Take this survey (Isidewith.com), post your results


I also didn't do the "how much does this matter to you " thing:

I side with Green Party on most political issues

Parties you side with...

94%


Green Party
on economic, foreign policy, domestic policy, environmental, social, and immigration issues.
compare answers


84%


Democrats
on domestic policy, economic, environmental, social, foreign policy, and immigration issues.
compare answers


73%


Libertarians
on domestic policy, foreign policy, social, and healthcare issues.
compare answers


62%


Constitution Party
on domestic policy and education issues.
compare answers


31%


Republicans
on education issues.
compare answers

Show all parties
Parties you side with by issue...

Somewhat important to me

the Environment
I side with Green Party on most environmental issues


Somewhat important to me

Domestic Policy
I side with Libertarians on most domestic policy issues


Somewhat important to me

Healthcare
I side with Libertarians on most healthcare issues


Somewhat important to me

Social
I side with Green Party and Democrats on most social issues


Somewhat important to me

Foreign Policy
I side with Green Party on most foreign policy issues


Somewhat important to me

Education
I side with Constitution Party, Republicans, and Conservative Party on most education issues


Somewhat important to me

Immigration
I side with Green Party on most immigration issues


Somewhat important to me

the Economy
I side with Green Party on most economic issues

Your ideology...


Economic
Freedom

Personal
Freedom
Legislated
Equality
Legislated
Morality
Centrist
Libertarian
Authoritarian
Right
Wing
Left
Wing
You

Left-Wing

Your political beliefs would be considered moderately Left-Wing on an ideological scale, meaning you tend to support policies that promote social and economic equality.

Where voters side with you...
 
Last edited:
th
 
Voluntaryist Manifesto

Voluntaryism is a philosophy that is applicable to all human beings. It is based on the concepts of the self, relationships, and society, whereby all interactions are voluntary as far as possible.

The self is that which defines an individual human being. It is an effect of consciousness, which is in turn an effect of matter and energy. Therefore, the self is the concept that describes the mind and body of an individual human being. The individual is independent of others and as such has sovereignty over their body, mind, and actions. They in effect own themselves, and the effects of their selves. This is known as self-ownership, and forms the basis of ethics. Each individual prefers to not be aggressed against. If they were to prefer to aggress against others then they would also prefer aggression against themselves. It is for this reason that the ethic of non-aggression is universally preferable. This therefore means that all initiation of physical violence is unethical. To use violence in defence of the self can be called ethical, as it is preferable for the self to survive over not surviving. Any form of physical aggression is an abdication of this preference in the moment that the violence is initiated. For the individual to be ethical, all relationships with others must be voluntary.

Each individual becomes physically independent of any other individual at birth, however is dependent on caregivers for material and psychological support until the age upon which they are capable to care for themselves in maturity. As caregivers chose to produce offspring, they chose the obligation to care and raise them to maturity. If support is lacking during these years of immaturity, the individual will reach maturity with a high probability of developing psychological problems. It is therefore necessary for caregivers to provide the maximum support possible, to maximise all positive interactions, and eliminate all negative interactions. In so doing, individuals will reach maturity as fully realised human beings. Other than the relationship between caregiver and offspring, all relationships must be negotiated between consenting parties. As all relationships with others must be voluntary for individuals to be ethical, no individual can use force against another. It is for this reason that a marketplace of individuals, products, and services is available and utilised. In a market individuals are free to choose. If an individual is not free to choose, then the situation is no longer ethical.

A society is a concept that describes the relationships of a large group of individuals, such as a market. It also refers to another group of individuals known as a government. A government is a collection of individuals who believe that they are exempt from ethical conduct, many of whom experienced a deficiency of support during immaturity. Individuals not of the government have no choice but to interact with those in the government. Each time an individual produces something of value, a portion of that value is forcibly taken by those in government. Each time an individual exchanges something of value with another individual, a portion of that value is forcibly taken by those in government. Any individual who resists the taking of value will be declared unethical. If the individual resists to the point of using violence, it is unlikely that the individual will survive. Sometimes a government will declare another government as unethical and attempt to force that government to comply with their wishes. This is known as war, and the reality of the situation is that many innocent individuals do not survive such conflicts. It is therefore necessary that the concept known as government be phased out of use and replaced with a market. This is the only ethical position available.

