I want to know all the titles people class themselves with politically and examples of what they are. I'm just researching these things ATM.
conservatism = someone/thing who doesn't change
socialism = stealing someone's stuff and giving it to someone else.
capitalism = I can do what I want with my money
republic = I vote for someone along with others to represent me (isn't that a democracy though?)
democracy = majority rule
libertarianism = freedom
anarchy = without rulers
Are you asking us to identify ourselves or how we define concepts?
define the concepts you use in your own words, and yes, it would be nice if you guys identify yourselves and very generous...thanks.
Welcome to the Mises Forum!
Definitely check out The Ultimate Beginner meta-thread for a comprehensive collection of relevant links and threads. I think you'll find it really useful. (Also be sure to check out the welcome link there for forum tips and how-to's)
You pose an interesting task. I suppose such a list would have been quite useful for me at some early point...although the problem with such lists is that they generally get a few things inaccurate. At the very least there are people who subscribe to one or more of the terms and yet don't identify with the common understanding of the word.
"conservatism" and "liberalism" are two of the hardest, because they are so widely used today, and yet have meant so many different things through history.
I haven't read through this whole thing, but at a preliminary glance, it seems a lot more accurate than most...and definitely more than one would expect it to be. I think it's a decent starting point.
Conservative vs. Liberal Beliefs
Socialism generally refers to a level of State control of an economy. Where exactly that level is, (i.e. when exactly you have "socialism") is a matter of pretty contentious debate.
I describe capitalism here.
republic I tend to think of as "rule of law"...Mises describes speaks on this here.
democracy I would say is majority rule as well. The Founding Fathers had a few things to say on that.
libertarianism...that's a big one. Especially within the community of people who consider themselves libertarians, there is a really wide range of definitions...at least in the details. The general principles are that of non-aggression and private property. See the section "libertarianism" in the beginner meta-thread.
anarchy is pretty well defined by the dictionary the way you put it. But others believe it to inherently mean many other things...the most common of which is "chaos".
Again, welcome!
I like Ron Paul's choice: voluntaryist.
Also, thanks OP for noting anarchism is "without rulers". I was pushing that definition back in 2008 on the C4L forums when I didn't think ANYONE in the world agreed with it, and recently I've heard Stefan Molyneux and you agreeing with it.
does that mean I can voluntarily not participate in the tax system if i like, and form my own community?
Your definitions are pretty charged at the moment. Saying that socialism is "stealing someone's stuff and giving it to someone else" assumes an already existing property structure, and is hence biased towards capitalism.
I'm not saying that the definition is ultimately wrong, but I would take a more academic and neutral-toned definition such as the one JJ gave.
hashem:Also, thanks OP for noting anarchism is "without rulers". I was pushing that definition back in 2008 on the C4L forums when I didn't think ANYONE in the world agreed with it, and recently I've heard Stefan Molyneux and you agreeing with it.
...and the dictionary. (even if it does seem a little politcally charged)
Here's another. The do tend to lump "lawlessness" and "chaos" in with it, and I think that's really more due to common modern usage than actual etymology or traditional meaning.
if you don't have someone's property....how can you distribute it...?
Conservatism:
Socialism
Capitalism:
Republic:
Democracy:
Libertarianism:
Anarchism:
EDIT
These are very strict and acedemic definitions, FYI
Also, I'd define myself as a centerist anarchist, that is to say favoring an anarcho-capitalist society in which socialist, non-profit, and untraditional forms of organization are available to all those who wish to participate.
I think Neodoxy stated those definitions better than I ever could, and I pretty much agree with them
I'm essentially apolitical - but when crap starts hitting the fan in real life and I'm forced into political situations and thought I tend to be semi-Burkean... I have no major issue with Ron Paul given the current situations and climate
"As in a kaleidoscope, the constellation of forces operating in the system as a whole is ever changing." - Ludwig Lachmann
"When A Man Dies A World Goes Out of Existence" - GLS Shackle
Neodoxy: These are very strict and acedemic definitions, FYI Also, I'd define myself as a centerist anarchist, that is to say favoring an anarcho-capitalist society in which socialist, non-profit, and untraditional forms of organization are available to all those who wish to participate.
Excellent post friend! You win the Unbiased Post of the Sometime award
In States a fresh law is looked upon as a remedy for evil. Instead of themselves altering what is bad, people begin by demanding a law to alter it. ... In short, a law everywhere and for everything!
~Peter Kropotkin
"Excellent post friend! You win the Unbiased Post of the Sometime award "
:D!
Finally! After all these years! I'm so happy!