Total Posts:11|Showing Posts:1-11
Jump to topic:

The true Centrist

Outplayz
Posts: 3,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 2:25:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think i am a true centrist. AMA and help me find out.

Guns: They should be cherished. It is a freedom that keeps all our other freedoms. It is a born right to be able to defend yourself, so you should have the right. With that said, there should be universal background checks. There should be zero guns sold without running a background check. Every state should federally be required to update the NICS system. Not doing so is negligent and allows sick people to get their hands on a gun. Furthermore, i would be okay with a registry... but, currently i am not bc i do not trust the left. If we give them that, they have free rain to punish gun owners, charge them with penalties, and ban any gun at any time... and, with that being their intention... i say no to registry right now.

Abortion: I am okay with it. I don't want to pay for it however. Also, there should be no abortions once a baby has brain activity. Brain activity means life, so at that point it should be too late. Don't know much more specifics, but that is where i stand.

Foreign Policy: If there are countries with human rights violations it is someone's responsibility to help the country. Someone powerful, and we happen to be the most powerful. If there are no human rights violations. The army should be back home. America first. We should make America a fortress and we can with the army back. Defense and offense when warranted.

Immigration: We need to have borders. You don't let strangers into your home, should be the same for our country. We should give visa's to people that will contribute, only. However, we should get a little easier in defining who those people are. If they are working everyday picking our fruit... i would call that contribution to our success and deserves citizenship. So, easier path to be a citizen for those trying and have the drive to make this country great. If they don't... we don't need them here.

Corporations: They have too much power. We should always regulate them and make sure they do not become too powerful. They should not be able to buy politicians. To combat that, maybe we don't need to take money out of politics bc that is hard. Maybe we should make a youtube for politicians. Get creative. Therefore, we can put people in power off their merit, not bank accounts.

Let's see... that is already a lot of writing so i will let you tell me why i am or not a centrist.
"For me, insanity is super sanity. The normal is psychotic. Normal means lack of imagination, lack of creativity." --- Jean Dubuffet
Leaning
Posts: 2,779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 2:59:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you take a gray stance on issues and are willing to lean one direction or the other in the interest of getting something positive done, you would sound like a centrist to me. Which you do.

Really I would suppose centrists are rather common, even if they lay claim to a party as their ideological base. I'd imagine you could get enough Democrats or Republicans in both the parties and be able to form a third party if only their interest could be garnered.

I have to say a lot of the time I don't think those two parties stand on all that solid ground for what they really believe in. Too many and too many contradictions (I assume). Course if you're too clear and precise in what your party stands for it's hard to gather much support with people being so individualized with their beliefs, always be a few that don't match.

But if you have too few clarifications for your party then you end up like the Prohibition Party or the Green Party (I assume).

I would think but not know that there have been a large number of political parties in the past that have had single or few issues they stood for and were successful with their agenda. Perhaps too successful if they accomplished them and lost the reason for the party to be around in the first place maybe though.

Would be nice to see politicians find more common ground where they can though I think at times.
Outplayz
Posts: 3,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 3:30:00 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2018 2:59:00 AM, Leaning wrote:
If you take a gray stance on issues and are willing to lean one direction or the other in the interest of getting something positive done, you would sound like a centrist to me. Which you do.

Really I would suppose centrists are rather common, even if they lay claim to a party as their ideological base. I'd imagine you could get enough Democrats or Republicans in both the parties and be able to form a third party if only their interest could be garnered.

I have to say a lot of the time I don't think those two parties stand on all that solid ground for what they really believe in. Too many and too many contradictions (I assume). Course if you're too clear and precise in what your party stands for it's hard to gather much support with people being so individualized with their beliefs, always be a few that don't match.

But if you have too few clarifications for your party then you end up like the Prohibition Party or the Green Party (I assume).

I would think but not know that there have been a large number of political parties in the past that have had single or few issues they stood for and were successful with their agenda. Perhaps too successful if they accomplished them and lost the reason for the party to be around in the first place maybe though.

Would be nice to see politicians find more common ground where they can though I think at times.

It doesn't seem common to me although you would think it's common sense to try and fix your ideas and pick the best of them. I am finding extremism on the sides now bc one side is pissed that Trump won, the Trump side has to hold their ground bc of the aggression towards them... and there is aggression towards them. I mean, wear a MAGA hat down Los Angeles or San Francisco and i bet someone will hit it off or hit you. That doesn't sound like we are moving towards a middle ground, a logic based ground.

