4.11.08

VOTE



this may be my most heated blog post ever...

if you have the capacity to vote, and a brain that can comprehend, then you NEED to vote.

i am SO MAD i cannot vote.  so so so so so so frustrated.
i registered to vote about a month ago, and didn't get my little yellow sheet that says, "you are officially registered" until 2 days ago.  obviously, not enough time to then register for an absentee ballot.  damn.
i should have registered for Washington instead of California just so i could vote for the president.  dang it!!!!  i want to vote SO BADLY.


anyway, you, reading this right now.  GO VOTE!
don't vote because of skin color.
don't vote because he reminds you of your grandpa or your dad.
don't vote because it's trendy.
vote because every vote makes a difference.  every voice should be heard.

we live in a democracy.  you can vote, so live your freedom!

wikipedia:
Democracy is a form of government in which the supreme power is held completely by the people under a free electoral system.

Freedom Freedom Freedom Freedom, power to the people!

and as for my political leanings?
well i believe that i am responsible, in whatever means, for bringing justice and freedom to all people.  i believe in bringing a voice to the downtrodden and outcasts.  i believe in equality and human rights.  I believe in compassion and love.  i believe in bringing beauty into the world that speaks words of healing and reconciliation.  i also believe in exploring and speaking ideas so that all minds can be challenged, including my own.
also... i am human, i have influences all around me.
i grew up in England.  a bit of a different government than here.
and in the US, i grew up in a town that had heavy heavy leftists and heavy heavy rightists.  I am an artist, and free thinker, passionate and idealistic.
my parents never told me to be one way or think one way politically.  in fact my dad hates talking about politics.
of the type of people i gravitate toward, its usually those who lean farther to the left.  and in the teenage years, i've dated an Anarchist who now calls himself a Socialist, another Socialist and a Marxist.  all of whom are extremely passionate about politics and philosophy.
my heart is drawn to the mindsets of Buddhist monks who my dad also resonates with.  Though all of my being is rooted in following Christ.
And the issue i am most concerned with is Gay Rights.  Everyone should have a right to civil union at minimum.  

and to me, all these things relate, go together, combine, work well, in harmony.  therefore, i guess i'm pretty liberal.

here is a random political compass:
here is where i scored on the scale: 
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23


and heres some jumbly words from the website i took the political leanings test from:

About The Political Compass™
In the introduction, we explained the inadequacies of the traditional left-right line.

If we recognise that this is essentially an economic line it's fine, as far as it goes. We can show, for example, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot, with their commitment to a totally controlled economy, on the hard left. Socialists like Mahatma Gandhi and Robert Mugabe would occupy a less extreme leftist position. Margaret Thatcher would be well over to the right, but further right still would be someone like that ultimate free marketeer, General Pinochet.
That deals with economics, but the social dimension is also important in politics. That's the one that the mere left-right scale doesn't adequately address. So we've added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian.
Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis. By adding the social dimension you can show that Stalin was an authoritarian leftist (ie the state is more important than the individual) and that Gandhi, believing in the supreme value of each individual, is a liberal leftist. While the former involves state-imposed arbitary collectivism in the extreme top left, on the extreme bottom left is voluntary collectivism at regional level, with no state involved. Hundreds of such anarchist communities exisited in Spain during the civil war period
You can also put Pinochet, who was prepared to sanction mass killing for the sake of the free market, on the far right as well as in a hardcore authoritarian position. On the non-socialist side you can distinguish someone like Milton Friedman, who is anti-state for fiscal rather than social reasons, from Hitler, who wanted to make the state stronger, even if he wiped out half of humanity in the process.
The chart also makes clear that, despite popular perceptions, the opposite of fascism is not communism but anarchism (ie liberal socialism), and that the opposite of communism ( i.e. an entirely state-planned economy) is neo-liberalism (i.e. extreme deregulated economy)
The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal "anarchism" championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America's Libertarian Party, which couples social Darwinian right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues. Often their libertarian impulses stop short of opposition to strong law and order positions, and are more economic in substance (ie no taxes) so they are not as extremely libertarian as they are extremely right wing. On the other hand, the classical libertarian collectivism of anarcho-syndicalism ( libertarian socialism) belongs in the bottom left hand corner.
In our home page we demolished the myth that authoritarianism is necessarily "right wing", with the examples of Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot and Stalin. Similarly Hitler, on an economic scale, was not an extreme right-winger. His economic policies were broadly Keynesian, and to the left of some of today's Labour parties. If you could get Hitler and Stalin to sit down together and avoid economics, the two diehard authoritarians would find plenty of common ground.
The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal "anarchism" championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America's Libertarian Party, which couples social Darwinian right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues. Often their libertarian impulses stop short of opposition to strong law and order positions, and are more economic in substance (ie no taxes) so they are not as extremely libertarian as they are extremely right wing. On the other hand, the classical libertarian collectivism of anarcho-syndicalism ( libertarian socialism) belongs in the bottom left hand corner.
In our home page we demolished the myth that authoritarianism is necessarily "right wing", with the examples of Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot and Stalin. Similarly Hitler, on an economic scale, was not an extreme right-winger. His economic policies were broadly Keynesian, and to the left of some of today's Labour parties. If you could get Hitler and Stalin to sit down together and avoid economics, the two diehard authoritarians would find plenty of common ground.


FREEDOM and LOVE.

Agape - In the New Testament, agapē is charitable, selfless, altruistic, and unconditional. It is parental love seen as creating goodness in the world, it is the way God is seen to love humanity, and it is seen as the kind of love that Christians aspire to have for one another.

Christians believe that to Love God with all your heart, mind, and strength and Love your neighbor as yourself are the two most important things in life (the greatest commandment of the Jewish Torah, according to Jesus - c.f. Gospel of Mark chapter 12, verses 28-34)



These are some of my beliefs.
Some are subject to change.
Think what you wish of me.
I am passionate, my voice shall be heard. 
and i wish with all my heart that no matter if you completely disagree with me, that your voice shall me heard too!

1 comment: