[Ekzamenov]

I don't know what the f*ck is going on in this world, but I'm pretty sure that those "Conservatives" and "Liberals" in Congress arer responsible and the jack-offs who insist that everyone choose one or the other of their lame-ass labels are jut making it worse. I'm abstaining from this trolling poll.

[biannaruh]

LOL.... ol' ablarc srikes again? Ablarc just think: all that education, years of fine work.... and you wind up being nothing more than... a troll.

I think "troll" is the new "dirty old man"

[Verriasana]

Crikey, called a troll twice in the space of just over a week .

Although I responded to this thread, I now feel out of place, being from the Antipodes 'n' all...

...but...labels (and nothing more) -- indeed.

Really, why did you ask, Ablarc?

[Adollobdeb]

To find out.


Midtown Guy responded forthrightly because he feels no obligation to mince words. Everyone else seems duty bound to proclaim their centrism, their ambivalence or their "moderation." Truth is, this poll may have uncovered that these days most folks don't really believe in anything.

Let's hear it for Nihilism, the political philosophy du jour.

You can only find Nihilists in the middle, where it's "OK" to not know or care what you believe; at the ends, you have to take a position.

.

[fuesquemill]

Still, to be called a troll is ridiculous. Over 9,000 posts and many of them very articulate and insightful. Where is the venom coming from?

[OvDojQXN]

You can only find Nihilists in the middle, where it's "OK" to not know or care what you believe; at the ends, you have to take a position.

Nah. A hard-line leads to all sorts of disaster. It is the stuff of a by-gone era. Communists, Capitalists, Socialists. The right path is in the mix.

[Lunims]

Like Joe Lieberman?

[Cnbaapuy]

The problem here is that the audience is global. Note Merry's post about the labels in Australia and how it's all turned on it's head. Here in Italy there is too another set of definitions. Confusing for Americans. It is especially difficult for us to respond in way that adhere to US concepts.

[S.T.D.]

I think it's often just confusion emanating from the parties' choice of names. So in Australia, a Liberal is really a conservative. You can capitalize the words and get one meaning, or leave them lower case and get a generic or true meaning.

Remember the National Socialist Workers' Party? Not Socialist, not a workers' party. That sly fox, Goebbels.

[shodulsilfeli]

I don'tt hink Ablarc is a troll. I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.

We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always devisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent.

I enjoy forum members making provocative posts, challenging the status quo, and offering new perspectives. For me , this poll asks each of us to put a narrow label on ourselves that simply doesn't apply.

What of the socially progressive, fiscal conservative? What of the conservative business man that sees a need for increased government intervention via regulation of out-of-control industries , e.g. insurance and financial.

It is a very narrow poll. I think the numbers would be greatly altered and much more telling had their been an option of "other".

The poll is polarizing and maybe Ablarc wanted to demonstrate how useless polls can be. I don't know. I think it is worthless and will be fun only to those that love to take online polls.

[Stovegeothnon]

So in Australia, a Liberal is really a conservative. You can capitalize the words and get one meaning, or leave them lower case and get a generic or true meaning.

I don't think there's much confusion globally. Liberalism as used in the US, now refers to Social Liberalism. In the past, it meant Classical Liberalism, an entirely different thing.

The poll is running as I expected.

I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.

1. You don't have to vote.

2. You can vote in secret.

3. You can explain your choice.

Nothing "trolling" about it.

We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always devisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent. Usually by visitors who label people without knowing anything about them other than from a few posts.

[Tribas4u]

Still, to be called a troll is ridiculous.

And both times by those highlighted in orange

Is there a hidden definition in the Mod Dictionary?

[LindaSmithIV]

My picture is in the Mod Dictionary under "groovy".

[ådrrraj]

And both times by those highlighted in orange

Yes, disturbing.

I think it's often just confusion emanating from the parties' choice of names. So in Australia, a Liberal is really a conservative. You can capitalize the words and get one meaning, or leave them lower case and get a generic or true meaning.

This poll was posted under News and Politics, so I assumed that the poll was seeking a response from a political point of view (it's neither, considering that the relevance of certain threads here has come into question recently, but I digress).

I mentioned in my post that I wholeheartedly embrace the non-political definitions of the word liberal. Can't say the same for the pols here, of any persuasion. Don Chipp (Democrats) (interview) espoused a reasonable starting point, but it all went to hell pretty quickly, as was to be expected. Representational democracy just isn't the same as the real thing (whatever that is).

[RalfDweflywex]

My picture is in the Mod Dictionary under "groovy".

Lots of wrinkles don't count as grooves Fab.......

