I specifically excluded “not committed” as an option on the political views section, because a lot of rationalists have a tendency to go towards “not committed” to signal how they’re not blind followers of a party, when really they have very well defined political views.
I, for example, absolutely refuse to register with a political party, answer “independent” to any questions about my political affiliation, talk a good talk about how both parties are equally crooks, and then proceed to vote for the Democrat nine times out of ten. I would kind of like to force people like me to put “Democrat” on there so that we get more data.
I will change this if enough people agree with Vladimir.
I agree with Vladimir. Parties are not ideologies—they’re coalitions (at least in the US). I see no reason to assume people are affiliated with a particular coalition, especially one in possibly a foreign country.
The problem is that In Russia there is only one Party, and studying what the classical options are, or what the little parties are, doesn’t seem to be worth my time given the current situation.
I agree that there should be no “not committed” option, but asking non-Americans to identify with an American political party seems kind of unhelpful. Do we think think more traditional ideological terms are to vague to be unhelpful?
Maybe: Conservative, Classical Liberal, Welfare State Liberal, Marxist/Post Marxist, etc?
I agree with Vladimir too, you can’t always pinpoint people like that.
I’d say I’m uncommitted too. By that I mean to encompass the general idea that I agree with a lot of the ideas that come from, for instance, libertarianism, and at the same time, with a lot of the ideas behind communism. As I never heard of a good synthesis between the two, so I stand uncommitted.
I specifically excluded “not committed” as an option on the political views section, because a lot of rationalists have a tendency to go towards “not committed” to signal how they’re not blind followers of a party, when really they have very well defined political views.
I, for example, absolutely refuse to register with a political party, answer “independent” to any questions about my political affiliation, talk a good talk about how both parties are equally crooks, and then proceed to vote for the Democrat nine times out of ten. I would kind of like to force people like me to put “Democrat” on there so that we get more data.
I will change this if enough people agree with Vladimir.
I agree with Vladimir. Parties are not ideologies—they’re coalitions (at least in the US). I see no reason to assume people are affiliated with a particular coalition, especially one in possibly a foreign country.
The problem is that In Russia there is only one Party, and studying what the classical options are, or what the little parties are, doesn’t seem to be worth my time given the current situation.
Do they have primary elections?
I agree that there should be no “not committed” option, but asking non-Americans to identify with an American political party seems kind of unhelpful. Do we think think more traditional ideological terms are to vague to be unhelpful?
Maybe: Conservative, Classical Liberal, Welfare State Liberal, Marxist/Post Marxist, etc?
I agree with Vladimir too, you can’t always pinpoint people like that.
I’d say I’m uncommitted too. By that I mean to encompass the general idea that I agree with a lot of the ideas that come from, for instance, libertarianism, and at the same time, with a lot of the ideas behind communism. As I never heard of a good synthesis between the two, so I stand uncommitted.