And the other axis of political opinion

Fascist: Laws must strictly govern peoples behaviour to prevent crime and disorder. Laws must be obeyed explicitly.

Authoritarian: Rules must govern peoples behaviour to limit crime and disorder. Every aspect of anti social behaviour must be restricted and monitored


Centre: There should be laws governing most things but there should be some flexibility if bending the law has no consequence on others.


Libertarian: People should have as much freedom as is possible without the freedom of others being compromised

Anarchist: Everyone should do whatever they want. There must be no rules but people should suffer the consequences. E.g. If you cause somone to be disabled, you must pay for their care for the rest of their life.

[Edited on 19-10-2009 by smart51]

Cheers Smart

this could have quite interesting results!

Err, you forgot Nationalist and Patriot.... so, I'll go for Fascist

Anarcho-primitivism

As a patriotic Canadian, it has to be centre. That's our natural position, in spite of our present government of total and utter stupid idiots.

I'm not sure your anarchist definition is correct. Had a long debate over this at Glastonbury. One of the climate groups is run under anarchist principles and it was far more respectful than i expected.

According to Wikipedia:

According to The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, "there is no single defining position that all anarchists hold, and those considered anarchists at best share a certain family resemblance."

anarchist schools of thought differ fundamentally, supporting anything from extreme individualism to complete collectivism

Some anarchists fundamentally oppose all forms of aggression, supporting self-defense or non-violence, while others have supported the use of some coercive measures, including violent revolution and terrorism

The term anarchism derives from the Greek ἀναρχος, anarchos, meaning "without rulers"

It's hard to define anarchism in a sentence or two and given the spectrum of political views it encompasses from extreme left to extreme right, any brief definition is going to be wrong. Perhaps instead of no rules I should have said no rulers. In the more individualist strains, people decide their own rules for themselves, which may appear on a society level to be no rules at all.

We're an anarcho-syndicalist commune, we take it in turns to act as a sort of executive officer for the week.

[Edited on 20/10/09 by Benzine]

The way climate camp is run is (trying to remember), no one in charge and everything agreed as a collective.

Although i think what happens is if 10 people think one thing, 10 think the other - you end up with two groups of 10 doing what they think. Can't quite remember and my glasto green hippie friend is currently away.

I think this thread should be dropped before the shouting starts.
Denis

Fascists?... They are bloody lefties
Me??... I'm Slightly to the Right of Attila the Hun

(only joking really..)

vive la Libertarian and all good people who work with books!

........Neil

Middle of the road

I don't do politics but I don't think Librarians are a valid choice.

I think everyone would want to live in a liberal sided society where everyone has the freedom to do what they want based on mutual respect. Unfortunately i dont think humanity in general is enlightened enough for this to work. In my mind, communism as an idea works well and will probably be the way humanity will end up in a millennia or so but due to our primitive selfishness and need for personal gain it doesnt work at the moment. Unfortunately for liberal societies to work at the moment there have to be lots of rules and a strict enforcement.... which kinda contradicts the point.

All my own view BTW.