When individuals are supported by their caregivers until maturity and do not believe they are exempt from ethics, violence will diminish and voluntary interactions will flourish.

============================================================================================
 
Voluntaryist Manifesto
Voluntaryism is a philosophy that is applicable to all human beings. It is based on the concepts of the self, relationships, and society, whereby all interactions are voluntary as far as possible.

The self is that which defines an individual human being. It is an effect of consciousness, which is in turn an effect of matter and energy. Therefore, the self is the concept that describes the mind and body of an individual human being. The individual is independent of others and as such has sovereignty over their body, mind, and actions. They in effect own themselves, and the effects of their selves. This is known as self-ownership, and forms the basis of ethics. Each individual prefers to not be aggressed against. If they were to prefer to aggress against others then they would also prefer aggression against themselves. It is for this reason that the ethic of non-aggression is universally preferable. This therefore means that all initiation of physical violence is unethical. To use violence in defence of the self can be called ethical, as it is preferable for the self to survive over not surviving. Any form of physical aggression is an abdication of this preference in the moment that the violence is initiated. For the individual to be ethical, all relationships with others must be voluntary.

Each individual becomes physically independent of any other individual at birth, however is dependent on caregivers for material and psychological support until the age upon which they are capable to care for themselves in maturity. As caregivers chose to produce offspring, they chose the obligation to care and raise them to maturity. If support is lacking during these years of immaturity, the individual will reach maturity with a high probability of developing psychological problems. It is therefore necessary for caregivers to provide the maximum support possible, to maximise all positive interactions, and eliminate all negative interactions. In so doing, individuals will reach maturity as fully realised human beings. Other than the relationship between caregiver and offspring, all relationships must be negotiated between consenting parties. As all relationships with others must be voluntary for individuals to be ethical, no individual can use force against another. It is for this reason that a marketplace of individuals, products, and services is available and utilised. In a market individuals are free to choose. If an individual is not free to choose, then the situation is no longer ethical.

A society is a concept that describes the relationships of a large group of individuals, such as a market. It also refers to another group of individuals known as a government. A government is a collection of individuals who believe that they are exempt from ethical conduct, many of whom experienced a deficiency of support during immaturity. Individuals not of the government have no choice but to interact with those in the government. Each time an individual produces something of value, a portion of that value is forcibly taken by those in government. Each time an individual exchanges something of value with another individual, a portion of that value is forcibly taken by those in government. Any individual who resists the taking of value will be declared unethical. If the individual resists to the point of using violence, it is unlikely that the individual will survive. Sometimes a government will declare another government as unethical and attempt to force that government to comply with their wishes. This is known as war, and the reality of the situation is that many innocent individuals do not survive such conflicts. It is therefore necessary that the concept known as government be phased out of use and replaced with a market. This is the only ethical position available.

When individuals are supported by their caregivers until maturity and do not believe they are exempt from ethics, violence will diminish and voluntary interactions will flourish.

============================================================================================

Just take the damned poll......lets see where you fall..
 
Voluntaryist Manifesto
Voluntaryism is a philosophy that is applicable to all human beings. It is based on the concepts of the self, relationships, and society, whereby all interactions are voluntary as far as possible.

The self is that which defines an individual human being. It is an effect of consciousness, which is in turn an effect of matter and energy. Therefore, the self is the concept that describes the mind and body of an individual human being. The individual is independent of others and as such has sovereignty over their body, mind, and actions. They in effect own themselves, and the effects of their selves. This is known as self-ownership, and forms the basis of ethics. Each individual prefers to not be aggressed against. If they were to prefer to aggress against others then they would also prefer aggression against themselves. It is for this reason that the ethic of non-aggression is universally preferable. This therefore means that all initiation of physical violence is unethical. To use violence in defence of the self can be called ethical, as it is preferable for the self to survive over not surviving. Any form of physical aggression is an abdication of this preference in the moment that the violence is initiated. For the individual to be ethical, all relationships with others must be voluntary.

