MMO Champion! Do you lean left or right?

[Mihalik]

Moderate.

I don’t believe in abortion except in the case of rape or incest or harm to the mother, or if the baby will be born with some debilitating injury or disease that will be a burden their whole life.

I'd just like to point out that that position is internally morally inconsistent. When you start introducing the asterixis of except except except you indicate you understand that the well-being of the mother takes priority before the well-being of a fetus that isn't viable outside the womb, but the fact that most of your exceptions are things such as rape and incest, you also hint that unless this arbitrary moral evil exists you are willing to take a woman's bodily autonomy from her...in essence it indicates a willingness to punish female sexuality.

That's straight up hardcore right wing conservative shit. And it also indicates that despite espousing an alleged acceptance of scientific empiricism, you don't actually understand how abortions work, what they are, what a fetus is and you are also utterly uninterested in the opinions of doctors and scientists.

[Endus]

I'd just like to point out that that position is internally morally inconsistent. When you start introducing the asterixis of except except except you indicate you understand that the well-being of the mother takes priority before the well-being of a fetus that isn't viable outside the womb, but the fact that most of your exceptions are things such as rape and incest, you also hint that unless this arbitrary moral evil exists you are willing to take a woman's bodily autonomy from her...in essence it indicates a willingness to punish female sexuality.

That's straight up hardcore right wing conservative shit. And it also indicates that despite espousing an alleged acceptance of scientific empiricism, you don't actually understand how abortions work, what they are, what a fetus is and you are also utterly uninterested in the opinions of doctors and scientists.

Indeed, it expresses a desire to straight-up discard the medical recommendations of the woman's doctor(s), to instead force a pseudo-religious dogma that has no basis in science upon her, regardless of what she or her doctor believe or choose.

Because anti-abortion positions are all pseudo-religious in nature, if not straight-up religious. There is no scientific basis for opposing abortion rights.

[minteK917]

Im clearly left wing, but i dont fall into the hypobolic trap most lefties on the internet do, specially when not understanding finances. Which often obstruct them from finding proper pragmatic solutions. When it comes to social issues right wing are simply nasty as fuck and not even worth listening to, then again they also dont understand finances either and often the horse shoe theory comes true. When you go on twitter you get a barage of dumb shit like: OMG if you take away all of bezos wealth, you can finace health care for all in the US!. Not understanding thats not even close to true, hell even if you took away all wealth of billionaire in the US, they are still a smaller chunk of taxes then millionaires right now. Which on top is just literally not understanding stock investment. Because its not liquid money they own to be taxed, its market share of companies. Meaning if they sell their shares to be taxed, the companies likely lose those investment as they are forced to buyback those shares to give the money to bezos so he can pay this imaginary tax. If you have to keep selling your shares to be taxed on selling them (people get taxed when they sale shares already, forcing you to sale shares because you added a tax to simply owning them, probably greatly reduce the rate people want to invest in peoples companies).

Same reason worker coops have a problem starting, nobody as a single exterior agent really has any incentive to buy in with large sums. If i buy half your company stocks and half your investment is my money, i sure as hell wouldnt want to split the reward fairly with every single worker, im literally just losing money. So you have to instead give your workers shares, however how do you do that right off the bat? How long do worker have to wait to get shares? I mean they certaintly cant be given by just joining as a worker for a week.

My point is, rightwing are mostly fucking attrocious monsters not even worth mentioning what they believe in and lefties are usually those dumb ass that has their heart in the right place, but their head in the fucking sky or even worse too dumb to even realize half the shit they say entails. Find a random red rose profile on twitter and ask them how surplus value is calculated for any service job or entertainment and watch their brain shut down. Or yell about how they can eat the landlords, while forgetting most landlords are just middle class, probably bought a duplex with most of their life savings and live in one of unit themselves.

[muto]

Literally nothing you listed here was remotely left-wing in any way whatsoever, other than by comparison to the hard-right extremists. One point, on abortion, is hard-right extremist in nature.

You’re right science, taxing the rich, and gun control aren’t left wing. /S

Also yes, I am pro-life sorry to hurt your feelings.

[xmirrors]

Definitely left leaning, but keep me away from the progressives.

[Endus]

You’re right science, taxing the rich, and gun control aren’t left wing. /S

Science isn't political at all. Thinking it's left-wing is an argument that fundamentally requires an extremist attitude, denying reality because it conflicts with your preconceptions.

Taxing the rich is just, like, standard economic policy. Incredibly centrist. A left-wing approach would be to question why they became rich, in the first place, and address that inequity more directly.

And gun control isn't really a political hot potato outside the USA, so calling it "left-wing" is fundamentally silly.

Also yes, I am pro-life sorry to hurt your feelings.