I assume the reason for that is IQ and the average being lower than good. Either that or personalities that need others to lead, and the ones that are leading are just messing up. It seems obvious to me what sounds like a good idea and what doesn't. Some times it isn't as obvious and i need to learn the facts. Some times, you have to make the harder decision i.e. 10 dying to save 1000. These all take a certain level of mental capacity. Those in power should have it and lead well... but i think it is bc we don't have a middle ground, overall, that things move so slow.

The middle ground eventually gets there though. For instance, leaving homosexuals the f alone. It's obvious they are humans and deserve respect. But... why did it take so long to get to that acceptance. I imagine many factors, but it shouldn't be that difficult. Something has to change to allow change to happen more quickly. Bc we do move to agreement, but so darn slowly.

I honestly think if picking politicians was like Youtube videos... you can TU them TD them, if they get too many TD"s they're out... The TU's continue to stay as long as the people give them their confidence. Some kind of system like that i think will move things much more quickly. I think the future might be like that... but, i guess we will just have to wait and see what happens.

It's vexing to me sometimes when i see something has such a clear answer, but nothing gets done. It annoys the hell out of me when politicians are debating and say something like "all the problems come from this x" but continue debating it... do something about it not talk. If people keep saying there is a problem with gun free zones, and the facts support it... do something about it and see if there is a change. Yet, people would rather just yell at each other and protest... which is further counter productive in my opinion bc it just makes the other side dig in their heals.
"For me, insanity is super sanity. The normal is psychotic. Normal means lack of imagination, lack of creativity." --- Jean Dubuffet
Leaning
Posts: 2,779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 3:39:41 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
A great number of vocal minorities perhaps? But that is only a guess based on the fact it fits the idea I already have in my head and like of most people not being extreme.

Heck, our President used to be a Democrat (I think), how fixed are people on their parties anyhow?

Well we are in an era where everyone's actions and words get recorded, especially if you are in the spotlight as politicians are prone to be. Helps us keep a better track record of them I suppose.

No middle ground? Hmm, perhaps there isn't much of one, but I think they pop up from time to time. In war or tragedy the sides come together a bit. And perhaps having a few extremes is at least better than a single extreme. All the players pulling at what we should do keeps it in the middle.

Look at the pendulum on a clock, least it's normally in the center obeying gravity when it's headed one direction then the other.
Outplayz
Posts: 3,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 3:53:50 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2018 3:39:41 AM, Leaning wrote:
A great number of vocal minorities perhaps? But that is only a guess based on the fact it fits the idea I already have in my head and like of most people not being extreme.

That is interesting and i have considered it too. The ones causing the problems are the ones that usually get out a vote, go to events, get out in general where the rational side is either busy with life or doesn't take priority in doing those things. It kinda makes sense... people with nothing better to do and are "so" offended that they get out in mass and beat the rational side. Who knows, but that is a logical consideration.

Heck, our President used to be a Democrat (I think), how fixed are people on their parties anyhow?

Well we are in an era where everyone's actions and words get recorded, especially if you are in the spotlight as politicians are prone to be. Helps us keep a better track record of them I suppose.

Yeah, that's a good thing. A lot of corruption is being exposed bc of it. I think we are still in its infancy too. In the future, it's not going to only be Youtube, but many platforms. Especially since the corrupt are starting to buy Youtube out to push their agenda. That will through a wrench in it and start a "video" revolution, i hope.

No middle ground? Hmm, perhaps there isn't much of one, but I think they pop up from time to time. In war or tragedy the sides come together a bit. And perhaps having a few extremes is at least better than a single extreme. All the players pulling at what we should do keeps it in the middle.

I wish we reached it more often and it didn't take tragedy to bring us to agreement. But it does. I really think it is simply people digging their heals in the ground and being arrogant / stubborn bc they don't like the "other" side. At least, that seems like a factor.

Look at the pendulum on a clock, least it's normally in the center obeying gravity when it's headed one direction then the other.

It's funny. We always reach the logical conclusion... for the most part, but it takes so darn long. Like i am all about prison bc that is what keeps violent crime down when they are in prison, but through people that smoke weed, that do drugs... they need help, not to be locked up and have their life taken away bc no one will hire them. That is what creates criminals... that is one thing i think we are behind on at this point.

