Topic: What stances from the opposite of your political spectrum do you support? (Read 498 times)

I'm not American so I don't identify with particular "political party" but I think I'm leaning a bit left. So I'll just list my stances that might be somewhat opposite the left's.

Death Penalty: Yes but as a sort of final resort and only after allowing several years of appeal.
Abortion: Only within the first term for cases like rape. Anything further than that only due to medical emergencies. Must have the father's consent IF possible.
Divorce: No no-fault divorce. And each person should be able to at least keep whatever he/she had before marriage.
Guns: No outright ban but they should not be available in places like supermarkets.


Weren't there instances where unions have effectively either dropped the quality of work or destroyed an industry? At least that's what I heard.

I think there's a distinction to be made here between individual (personal rights/freedom) and state (economic control/freedom), and that the traditional left/right distinction as a single axis isn't really sufficient.

I do favour a lot of personal freedom, but also a strong state that can act as a check on the excesses of capitalism.

I suppose looking at the traditional left/right spectrum I would be firmly on the left for most things, but one element of the left where I disagree somewhat is its overly lenient response to criminal activity. Whilst I'm certainly not in favour of the death penalty or pointless punitive and retributive responses, and I fully appreciate the role of mitigating circumstances such as upbringing etc, I do feel strongly that as sentient beings we each need to take at least a measure of responsibility for our own actions. Someone I know a little, a friend of a friend, has been arrested literally hundreds of times for different instances of shoplifting. The reason they habitually re-offend is because there is no deterrent.

My views are liberal. But I don't want to asociate myself to any political movements. Mainly because all liberal parties are really shitty in my country.
I think that death penalty is needed. In some cases worst criminals really deserves it.
In past I was strongly against LGBT. But later my views changed. Now I can't say that I support them. I'm more neutral and I have nothing against them.

You don't need to support fully the opinions that your group supports.
I define myself as Liberal, but I don't like the privatization of everything. For example, I want a Public Healthcare system in my country and not a private one as most Liberals wish.

Agreed.

Funny thing is that once big companies start to show their ugly side they're like "hey! they're acting like communist dictators!!!"

Yeah well what did you expect moron?

Liberal economy means the biggest wins in the end and once it has a monopole you can no longer stop him.

Wait, what is your argument against comprehensive sex education?  and if not the prepubescent age of 8, at what age do you think comprehensive sex education is appropriate?

I also used to be against it, but there's what we could call the rabid dog dilemma. A murderer is caught and put in jail, where he murders someone again and is diagnosed as a psychopath beyond recovery. Should he be kept in isolation and on meds for another 50 years? In extreme cases a death penalty is a better option.


Is there even such a thing? Those are just 2 ideas from the opposite side that I support.


Not many things can be put into black or white category these days. I watched a debate between left and right about to what extent should children be taught about sex and preferences at school. I was surprised to see that the left side found nothing bad in teaching 8 year olds about gay sex, orgasms and masturbation. We should be all about freedom of choice, but a line has to be drawn somewhere. When a country becomes too liberal scumbags start coming out of the woodwork.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/jul/18/topstories3.mainsection

Yep.  Neither of the two parties are right or left.  People who are truly on the left are actually in support of fiscal responsibility as well as gun rights. 

As crazy as this sounds, I personally think this is true as well.

I think that both parties put on a big show and dance against one another on a bunch of issues that neither one of them really care about -- think about it in the sense of gun control, healthcare, etc. They're going to let one party win some, then lose some, then the other party comes in and does the same. It's a way to show that they're fighting and it justifies the amount of money that they raise for their campaigns. Because without opposition theirs no need for either party to raise money (as they'd be able to do whatever they want, by default)

When both sides are being bipartisan -- usually on issues of war, taking away our rights, taking away privacy, etc -- this is when you see what they really want to do and what their true motives are. They continue to strip us of our rights, and they put all this BS in the news that never includes the REAL ISSUES.

I consider the current democrats and republicans to serve the same interests.  They are backing big corporations and billionaires, they both want big military and capitalism to rule all.  I consider myself neither of these.  I do like a lot of libertarian principles like no punishments for victimless crimes such as drug use.  However, I do not agree with their economic views because they want a system that exploits workers and rewards owners of capital that do little to no work.

Eh. I mean the question is what stances from the opposite of your political spectrum do you support.

I would still call myself a conservative, even if I do have a handful of principles that I don't agree on the Conservative side of politics. Though I think if you support a majority of the principles of your 'group' you still apart of the group in my mind.

I think the list that I laid out is the majority of the policies that I cross the aisle for, the rest I align with the party on (at least most of the time)

It appears most of the people here are not of any political spectrum or group, but of their own spectrum. Sure they agree with things of the left and of the right, but that is being a individual.  