Doesn't hurt my feelings. Just means you're opposed to women's basic human rights. Bold thing to come out against.

[Bodakane]

This is pointless without a definition of what you consider left or right.

No it isn't. Its not nebulous at all.

[Milchshake]

Truly, the words of a king, a modern day Solomon.

[Bodakane]

You’re right science, taxing the rich, and gun control aren’t left wing. /S

Also yes, I am pro-life sorry to hurt your feelings.

Science is only left wing, because the right has chosen to oppose it because they don't like fact based conclusions.

[Mihalik]

Also yes, I am pro-life sorry to hurt your feelings.

Let's try one more time.

1. You are not pro life. Your positions/values around the subject are internally inconsistent.

2. What you are is pro-forced pregnancy for women who happened to have consensual sex.

3. You are also not "pro-science". If you were, you couldn't hold the positions you do in points 1 and 2. You cherry pick science just as right wingers tend to do. In this case you cherry pick and ignore reproductive medicine. It's not particularly different than anti-vaxxers chugging horse de wormer but refusing to wear a mask.

You can have those values, nobody can stop you, but expect to be called out when you misrepresent yourself.

[Deus Mortis]

My positions are simply all over the place and as a result there will probably never be a politician that lines up with how I feel. The opinions I have even when they go left or right have points to them that I agree with certain parts from the other side. For example I am pro military and police, but I disagree with wars like Afghanistan and your typical military industrial complex stuff, but I am for a strong military as a deterrent from other major powers such as China and Russia. On the matter of police, I am for a strong police force, but I would love to see a complete reform. I want them to have training more akin to what you see in EU countries that last 2-3 years. Also I am perfectly fine with oversight groups to make sure the bad apples are punished accordingly. The constant lowering of standards benefits no one.

Those opinions would have me labeled as right wing but I also agree with a lot of liberal opinions. Even though I may not agree with abortion on a moral standpoint I know my moral standpoint means jack shit, and from a legal standpoint I think it should be legal. It is a women's body it is her choice, simple as that no ifs and or buts, anything more and you start getting into slippery slope territory. I also agree with numerous welfare programs. They have helped me before while I was going to school, and while some may abuse them I think the net positive is far in favor of having them.

When it comes to stuff like immigration my opinion is I want everyone to do it legally, but I know our systems are all kinds of fucked and slow. I would love to see a complete revamp and to throw more money at proper staffing to see people applying to join the country I live in have a quick and painless process of becoming American. We are a melting pot after all.

[ati87]

My policies is whatever bloody works best, so a moderate in that sense. A right-winger will however say "your left wing" but from my POV I haven't found any right-wing/conservative idea that I would, to put it mildly, not being borderline retarded.

Only conservative (not a right-winger) I respect is Angela Merkel and I would not be surprised if most right-wingers wouldn't consider her to be a conservative/right-wing politician because she actually get things done. She is the only leader (from a right-wing party) I saw that looks at the situation at hand and tries to push to the most pragmatic solution.

Problem with conservatives is that they don't like solutions, they just like to be angry all the time.

[muto]

Science isn't political at all. Thinking it's left-wing is an argument that fundamentally requires an extremist attitude, denying reality because it conflicts with your preconceptions.

Taxing the rich is just, like, standard economic policy. Incredibly centrist. A left-wing approach would be to question why they became rich, in the first place, and address that inequity more directly.

And gun control isn't really a political hot potato outside the USA, so calling it "left-wing" is fundamentally silly.



Doesn't hurt my feelings. Just means you're opposed to women's basic human rights. Bold thing to come out against.

1. Yeah actually it is when a lot of people on the right are anti-vaxxers cause my rights, and don't believe in climate change.
2. No it's left wing philosophy (USA). The right usually lowers taxes on higher tax brackets.
3. True, but I live in the U.S., so yeah it's left wing philosophy, especially when the NRA funds, and supports right wing candidates.
4. Once again. Pro-life.

[draynay]

1. Yeah actually it is when a lot of people on the right are anti-vaxxers cause my rights, and don't believe in climate change.

Science isn't political just because suicidal idiots ignore it.

[Aurgjelme]

Tbh I don't have high opinions of people who identify as such. They're either too privileged to be bothered by any issues touched by politics or too ignorant to understand how things affect them. Basically the ultimate "Lala land" club. You don't have to be polarised, but when many topics that impact everyday life end up on polar ends of the political spectrum and you say "both sides" or "neither side", it looks like rejecting reality. Lucky for those with enough money to do so. Pity for those too apathetic/uninformed to vote in their own interests.

So there is no nuance in the choices people can make politically? They have to take a stand with one side, instead of trying to carve out a new path between the two polarized fronts you have in the states?