[lapyignipinge]

I don't know what the f*ck is going on in this world, but I'm pretty sure that those "Conservatives" and "Liberals" in Congress are responsible and the jack-offs who insist that everyone choose one or the other of their lame-ass labels are jut making it worse. I'm abstaining from this trolling poll.

Idon't think Ablarc is a troll.

Thanks for the benefit of the doubt, BR. Not positive that’s a good thing.

When things are bad, it’s good to have “subversives”; they’re tomorrow’s straight arrows. History has been driven mostly by folks whom at least some people regarded as trolls, because they asked questions that challenged cherished beliefs --Jesus Christ, Socrates, Oscar Wilde, Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, Mahatma Gandhi-- and they got people so mad that folks didn’t rest till they had made every one of them dead.

I think the poll is, at its heart, trolling. It is asking who defined themselves by terminology advocated by the extreme left.

No idea what you mean here; the conclusion precedes the observation, and the observation is highly suspect. This sounds like something Sarah Palin would say. The truth about her and her followers, however, is that they define themselves in no uncertain terms; and then they define everyone else.

We have seen the posts on WNY that involve the word "Liberal" and it is always divisive, inflammatory, angry, and, often, incoherent.

Examples?

I enjoy forum members making provocative posts, challenging the status quo, and offering new perspectives.

Well, I don’t know about challenging the status quo or offering new perspectives, but the post certainly seems provocative to you, so you must be enjoying it.

But really, what’s provocative about it? It’s a question Gallup asks a thousand people a day.

For me , this poll asks each of us to put a narrow label on ourselves that simply doesn't apply.

You better leave MidtownGuy out of the “each”; he doesn’t mind so much putting a narrow label on himself; knows where he stands, I guess.

The poll is too clear cut. I'm liberal on some things but conservative on others.

At least you’re not angry.

What of the socially progressive, fiscal conservative?

He can decide whether his allegiance is greater to gay marriage or a cap on the minimum wage.

What of the conservative business man that sees a need for increased government intervention via regulation of out-of-control industries, e.g. insurance and financial?

This person is fictional, because oxymoronic. You could, however, refer to him as a somewhat liberal businessman.

It is a very narrow poll. I think the numbers would be greatly altered and much more telling had their been an option of "other".

That’s right; almost everyone except MidtownGuy would have been “other.” What would we have learned from that? That most people have allegiance to some views of both liberals and conservatives? Pshaw, most of us already knew that.

The poll is polarizing and maybe Ablarc wanted to demonstrate how useless polls can be. I don't know.

Getting close.

The introduction makes it clear the pollster (the trollster) thinks that most folks think it won't apply.

What I really am finding out is the surprising capacity of “moderates” and “centrists” to be madder than wet hens. I thought that was reserved for extremists at each end. Seems like it turns out there are extremists of the Center. That’s something I didn’t know. Did you?

But why is the poll polarizing? Surely because its rules don’t allow us to proclaim what many of us Americans think is the only virtue: Centrism. Look what harm the President is doing to his ability to get something done for us by applying the presently-naive ideology of Centrist bipartisanship. Turns out, in the Congress there's no one in the Center. No one to compromise with.

I would call myself a European conservative. Let's say center right.

In Europe, you can say exactly where you stand without getting offended that someone asked you to label yourself.

Also Australia:

I despise conservatism (and politics).

I'm all for progress and reform (much more than the pols of any persuasion) and embrace other aspects of the definition of liberal.

It's all very confusing and contradictory. Perhaps it's just the terminology.

You can’t do without words for things; it’s the only way you can talk.

Perhaps capitalist and socialist are more internationally uniform, and would be more useful terms to describe an aspect of one's perspective.

Problem is, these days even the self-styled Socialists are really Capitalists –like the ones in China; and the self-styled Capitalists (like Fabrizio) believe in certain Socialist virtues –like government health insurance. Eh, Fabrizio?

I am a neither conservative nor liberal Republican, but I am more capitalist. While I do belive the rich makes jobs for the poor, it is kinda how the human money eco-system works.

You could say the rich make jobs for the poor, and the poor make wealth for the rich. To get really rich, it helps to have those minimum-wagers.

Don't Fence Me In.

('Cuz you'll only use it against me.)

Mildly paranoid, you say?

[masterso]

Where would you put China?

Or France, for that matter?

At this point, I'm not sure what to make of China's structure. If anyone here feels they have that sorted out, please comment.

I perceive France to be well into the socialist realm due to their nationalization of many major industries.

[Polopolop]

I'm a progressive, far left, pinko, radical, liberal, socialist and PROUD.
Eat the rich and distribute all their children's toys.

Fair enough. I have not met many who will come out and make a statement like that.

[jessyhalm]

I fear Obama is turning me into a moderate.

[ZesePreodaNed]

^ From what? And how is he doing it?