This thread should be titled "On what issues do you have hypocritical, self-contradicting beliefs?" or "Which political ideologies do you abandon when they don't end up being convenient to your specific perspective?"
Lol, an authoritarian libertarian.

I think that some of these views are views that are embraced by libertarians though. Libertarians don't really care about what you do in the bedroom, and don't think that the government should have a role in regulating this.

As a side note, what was your reasoning for switching from pro-choice to pro-life? I'd love to hear that one.

I am mostly right leaning, although I also have somewhat of a libertarian tilt to my political views.

My deviation from right leaning political stances primarily surround those of gay marriage -- I feel that people should be free to do what they want in their own home, and although I do not like government induced incentives that reward certain life choices, such as marriage, I believe that so long as the relationship is not fraudulent (such as marrying a sibling, or someone you are with solely for financial/government benefits reasons), two people should be able to be married with few limitations. The above stance is limited to the point that lifestyle choices are not imposed upon me, meaning that I, as a man, should not be forced to use the restroom with a women, or to call a person something they are not.

For the most part, I am in favor of free trade with little regulation, which is a right leaning stance. However I will acknowledge when foreign governments put their thumb on the scales -- be it via tariffs, subsidies, or forced joint ventures of foreign firms operating domestically -- trade is not actually free, and that the domestic economy is put at an artificial disadvantage. I believe in these cases it is appropriate to tax and regulate trade in order to level the playing field for the domestic economy, and the goal should be to eventually have real free and fair trade. 

China uses technology to maintain and exert additional control over its people (social credit score, which can restrict the ability of people to travel or get a job), and to control what its people reads (the GFW, which censors unfavorable [to the Chinese government] information)

I used to support all libertarian ideas, including the right to move and live where you please, and I thought the right to leave the country and migrate somewhere else should be one of the basic freedoms. That ended when I saw what countries that opened their borders to muslim migrants have experienced.
There's a middle ground between many left and right ideas, like on one hand you could say that people should have the right to buy land next to you, even if they come from a different culture and a different religion, but on the other, you have to make sure they know the rules and are willing to adapt. The far left would allow them all in without any rules, and even give them money for a good start, while the far right would kick them all out.
I support some ideas from the left and some from the right side. For instance, I'm not against gays and lesbians, it's their choice, and I'm against religion being brought into politics and support the right to abortion in extreme cases, like when the health of the mother is at stake. At the same time I fully support capital punishment for the worst criminals and believe there prisoners should work instead of being served food and clean clothes at the expense of the taxpayer. So, as you can see I don't fully agree with neither side.

"Opposite of your political spectrum" is a bit ambiguous.

I'm a libertarian. Within libertarianism, I think that the biggest division is between those who came to libertarianism from the left and those who came to it from the right. I came to it from the left, so among libertarians I have rather liberal views on virtue, LGBT issues, some race-related things, the role of selfishness, the basic justification for libertarianism, some economic-theory nitpicking, etc. But on the most divisive left-right split within libertarianism, abortion, I was actually flipped from pro-choice to pro-life due to effective arguments by right-oriented libertarians.

More broadly, the opposite of libertarianism is authoritarianism, including fascism and communism. I don't agree with these groups much, but authoritarian regimes often have self-sacrifice as a core value, and I appreciate this. (But I despise collectivism, which I basically define as sacrificing the valuable few for the convenience of the ignorant many, and fascist/communist self-sacrifice is often oriented toward collectivism.) Also, communists are often pro-technology, which isn't bad on its face.

It's an interesting question to think about. IMO you can find common ground with basically anyone. Oftentimes, I find dedicated centrists the most difficult to understand, since they're basically saying that the world is not massively screwed up, which is ridiculous.

Unions are allowed in every profession except management related jobs. The purpose of a union is to collectively communicate with management, and management cannot use a union to communicate with itself.

If an employer effectively communicates with its employees, pays a competitive wage and treats its employees well, most employees will have no reason to want to join a union.

I do not have a political spectrum I have my own opinions, not of any party, just like my faith. I do not identify with any group but as a individual, as should you.
You should vote yourself, not vote someone to vote for you. You should form your own thoughts and opinions not just go with another mans, You should have your own feelings and represent yourself, Having a gang is for mobsters. You do not need to follow the leader after age 16.

If you are not yourself and just go with others and not question it, you are a sheep.

As a libertarian my views span both left and right ideological points.

I think people should watch Jordan Peterson's views on why the left / "share the wealth" crowd has points. And the left needs to understand the real potential of government abuse - especially in the current day with the left's assault on the free expression of ideas.  Repression of ideas is not the solution.