I suppose most comments here are directed towards what affiliation Americans have in politics, since in Europe, you have many options and many "true centrist" parties.
So maybe save some of that salt when you have a diverse following here on MMOC.

From a European perspective, looking at the US election and parties, its like choosing between a rock and a hard place it seems. Both your parties are extreme right wing.

[Byleth]

I'm not stupid enough to declare my political leaning outright on these forums.

Anyone who has read any of my posts over the years probably has a good idea however.

[Aurgjelme]

Pro choice : Women decide best over their own bodies.

Anti state funded religion: The religions can survive on their own, no alms from the state are needed, and worship and preaching should stay out of public spaces.

A strong welfare state: I have grown up in the Scandinavian region, and I appreciate both paying into and getting help from the community. At the same time I see how fragile it is and how some neighbor countries like Sweden is struggling due to a less integrated society.

Strong borders: Again, Sweden is a good example on how things can turn when you dont manage integration.

Pro LGBTQ: Love is love! The state and other people should stay out of others peoples business when it comes to this, unless its vile stuff like pedophilia like @Themius keeps defending on this forum. Disgusting.

As for business models, I have seen how big multinational companies are doing their best to maximize profits, while cutting in the standards of workers, how organizations like the EU has forced small businesses away from the rural places in my country and enforced freedom of movement for all European workers. Resulting in lower wages for certain professions where companies can hire cheap labor from the eastern block.
And how the big businesses avoid taxes like national companies might while enjoying all the benefits.

Climate is important: But destroying nature is not the way to save our climate. Building wind farms right on top of bird sanctuaries and in the spawning pools of our fish seems like a bad idea, but is already under way. All to save climate, when in reality its just to help Germany in its energy crisis. My country is self sufficient with hydro power plants, which can even be upgraded further to increase their effectivity.
50% of the companies that are building wind farms in my country are listed in tax havens.
The green deal seems more like a sham so investors within the fields can make money from subsidies and tax payers, while the nature suffers.

Gun laws: I own two weapons, but I am a hunter. And there are strict laws for owning guns. As it should be. You should have a valid reason for owning one, and you have to get a permit from the police, and it has to be registered. This should be the bare minimum for owning a gun.

As a Scandinavian I really do feel like we are centrist for the most part in many issues, and we have no problem staying there.
The militarized "ALL OR NOTHING" posters here from the other side of the pond show exactly how good the system over there is a polarizing
each other over politics, race and beliefs.

[JohnBrown1917]

Truly, the words of a king, a modern day Solomon.

Brave of you to post that when your straw-men left 'podcasts' caused you to move to the right.

- - - Updated - - -

Pro choice

Strong borders: Again, Sweden is a good example on how things can turn when you dont manage integration.

.

By being among the countries with the highest standards of living and highest HDI in the world?

[Lenonis]

Most people I'm sure think I'm an extreme left wing nutjob on here but I'm not really. Sure when it comes to social issues I am definitely in the left wing camp. Mainly because the right wing approach to social issues is filled with fear, hatred, and a complete lack of rationality.

For example I'm anti-abortion. But in the sense that I want to get to a world where abortion isn't NEEDED. Not a world where it's outlawed (which most pro-choice people feel btw). Condoms and sex ed for all. Vastly expand health services especially to poor and rural communities. A far better system for those children given up by parents who know they can't provide. And so on and so on.

For the rest it's more "mind your own god damn business". As long as no one is being harmed stay out of it. If people want to own 92384938 guns, let them. If people want to marry the same sex, let them. If people want to marry multiple people, let them.

Before people think I'm about to jump on the @Machismo train I also believe people in masse are generally horrible and corporations are inherently sociopathic and need to be highly regulated. Businesses don't get to discriminate. Period. Companies don't get to abuse workers. Companies need to pay a living wage (which would be tied to a locality -- this state/federal minimum wage nonsense is not working).

I believe in science. Mandate vaccines. Mandate masks. Toss people who maliciously spread misinformation in jail. I'm over enabling people to be abusive awful people for profit and letting them lead ignorant people to their deaths. It needs to be criminal.

I also think we're smarter than we like to think -- we can figure out solutions that don't create a slippery slope situation. We can solve immigration issues. We can solve income disparity issues. But we can't when a minority of the people in this country that somehow still has a majority of power just wants to see everyone else suffer.

Anyway, that's my rant for this morning. Thanks for coming to my ted talk.

[Glorious Leader]

No one should spend more then they have

From a point of logic it has to be this way. The government issues the currenncy tt doesn't exist without it already being spent first. The government spends currency in order to marshal resources for a public good or trust. You wouldn't have that money if the government didn't spend it first.