If a third party could win, what would your party of choice be?

None, I'm a life long little i independent and I don't believe in parties. I prefer informed reasoned anarchism.
 
I like the Green Party and Mountain Party on local levels.

Not sure it would work on a national level though.

I never heard of the Mountain Party.

If the Greens got into power in America, they would just form into a coalition with the Democrats, and it would be as if the two were completely indistinguishable (like with the Green Parties in Europe).
 
None, I'm a life long little i independent and I don't believe in parties. I prefer informed reasoned anarchism.

Are you saying you oppose rulers?

If not, then you are not an anarchist.
 
I like the Green Party and Mountain Party on local levels.

Not sure it would work on a national level though.

I never heard of the Mountain Party.

If the Greens got into power in America, they would just form into a coalition with the Democrats, and it would be as if the two were completely indistinguishable (like with the Green Parties in Europe).

I'm not sure - the Greens seem a lot more liberal then the Dems right now.

Mountain Party might be just West Virginia.

I'd like to see more parties in the action though.
 
I'm not sure - the Greens seem a lot more liberal then the Dems right now.

Whenever a third party gains traction, one of the major parties just steals some of their platform.

In multi-party systems, minor parties are forced to form a coalition with major parties, which ends up convolution their platform greatly. Nearly every country, even those with many parties in parliament, only have 1 or 2 parties with real influence.

I'd like to see more parties in the action though.

Not me. It would not solve anything and just make the political system more complicated.

I would like to vote for the party of 'fuck off!', but opting out of this savagery is not really an option. I demand nothing from the state, yet the state expects my freedom, and a portion of my labor and liberty.
 
I'm not sure - the Greens seem a lot more liberal then the Dems right now.

Whenever a third party gains traction, one of the major parties just steals some of their platform.

In multi-party systems, minor parties are forced to form a coalition with major parties, which ends up convolution their platform greatly. Nearly every country, even those with many parties in parliament, only have 1 or 2 parties with real influence.

I'd like to see more parties in the action though.

Not me. It would not solve anything and just make the political system more complicated.

I would like to vote for the party of 'fuck off!', but opting out of this savagery is not really an option. I demand nothing from the state, yet the state expects a portion of my labor, liberty, and entire freedom in return.

Thing is - two parties are no longer representative.
 
None, I'm a life long little i independent and I don't believe in parties. I prefer informed reasoned anarchism.

Are you saying you oppose rulers?

If not, then you are not an anarchist.

I do oppose rulers, we elect people to enact and enforce laws and rules agreed on by the society at large. We don't elect people to 'rule' us. That word is offensive.

And no I'm not an 'according to Hoyle' anarchist. I prefer adults act like adults which means your freedom ends where it harms someone else's. You don't get to drive through red lights, you don't get to blast your stereo at 1AM, and you don't get to take over a Bird Sanctuary on public land because you think the government is housing commie birds there.

Build a Bird Sanctuary on your private land and occupy it against the government. That way no one has to be affected by your mental disorder.
 
Last edited:
Thing is - two parties are no longer representative.

Political parties never represented the interests of the general public.

They are groups with different philosophies that power holders and corporations bid on.
 
I do oppose rulers, we elect people to enact and enforce laws and rules agreed on by the society at large. We don't elect people to 'rule' us. That word is offensive.

You just acknowledged three different types of rulers in that first sentence. It does not matter if the term rule offends you. You believe in rulers and that is the reality of what they are.

If you believe in having police enforce arbitrary laws over someone else, then you are ruling them. If you believe the majority has the right to decide what those laws are, then you just made the majority rulers. The very fact that you have created a political machine in the explanation of your "anarchist" beliefs, signifies that you have a machine ruling over man.

Come on man, you know that is bullshit. There have been hundreds of anarchists intellectuals that have written books and literature, and everyone of them would be ashamed by you, poser.
 
I need to detox. That was the most idiotic thing I have read all year, hands down.

WTF! An anarchist that believes in the state, established law, police forces, elected representatives, and majoritarianism? That isn't an anarchist; It is a poser trying to act chic and hipster without compromising their statist ideals.

Makhno, Rothbard, Goldman, Proudhon, Abbey, Spooner, Malatesta, Tolstoy, Hayek, and Banukin just rolled in their graves.
 
I do oppose rulers, we elect people to enact and enforce laws and rules agreed on by the society at large. We don't elect people to 'rule' us. That word is offensive.

You just acknowledged three different types of rulers in that first sentence. It does not matter if the term rule offends you. You believe in rulers and that is the reality of what they are.

If you believe in having police enforce arbitrary laws over someone else, then you are ruling them. If you believe the majority has the right to decide what those laws are, then you just made the majority rulers. The very fact that you have created a political machine in the explanation of your "anarchist" beliefs, signifies that you have a machine ruling over man.

Come on man, you know that is bullshit. There have been hundreds of anarchists intellectuals that have written books and literature, and everyone of them would be ashamed by you, poser.

You seem to have some ax to grind. Try Ace Hardware, they have grinders.

I couldn't careless either way.
 
You seem to have some ax to grind. Try Ace Hardware, they have grinders.

I couldn't careless either way.

Obviously you do not care. Otherwise you would not of said something that astoundingly idiotic; In blatant disregard of 200 years of literature and philosophy.

It is the equivalent if I said I was a capitalist, and then told you I believed in abolishing capital. That would make no fucking sense, moron.
 
You seem to have some ax to grind. Try Ace Hardware, they have grinders.

I couldn't careless either way.

Obviously you do not care. Otherwise you would not of said something that astoundingly idiotic; In blatant disregard of 200 years of literature and philosophy.

It is the equivalent if I said I was a capitalist, and then told I believed in abolishing capital. That would make no fucking sense, moron.

Yes, let the anger swell inside you young padawan.

No idea what you are all worked up about, you asked a question in the OP and I answered it. Then green pea soup started coming out of your mouth, drawers started opening on their own, and your skin burned when I threw tap water on you that I said was holy water.

No idea wtf is going on.
 
:spinner:

It is official. The world has gone insane.

A man can be a woman, so why can't a statist be an anarchist? Hell, let's just make everyday opposite day.
 
Which party would you support, if any?

Any, who cares? As long as it isn't the main two. But any party which proposed changing the way Congress is elected, and to make it Proportional Representation would get my interest.
 
200px-Pirate_Party_USA_Logo.svg.png
US Pirate Party
 

Forum List

Back
Top