Another thing we are behind on i think is prostitution. It should be legal in my opinion so we can focus on the true crime... trafficking, rather than throwing people that want to have some human contact in jail. Another thing that leads to crime is a sexually frustrated crowd in my opinion... bring back the oldest profession.
"For me, insanity is super sanity. The normal is psychotic. Normal means lack of imagination, lack of creativity." --- Jean Dubuffet
Leaning
Posts: 2,779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 4:01:11 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I would 'think' most people share your lack of confidence that our current prison system goes about it's job in the right way. I'd imagine that they agree it's necessary, but I think I often hear it called flawed.

People seem to be legalizing marijuana nowadays, so I imagine a number of people imprisoned for that will go down in the future.

Prostitution? I dunno, I hadn't thought about it much.

Marijuana? I did vote against in Oregon, though it passed regardless. I assume I considered and thought about it in the past made my decision then and then forget all my reasons later. Mostly I don't care enough to think about it.

Last vacation I went on back home by brothers gave me a bit of ribbing about that, as they themselves are pro marijuana. I told them I would think about it later. So when I feel more up to it, I'll just start a debate on this site and be forced to re evaluate my opinion on the matter.
Outplayz
Posts: 3,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 4:11:58 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2018 4:01:11 AM, Leaning wrote:
I would 'think' most people share your lack of confidence that our current prison system goes about it's job in the right way. I'd imagine that they agree it's necessary, but I think I often hear it called flawed.

People seem to be legalizing marijuana nowadays, so I imagine a number of people imprisoned for that will go down in the future.

Prostitution? I dunno, I hadn't thought about it much.

I think if done right it could work. I don't think anyone does it right yet.

Marijuana? I did vote against in Oregon, though it passed regardless. I assume I considered and thought about it in the past made my decision then and then forget all my reasons later. Mostly I don't care enough to think about it.

Last vacation I went on back home by brothers gave me a bit of ribbing about that, as they themselves are pro marijuana. I told them I would think about it later. So when I feel more up to it, I'll just start a debate on this site and be forced to re evaluate my opinion on the matter.

Marijuana is truly a harmless drug. You can smoke it for a year straight and stop it the next day. At least, the vast majority don't get any kind of physical addiction to it, and that is a good thing. It does make you slow and dumb, some it doesn't. Me personally, my IQ drops to retard levels lol. But only when i am on it. My philosophical/creative IQ jumps up sharply however.

It is a great self discovery drug. It really does have a bunch of uses. Most people don't like it the first time they do it too, so if you haven't, do it with people that will make you laugh.... or get some really good food. I think the positives way out way the harms, so it was a good choice making it legal. I hope the rest of the state follows. I mean, it's not for everyone... but you'll know real quick if it's for you or not.
"For me, insanity is super sanity. The normal is psychotic. Normal means lack of imagination, lack of creativity." --- Jean Dubuffet
Leaning
Posts: 2,779
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 4:30:36 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I'll be rethinking my opinion in the future.

I suppose some of my reasons for voting against it is lumping it together with other drugs. The fact my second brother seems to have done poorly by association with it. As well as my dislike of introducing new concepts.

Concepts already in play such as alcohol or trans fat, ah well, they're already here, people aren't giving them up and I love doughnuts.

I also have always figured how hard is it to obey a law that not obeying will get you tossed in prison? And for what really?

Same argument I kind of have for age of use for sex, alcohol, and such. If you aren't able to wait, you apparently weren't mature enough to be trusted with it.

Flawed I suspect, but will think about later.
Athias
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 2:54:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2018 2:25:46 AM, Outplayz wrote:
I think i am a true centrist. AMA and help me find out.

Guns: They should be cherished. It is a freedom that keeps all our other freedoms. It is a born right to be able to defend yourself, so you should have the right. With that said, there should be universal background checks. There should be zero guns sold without running a background check. Every state should federally be required to update the NICS system. Not doing so is negligent and allows sick people to get their hands on a gun. Furthermore, i would be okay with a registry... but, currently i am not bc i do not trust the left. If we give them that, they have free rain to punish gun owners, charge them with penalties, and ban any gun at any time... and, with that being their intention... i say no to registry right now.

Abortion: I am okay with it. I don't want to pay for it however. Also, there should be no abortions once a baby has brain activity. Brain activity means life, so at that point it should be too late. Don't know much more specifics, but that is where i stand.

Foreign Policy: If there are countries with human rights violations it is someone's responsibility to help the country. Someone powerful, and we happen to be the most powerful. If there are no human rights violations. The army should be back home. America first. We should make America a fortress and we can with the army back. Defense and offense when warranted.

