Am I more of a liberal or a conservative

I am anti-gay marriage, anti-abortion, anti-feminism, and anti-affirmative action? Because I am all of the above but am fiscally liberal (I think we should adopt a Nordic model-like economy), and I also strongly believe in seperation of church and state. I am anti-abortion because I think all life should be respected, anti-gay marriage because it doesn't make sense (http://tech.mit.edu/V124/N5/kolasinski.5c.html), anti-feminism because I believe third-wave feminism is a joke, and anti-affirmative action because it is one of the most hypocritical concepts ever invented.

 

You are a democrat from 1960.

 

My views:
Gay marriage - Governments should not define what marriage is. We should all be able to decide for ourselves what marriage is. I'm not gay so this doesn't affect me but personally I think a marriage is between a man and a woman.
Abortion - I'm Pro Life. I don't waver on this one.
Affirmative action - A great idea that's been abused to appease special interest groups.
Fiscal views - I'm moderate, and open to a lot of different ideas here.
Church and state - One religion should not be forced upon anyone. For example, if people want to pray in school, it can be informal and all students should not have to participate.
Feminism - Has no effect on me. I think women's rights are fine, but I'm a guy so I have no real opinion here.

I side more with Libertarian principles of smaller government, and the states handling their own business. I am conservative in a few areas, but I like to think I'm fair across the board. Abortion is the one area I will stand up and say it's wrong (unless the pregnant woman's life is at risk).

- - - Updated - - -

I miss those guys. Clinton is the closest thing we've had in recent years lol... now they're so liberal!

 

Our system is very prone to corruption though.

Are you a full conservative now?

 

Could be a genuine conservative. By that I mean a classical liberal. Doubt it though.

 

My devout Catholic parents were both Democrats in the 1960's, but the Democrat party turned away from their values when it nominated leftist extremist George McGovern for President. After that, its all been downhill for the Democrats. As it stands now, no real American patriot could be a Democrat.

 

classical liberals wouldn't want a scandinavian system. at all.

 

Why do you say that?

 

Because its true I guess. Classical liberalism likes small government, which would mean that the government doesn't provide pensions, unemployement benefits, etc and doesn't meddle in the economy much. Or atleast, keeping the intervention at a minimum, and only a basic safety net. That's not how the scandinavian system works.

 

I don't know what to think of myself as. I disagree with both liberals and conservatives in a lot of ways.

 

A european conservative perhaps?

By the way, there's nothing liberal about the views you've stated here. I don't mean that as an insult or anything, but its just true. A liberal, in the true meaning of the word, economic view would be one of free markets and small government. You might as well call yourself only a conservative. There's more kinds of conservatism than the american ones.

 

welcome to the 76%.

 

I'm a lot like you, I am anti-feminism, and anti-affirmative action. Because I am all of the above but am fiscally liberal (I think we should adopt a Nordic model-like economy), and I also strongly believe in seperation of church and state. I won't waste my time being anti-gay because they've always been with us and it's a civil rights issue, and not anti-abortion, especially since the anti-abortion crowd just wants the babies to be born, but doesn't care to help support them afterwards! the thing is, there aren't enough parties! People don't all neatly fit into two straight line ideologies like CONSERVATIVE and LIBERAL! I end up voting for the liberal side because in reality, I couldn't give a crap which way the gay, abortion, and such issues go! In fact I'd TRADE those issues and turn on their supporters to get that economic model that I want if I could. My main thing is that I want a Scandinavian modeled economy and be free of the Evangeical morality police! But sadly, I have nobody that I can vote for that agrees on that without throwing in extra stuff that I DON'T CARE ABOUT, like Gay Marriage and Abortion.

 

I am probably close to that myself.

 

Agreed. You have a occupy Wall Street streak to you though. That didn't come about until the late 60s democrats. You are a 1965 democrat I think.

 

Your anti-homo marriage link is basically saying that marriage is about children. Which is obviously incorrect. Children have never been a requirement for marriage, and people who have children have never been required to marry. Gay people can and have had children. Sterile people can get married. Even people who express an explicit desire to never have children can get married.

The only reason to oppose gay marriage is social engineering...which would make you authoritarian. Liberals tend to be more authoritarian than conservatives (Liberals are both socially and fiscally authoritarian...conservatives are just socially authoritarian).

 

I'm not a liberal in the classical sense, but fiscally in the US I would be considered liberal.

 

No, what it's saying is marriage benefits are all about children. I am not anti-gay at all. The fact is only around 20% of gay couples have children.

 

You would fit into the Populist category in American politics or into one of the conservative parties in Scandinavia. The True Finns are a Finnish example.

 

Marriage benefits extend to things like power of attorney as well. There are a lot of healthcare concerns that apply to spousal rights, which are reinforced by marriage.

 

Yeah, I know. Americans misuse the word. But you can be the first to stop that.

- - - Updated - - -

Populist? Wouldn't that be Obama?

And by conservative, do you mean the established conservative parties or the newer but fastly growing nationalist/conservative parties? Because the established ones certainly aren't against feminism, affirmative action, and gay marriage. not at all.

 

It's not a misuse, just a difference in perspective.

In America, elements of socialism, progressivism, and capitalism are integrated into "liberal". In Europe, there's more of a defined difference between Social Democrats, Liberals, and Socialists. This is mostly due to the greater number of parties to pick from in most European nations.

Obama is populist compared to many left wing parties in Europe, but he's not really populist compared to the Blue Dog Democrats in his party.

I'm referring to the nationalist conservative parties. It is true that the Conservative party of the UK is socially liberal compared to nationalist parties, so I understand the distinction you're making.

There's a big difference between the Conservatives and the BNP, for example.

 

Confused

 

You mean that because there's basically only two sides to choose from in the US, socialism and other leftisms are mistaken for liberalism because it has to share the democratic party which is mostly liberal (socially)? So therefore people assume that anything associated with the democrats is liberal, and thus stuff like banning fatty foods and raising taxes could be considered liberal? That's an explaination, but its still a misuse of the word in my view.

I see. But a populist nontheless.

Yeah, and I was thinking about our swedish established conservatives as well. Although, since sweden is so much left its perhaps not representative of western europe. We've been ruled by a conservative and rightist coalition for a while now, and they're the ones that have introduced affirmative action like programs for minorities, and they're feminist like every other party except the new nationalist one, and gay marriage has been allowed for quite a while I think. Iirc, the state church even supports it. That says much about the established swedish right; not so much righty.

There's indeed a big difference between the BNP and conservatives, but I wasn't thinking about those kinds of nationalists. Those would be the old nationalists, and they aren't growing except in hungary with jobbik, and greece with golden dawn. I was thinking about the new nationalists, like geert wilders' pvv, danske folkparti, and sweden democrats. They are, unlike the others, very socially liberal. And then there's the reformed nationalists that have moved away somewhat from the fascist-like thinking into the new nationalist camp, like front national and the true finns (?). and of course, the nationalists in denial: UKIP. They're more libertarian than the other tho. All these have in common that they are on the rise as a reaction to big changes comming too fast.

 

I believe the Falconist Party is right up your alley

- - - Updated - - -

You may also want to check out the American Solidarity Party