Principia Discordia

Imagine an alternate version of America where the two major political parties evolved in different ways. They have the same fiscal and economic views as they do in this reality, but their opinion on social matters is reversed.

Imagine that the LEFT WING is pro-life, anti gay-marriage, anti-immigration, and has a history of racism. ("we must take steps to protect this country!"). They are still economically liberal, preferring higher taxes and a strong federal government.

Imagine that the RIGHT WING is pro-choice, pro gay-marriage, supports immigration reform, and has a history of racial tolerance. ("Keep the Fed out of social issues!") They are still economically conservative, preferring small government and tax breaks for the rich.


Which is more attractive to you?

My knee-jerk is Bizarro Republicans...but I could be just, you know, feeding that monster inside.

I probably should have thought on it more before I voted...but I like the idea of the Bizarro Repubs more than the Bizarro Dems...the Bizarro Dems don't seem to have much going for them if they hate everyone but still want "big gummament."

What you call "Bizarro Republicans" actually seems to describe the modern Democratic Party pretty accurately.

It's still a shit sandwich. Scrap "tax breaks for the rich" and I'd side with the right wing in this case, though.

That said, there's many "alternative" left and right wing parties all over the world, or at least in Europe there's many of them and all of them are largely "pro-choice, pro gay-marriage, supports immigration reform, and has a history of racial tolerance" -- not 100% btw, but they tend those directions on those issues.

Neither does the right wing necessarily always be against those issues either, it kinda depends on the left/right window thing moving.

And what's immigration reform? I believe our right wing wants to reform more about immigration than our left (but not always in a good way).

I guess I would be ah... problem with this is that I'm registered Green. So, I don't know if it were the other way around for third parties where the economic angle was reversed, I'd be a (legitimate) Libertarian. You don't really find that many conservative socialist parties out there.

Though, that might be a funny idea to hash out.

It isn't much of a question to me.

It boils down to: Which is more important, economic freedom or social freedom?

Which boiled down further means: What do you care about more, money or everything else?

Money is nice. But it isn't that nice.

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 27, 2011, 10:23:51 PM
It isn't much of a question to me.

It boils down to: Which is more important, economic freedom or social freedom?

Which boiled down further means: What do you care about more, money or everything else?

Money is nice. But it isn't that nice.

I was going to say this, but not as well.

Are both parties still composed almost exclusively of lying, cheating fuckpigs or has that changed too?

Can I vote for Bizarro Nader, and cause Bizarro Republicans to screech about it for years to come, despite it having absolutely no effect on their guy losing?

Quote from: Placid Dingo on September 28, 2011, 07:44:14 AM

Quote from: Demolition_Squid on September 27, 2011, 10:23:51 PM
It isn't much of a question to me.

It boils down to: Which is more important, economic freedom or social freedom?

Which boiled down further means: What do you care about more, money or everything else?

Money is nice. But it isn't that nice.

I was going to say this, but not as well.

Yeah, that's pretty much what I meant.  DS said it better.

I feel like the social issues have a more visible impact on my everyday life. Marriage, abortion, etc -- those laws are a really tangible manifestation of state policy.

Fiscal / Foreign policy is probably more connected to my everyday life, but less directly. Its effects are a little cloudier.

Ok, just a gut feeling, stab in the dark kind of thing...

But if the socially liberal policies held sway, why can't I help but feel that would have some positive effect on the economy?



LMNO
-still gets these pangs of liberal idealism, every once in a while.

The bizarre puritanism of the Bizarro Democrats, combined with a desire for a strong federal government make a very dangerous combination.

There's a couple of important angles getting overlooked IMO.

You don't say: a) whether or not there is a religious influence on either party and 2) whether or not each party supports social welfare programs.


Both of those things factor in to my voting as much the platforms on social issues. Based on your descriptions, I would hazard to guess that the religious influence is on the bizarro Democrats, and that allows them to support social spending, (as most versions of Christians think charity and giving to the poor is good, for some reason, in regular 'Murrica it doesn't translate to government sponsored programs).

As I was typing, I thought of another factor. Military ideology and corporate welfare.

Really, the more I look into this, the more I think this question isn't answerable with anything but a kneejerk on social and/or financial issues (vague, general financial issues that don't really say a whole lot.)

For example: Based on this, one could assume that the Bizarro Republicans oppose military spending as much as they oppose social spending, do not support corporate or social welfare (actually being consistent on their reduce government spending ideology), and support tax breaks for everyone (which includes the rich).

Given this situation, I'd have to look at each individual candidate. Which is more or less what I do now. If there was a Bizarro Dem who was nominally pro-life but supported the status quo (i.e. abortion is currently legal, so I won't sponsor any legislation against it), neutral on or mildly against gay marriage, but wanted to increase funding for universities and welfare programs, then I'd probably vote for that person, unless the Repub candidate for the same office was bucking the party line on financial issues.

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on September 28, 2011, 04:00:39 PM
Ok, just a gut feeling, stab in the dark kind of thing...

But if the socially liberal policies held sway, why can't I help but feel that would have some positive effect on the economy?



LMNO
-still gets these pangs of liberal idealism, every once in a while.

In a way, are we looking at a softer, more gentle form of unconscious partisanship? Knowing close to jack all about the economy, I still feel the people I vote for can handle it better, for largely no reason at all.