Immigration: We need to have borders. You don't let strangers into your home, should be the same for our country. We should give visa's to people that will contribute, only. However, we should get a little easier in defining who those people are. If they are working everyday picking our fruit... i would call that contribution to our success and deserves citizenship. So, easier path to be a citizen for those trying and have the drive to make this country great. If they don't... we don't need them here.

Corporations: They have too much power. We should always regulate them and make sure they do not become too powerful. They should not be able to buy politicians. To combat that, maybe we don't need to take money out of politics bc that is hard. Maybe we should make a youtube for politicians. Get creative. Therefore, we can put people in power off their merit, not bank accounts.

Let's see... that is already a lot of writing so i will let you tell me why i am or not a centrist.

Declaring yourself a "true centrist" is just another way of stating that "I maintain an inconsistent political philosophy." It's a cognitive dissonance which usually manifests in argumentum ad temperantiam. I can neither confirm nor deny your "centrism," because its only standard is arbitrarily choosing among left-wing and right wing political dogmas.
Outplayz
Posts: 3,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2018 5:41:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2018 2:54:04 PM, Athias wrote:
At 7/11/2018 2:25:46 AM, Outplayz wrote:
I think i am a true centrist. AMA and help me find out.

Guns: They should be cherished. It is a freedom that keeps all our other freedoms. It is a born right to be able to defend yourself, so you should have the right. With that said, there should be universal background checks. There should be zero guns sold without running a background check. Every state should federally be required to update the NICS system. Not doing so is negligent and allows sick people to get their hands on a gun. Furthermore, i would be okay with a registry... but, currently i am not bc i do not trust the left. If we give them that, they have free rain to punish gun owners, charge them with penalties, and ban any gun at any time... and, with that being their intention... i say no to registry right now.

Abortion: I am okay with it. I don't want to pay for it however. Also, there should be no abortions once a baby has brain activity. Brain activity means life, so at that point it should be too late. Don't know much more specifics, but that is where i stand.

Foreign Policy: If there are countries with human rights violations it is someone's responsibility to help the country. Someone powerful, and we happen to be the most powerful. If there are no human rights violations. The army should be back home. America first. We should make America a fortress and we can with the army back. Defense and offense when warranted.

Immigration: We need to have borders. You don't let strangers into your home, should be the same for our country. We should give visa's to people that will contribute, only. However, we should get a little easier in defining who those people are. If they are working everyday picking our fruit... i would call that contribution to our success and deserves citizenship. So, easier path to be a citizen for those trying and have the drive to make this country great. If they don't... we don't need them here.

Corporations: They have too much power. We should always regulate them and make sure they do not become too powerful. They should not be able to buy politicians. To combat that, maybe we don't need to take money out of politics bc that is hard. Maybe we should make a youtube for politicians. Get creative. Therefore, we can put people in power off their merit, not bank accounts.

Let's see... that is already a lot of writing so i will let you tell me why i am or not a centrist.

Declaring yourself a "true centrist" is just another way of stating that "I maintain an inconsistent political philosophy." It's a cognitive dissonance which usually manifests in argumentum ad temperantiam. I can neither confirm nor deny your "centrism," because its only standard is arbitrarily choosing among left-wing and right wing political dogmas.

Well that was just a title for the thread, and partially bc i watched someone else say it and basically sounds left to me. Made me confused for a second what a centrist is. Centrism doesn't mean you have inconsistent political philosophies... there shouldn't be any of that from the stuff i wrote. It just has elements from both parties, and ultimately, my belief is that makes for stronger policies.
"For me, insanity is super sanity. The normal is psychotic. Normal means lack of imagination, lack of creativity." --- Jean Dubuffet
Athias
Posts: 323
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/3/2018 7:04:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 7/11/2018 5:41:07 PM, Outplayz wrote:
Well that was just a title for the thread, and partially bc i watched someone else say it and basically sounds left to me. Made me confused for a second what a centrist is. Centrism doesn't mean you have inconsistent political philosophies... there shouldn't be any of that from the stuff i wrote. It just has elements from both parties, and ultimately, my belief is that makes for stronger policies.

Yes, Centrism is a magpie of inconsistent philosophies. It isn't the arguments which concern me; it's the basis which informs them that solicits my attention. For example, I support the philosophy of sovereignty. It would be inconsistent if I were to for example, support no taxes, while simultaneously, supporting the prohibition of abortion. Centrism is not even a philosophy; it's arbitration. If Centrism was in fact a philosophy, it would not claim to be "at the center' of anything; it would have its own tenets and principles. The fact that you even asked for help to discover if you're a "true centrist" informs my point.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.