminishing throughout the 19th century.
Any chance either of you are ashamed of it? He said with a wink and a smirk!
-----
Not me.
Seems it's impossible to make me ashamed of anything that constitutes who I am. God knows hobitbob gave it his best shot.
and you've got to love this one
Seems you may be an anarchist, Sofia.
Quote:The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal "anarchism" championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America's Libertarian Party, which couples law of the jungle right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues.
Oh my - Sofia, timber and O'Bill as neo-liberals 
Cool graph, ehBeth.
No, no such graphic Olympics in my reasoning. Just comparing all members with one another. If someone almost always comes down on either the right or left side of an issue with stunning predictability, I feel confident assigning them a list.
I'm sure there is some group somewhere that would think I'm wildly liberal (That would be the town I live in)--but here, I'm conservative.
That's not the first time I've been referred to as an anarchist. Hmmm. Your site kept re-defining me! I ended up as the Dalai Lama.
I may be.
<striking meditative pose>
<legs too tangled>
Sofia wrote:Roger, Craven and Thomas, I don't categorize...
I do:
roger = fiscal and social conservative, only gives you a doubt because he cedes the other side's point a lot
Thomas = fiscal conservative social liberal
me = social liberal, fiscal liberal
cool - I'm dodging all bullets - phew.
Sofia wrote: If someone almost always comes down on either the right or left side of an issue with stunning predictability,
But which right or left, Sofia? On one quiz on one of those sites you'd be right, on the other site you'd be left. Depending on the site, and quiz, I come out as centrist, Libertarian, liberal (but not Liberal - because that's right-wing) and very occasionally just to the right of centre.
I am a wussy centrist. Been condemned for it for years.
It is the left who moved to the right.
Funny how numbers of people/"the majority" sometimes gets drowned out by the ranting of a few.
This can happen on both sides...our perceptions are always that our own "side" has the logic and the others have the ranting. I think this may be the origin or Wilso's complaint...and I can see his point...I certainly have not actively disagreed with him on politics.
Our biggest disagreement was over how good or bad "When Harry met Sally" was, as a film.
KP
It's become pretty obvious that the politicians on both sides have been fueling the fires of anger in all of us for quite some time and some people are still falling for it, getting inappropriately angry because some politician has gotten them all fired up about something that's completely out of their control. It's best to see it for what it is, and try not to buy into it.
A house divided cannot stand.
Fair observation, SueZCue. Some folks, though, are just unpleasant and/or immoderate by nature, at least on the 'net; for such, politics merely is an excuse to display their lack of judgement, maturity, and civility. Religio-philosophic discussions are another favorite playground for the type. Temper tantrums and attention-getting are their chief entertainment; the more outrage they can generate, the happier they are. Sorta sad, really.
One poster comes to mind for me. Since being here, I have never felt the need to not respond to a member. I now choose to ignore someone, and that to me is sad.