Each individual becomes physically independent of any other individual at birth, however is dependent on caregivers for material and psychological support until the age upon which they are capable to care for themselves in maturity. As caregivers chose to produce offspring, they chose the obligation to care and raise them to maturity. If support is lacking during these years of immaturity, the individual will reach maturity with a high probability of developing psychological problems. It is therefore necessary for caregivers to provide the maximum support possible, to maximise all positive interactions, and eliminate all negative interactions. In so doing, individuals will reach maturity as fully realised human beings. Other than the relationship between caregiver and offspring, all relationships must be negotiated between consenting parties. As all relationships with others must be voluntary for individuals to be ethical, no individual can use force against another. It is for this reason that a marketplace of individuals, products, and services is available and utilised. In a market individuals are free to choose. If an individual is not free to choose, then the situation is no longer ethical.

A society is a concept that describes the relationships of a large group of individuals, such as a market. It also refers to another group of individuals known as a government. A government is a collection of individuals who believe that they are exempt from ethical conduct, many of whom experienced a deficiency of support during immaturity. Individuals not of the government have no choice but to interact with those in the government. Each time an individual produces something of value, a portion of that value is forcibly taken by those in government. Each time an individual exchanges something of value with another individual, a portion of that value is forcibly taken by those in government. Any individual who resists the taking of value will be declared unethical. If the individual resists to the point of using violence, it is unlikely that the individual will survive. Sometimes a government will declare another government as unethical and attempt to force that government to comply with their wishes. This is known as war, and the reality of the situation is that many innocent individuals do not survive such conflicts. It is therefore necessary that the concept known as government be phased out of use and replaced with a market. This is the only ethical position available.

When individuals are supported by their caregivers until maturity and do not believe they are exempt from ethics, violence will diminish and voluntary interactions will flourish.

============================================================================================

reportred as spam, spaMBLA.

i don't want to hear your justifications fr pedophilia.
 
reportred as spam, spaMBLA.

i don't want to hear your justifications fr pedophilia.

Whiner.

There are really just two kinds of government, those that people are encompassed by on an involuntary basis, and those where they are not.

Declarations people make concerning which flavor of involuntary mode they prefer are like slaves arguing about whose massa is better.

I'll butt out now and let you continue with your fantasy of why your brand of intolerance is the best.
 
Just take the damned poll......lets see where you fall..

I took one years ago. Back then I was as liberty oriented as you can get. Now, I am not in favor of any involuntary government for me, so it's sort of not applicable.

Now it would be like asking Dorothy if she was a good witch or a bad witch...like her, I'm not a witch at all. Have fun.
 
You would think, but I think most, not all people think their vote is wasted if not on the big 2.

Indeed.

I've often wondered it it would even be possible to have a 3rd party actually rise to power. It's a catch-22 sort of situation.
 
Indeed.

I've often wondered it it would even be possible to have a 3rd party actually rise to power. It's a catch-22 sort of situation.


So then you can have a choice between 3 parties that will tell you how to live rather than 2?

The question you might ask is what if YOU ran your life, rather than a politician?
 
Indeed.

I've often wondered it it would even be possible to have a 3rd party actually rise to power. It's a catch-22 sort of situation.
It would be interesting, but the dems and repubs have made it almost impossible. The bull shit tea-party is the closest we've gotten in 60 years, and that's a group of weirdos who still masquerade as Gop. I think we would be better off without parties and have people with good ideas and no predetermined allegiances to anyone but their constituency.
 
It would be interesting, but the dems and repubs have made it almost impossible. The bull shit tea-party is the closest we've gotten in 60 years, and that's a group of weirdos who still masquerade as Gop. I think we would be better off without parties and have people with good ideas and no predetermined allegiances to anyone but their constituency.

What if their constituency was made of lots of people that can't agree on which ideas are good?
 
So then you can have a choice between 3 parties that will tell you how to live rather than 2?

More accurately, I wondered if it was possible.

The question you might ask is what if YOU ran your life, rather than a politician?

I run the vast majority of all aspects of my life. I don't live in prison, after all.
 
It would be interesting, but the dems and repubs have made it almost impossible. The bull shit tea-party is the closest we've gotten in 60 years, and that's a group of weirdos who still masquerade as Gop. I think we would be better off without parties and have people with good ideas and no predetermined allegiances to anyone but their constituency.

That would work for the first few minutes until somebody remembers 'the good ole days of getting what you want'.

Sucks. EVERYTHING SUCKS!
 
Back
Top