[Contrapunctus]

I've come to a point in my life where I'm mostly disenchanted with the idea of adhering to a single ideology. At this point I borrow a lot from various schools of thought from Socialism to Libertarianism (Socially speaking.) Even though my ideals are somewhat of a hodgepodge, it's comforting to have a label. I'd call myself a Republican but that normally refers to the GOP, not to Republicanism. I'd call myself a Jacobin but with that title you're either a radical member of the right, or you have a love affair with Madame Guillotine. So I'll list everything out, and see what nomenclature the forum can come up with for my ideology:

Government:
First and foremost I believe in the Republic. As far as what the Republic should be, I draw influence from the First French Republic, and the writings of Dr. Sun Yat-sen. I believe the Republic should be committed to safeguarding the rights of the people, and be composed of members elected by egalitarian means, free from monetary influence. The Republic should be divided up into executive, legislative, and judicial branches, with the members of each branch being chosen by the people in some way. I believe in the use of a constitution, a document that lays out the rights and freedoms protected by the Republic, and that is open to expansion and change as time goes on.

Military and Clandestine operations must be executed in the interest of the people, and by the graces of the government in the form of a vote. In addition to that, each of these operations must be, at all times, observable by the people with 100% transparency. If actions by the military or clandestine forces should breach the rights of the people, foreign or domestic, they must be stopped, and their architects must be charged as criminals.

The Republic will not intrude in the private lives of its citizens, and will above all uphold their rights to do as they please with themselves, and consensually with others, as long as their actions do not infringe on the rights of others.

Economics:
I am an American, therefore material goods, and private property are my bread and butter. I believe capitalism is the best way to provide a surplus of material goods to the citizens, thus increasing the standard of living for the majority of them. However, capitalism does have a darker side, especially in America. Capitalism puts the lowest citizens into a cycle in which they have to work for low wages for many hours in order to provide for themselves and their families. Because of this cycle, their social and economic mobility is cripplingly hampered. In addition to that, capitalism allows for the super rich to infiltrate the government, and pollute it with their money. To prevent capitalism from running a muck, I believe these institutions should be implemented:

To break the cyclical nature of living in the lower stratum of a capitalist society, I believe several programs should be implemented to break this cycle, and allow for greater social mobility. The first of these programs would be a heavily progressive income tax. The second program is a Negative Income Tax. The Negative Income Tax ties directly into the progressive tax system. Every citizen who falls below a certain income will be given a check by the government to supplement their income, regardless of employment status. The amount of money received will follow inflation and the cost of living. All public colleges will be subsidized by the government, allowing for a free education for aspiring students.

Businesses should be regulated to prevent them from infringing on the rights of the workers and from damaging the environment. The minimum wage will adjust to inflation, and all workers, despite their industry, will have the right to unionize as they see fit. Certain industries may be subsidized by the government after it is put to a vote. As far as particular industries that I'd like to see subsidized the first that comes to mind is alternative energy.

I'd also be interested in implementing a Georgist land tax in urban areas, thus allowing for maximum growth and productivity.

Civics (Importanté):
Above all else, every human being is born with inalienable rights simply for the sake of being born a human. Every aspect of the nation from law to commerce must reflect this notion. It should be instilled in the minds of the citizens from a young age that they are individuals with rights that nobody may take away. They must be taught that in order to safeguard their rights they must scrutinize and question the government at all times.

As far as a list of the rights I have in mind:
Delcarations of the Rights of Man
Bill of Rights
The Universal Declaration of Human rights

I do not believe these rights are subject to change, nor can they be trampled on. Even though gay rights are not listed on these documents, I am an advocate of those rights.

Is there a name for this?

[Saeko]

Liberalism.

[Potemkin]

Yep, liberalism.

[Contrapunctus]

I feel so vindicated. Can I still call myself a Jacobin?

[Rei Murasame]

Pretty much. What you've described actually looks like some form of liberalism.

Jacobins were radical liberals, so you could be one, but Jacobinism was superseded after Napoleon appeared, wasn't it?

[Contrapunctus]

Pretty much. What you've described actually looks like some form of liberalism.

Jacobins were radical liberals, so you could be one, but Jacobinism was superseded after Napoleon appeared, wasn't it?

It was. It's also been used to describe Tea Partiers, and it also has that "Decapitation" vibe. It still sounds cool and has a historical connotation that I can relate to, sans the guillotine.

[Varax]

It's straightforward America reform-liberalism. Not much else to say really. You could call yourself a 'Jacobin' if you want as they're liberals but that was during a period of history when liberalism was radical and revolutionary unlike now where it is the dominant system.

[mikema63]

You can get away with calling yourself a Jacobin though I think that wouldn't be entirely accurate.

[Contrapunctus]

You can get away with calling yourself a Jacobin though I think that wouldn't be entirely accurate.

But it certainly sounds cooler than an American reform-liberal.

[fuser]

Your ideology is not cool, live with it or else join comrade Stalin.

[Contrapunctus]

Nobody likes Stalin. Not even Stalin.

[J Oswald]

Nobody likes Stalin. Not even Stalin.

Stick around here long enough, and you'll find out otherwise.


(What's the link to that poster of Comrade Stalin leading PoFo from victory to socialist victory?)

[Contrapunctus]

Stick around here long enough, and you'll find out otherwise.

Oh please tell me there are Trotskyites to balance the Stalinites out.

[J Oswald]

Oh please tell me there are Trotskyites to balance the Stalinites out.

As one of our resident experts on socialist thought would probably be more than happy to point out, in far more detail than I can provide, modern Trotskyism is a self-contradictory and muddled ideology often held by middle-class trustafarians with no actual grasp either of Trotsky's ideas or socialist thought in general. We are (thankfully) bereft of such people here. I know of no current active members who would describe themselves as Trotskyites.

[ComradeTim]

There is a Connollyist, The Immortal Goon. Thats similar to Trotskyism.

[J Oswald]

What similarities do you see between Connollyism and Trotskyism? I am genuinely curious - I know far less about Connolly than I do Trotsky.

[ComradeTim]

Well, they are both small splinter groups from the main body of Marxist thought, which have never had really major success in influencing any countries politics. I mostly said it because lots of leftists here call him a Trot.

I'll let him properly hash out the differences when he gets here.

Edit: Well, it seems like I was pretty wrong, Trotsky was not a Connolly fan.

Many complained that the Easter uprising, as it was a national fight and not yet a social fight, was of limited significance to socialists.For example, Karl Radek dismissed the uprising as a “putsch”, while Trotsky grumbled about the “nationalist dreamers” who “ensured the preponderance, in the working class movement, of the “Green flag over the Red.”” The basis for a national revolution has disappeared even in backward Ireland,” said Trotsky.

[Contrapunctus]

As one of our resident experts on socialist thought would probably be more than happy to point out, in far more detail than I can provide, modern Trotskyism is a self-contradictory and muddled ideology often held by middle-class trustafarians with no actual grasp either of Trotsky's ideas or socialist thought in general. We are (thankfully) bereft of such people here. I know of no current active members who would describe themselves as Trotskyites.

You're lucky you didn't meet me six years ago then.

[J Oswald]

You're lucky you didn't meet me six years ago then.

Were you a Teenaged Trustafarian Trot?

[Contrapunctus]

Were you a Teenaged Trustafarian Trot?

With an Xbox 360 and a bad attitude.