Political Crossfire Forums

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1447 Location: Lisbon

What do you guys think? Perhaps we could even make a subforum in the Green HQ for Green Socialism or perhaps all socialists could merge with the Greens?

Snow Patrol · Joined: 30 May 2005 Posts: 2175 Location: Glasgow

The number of socialists in either the Green or Radical HQ's is minimal.

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1447 Location: Lisbon

Snow Patrol wrote: The number of socialists in either the Green or Radical HQ's is minimal. The Constitution party started out pretty small but grew, who's to say the Socialist HQ couldn't grow in the same way?

Snow Patrol · Joined: 30 May 2005 Posts: 2175 Location: Glasgow

Don Quixote wrote: Snow Patrol wrote: The number of socialists in either the Green or Radical HQ's is minimal. The Constitution party started out pretty small but grew, who's to say the Socialist HQ couldn't grow in the same way?
The Constitution HQ has been around for a while now and has less than 20 members, including Heynow and endersshadow. Besides there is a HQ for socialists already, it's not my fault you have problems with certain people in Radical HQ.

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1447 Location: Lisbon

Snow Patrol wrote: Don Quixote wrote: Snow Patrol wrote: The number of socialists in either the Green or Radical HQ's is minimal. The Constitution party started out pretty small but grew, who's to say the Socialist HQ couldn't grow in the same way?
The Constitution HQ has been around for a while now and has less than 20 members, including Heynow and endersshadow. Besides there is a HQ for socialists already, it's not my fault you have problems with certain people in Radical HQ. That's actually why I decided to take a poll. This way people can decide if the Radical HQ is any good or if the socialists there should branch off to form a new HQ. My problems with the people in the Radical HQ aren't going to affect the votes. Besides the Radical HQ is the "Radical" HQ Socialists only go there because it is the closest thing to a Socialist HQ.

Red Flag · Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:17 pm Post subject:

Snow Patrol wrote: Don Quixote wrote: Snow Patrol wrote: The number of socialists in either the Green or Radical HQ's is minimal. The Constitution party started out pretty small but grew, who's to say the Socialist HQ couldn't grow in the same way?
The Constitution HQ has been around for a while now and has less than 20 members, including Heynow and endersshadow. Besides there is a HQ for socialists already, it's not my fault you have problems with certain people in Radical HQ. I actually quite like the idea comrade, why should we settle for simply a radical HQ when the right wingers get to pick between the Republicans, Libertarians and Constitutionists? Although I think that the idea for a Green Socialist HQ is prepostrous.

Kalu · Joined: 30 Jan 2005 Posts: 695

Why split ourselves? It'd be better to just keep a Radical HQ, that way ideas can flow more easily. Besides, the right-wingers have more HQs because they have ALOT more members here. Look at the stats: Libertarian and Republican Party HQs lead (especially the Republican HQ) in terms of posts and topics.

Anyways, green socialists are way too few here. Just join the Green Party HQ or Radical HQ. Personally I think we should just have it be Radical HQ, that way we can communicate more easily (but then again, the Green Party is an actual party in many countries around the world, and radicals tend to shy away from/attack party politics).

If you have personal problems with people in the Radical HQ (I don't know your history, this is really based on hearsay), you should try solving them; I will say that trying to branch off and create many uncessary political HQs will only curtail discussion and the spread of ideas. Anarchists, socialists, communists and all other radicals must communicate, otherwise we won't be able to effect real change; we'll just keep marginalizing ourselves. We don't necessarily need to work together, but keeping avenues of discussion open is better than closing ourselves off.

Ragnar Danneskjold · Joined: 11 Oct 2005 Posts: 2628 Location: Mulligan's Valley

Red Flag wrote: right wingers get to pick between the Republicans, Libertarians and Constitutionists?

Libertarians are not right, they are up.

poweRob · Joined: 15 Jul 2004 Posts: 19977

Don Quixote wrote: What do you guys think? Perhaps we could even make a subforum in the Green HQ for Green Socialism or perhaps all socialists could merge with the Greens?

I'm full on opposed to this.

Kalu · Joined: 30 Jan 2005 Posts: 695

Mr. Smith wrote: Red Flag wrote: right wingers get to pick between the Republicans, Libertarians and Constitutionists?

Libertarians are not right, they are up.

Please go here.

Libertarians are pro-capitalist, "free market" economics; they are on the right-wing in terms of economics. They are socially libertarian, yes, but economically they are right-wing. Republicans are right-wing too ("free market", etc.), but they differ from the Libertarians in that they're socially conservative.

Communists are left-wing (duh), in that they support collectivism. Anarchists are left-wing too, but they support voluntary collectivism and are against the state. Democrats are moderate left-wingers (well, for the most part) in that they support Keynesian economics with social programs, although some Democrats are more socialistic.

Basically right-wing and left-wing is defined by economics. "Top" (Authoritarianism) and "Bottom" (Libertarianism) must also be discussed too, but Libertarians aren't "above" or "excluded" from the political spectrum. Go to politicalcompass.org for a more detailed explanation.

Chris29 · Joined: 13 Jul 2004 Posts: 2534 Location: Calgary, Canada

I would be completely against this. For one thing I still contend that the real green party is not a left wing party in that it is a party of principles and goals and in very few cases are the methods to achieve those goals fully agreeable. Moving socialists to the green hq would only take away from the green hq imo. Don if you do have some problems with the people in the radical HQ then why would you want those same people to be in the green HQ?

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1447 Location: Lisbon

Rob wrote: Don Quixote wrote: What do you guys think? Perhaps we could even make a subforum in the Green HQ for Green Socialism or perhaps all socialists could merge with the Greens?

I'm full on opposed to this. Not much of a Socialist eh Rob? :lol:

7 · Joined: 10 Nov 2005 Posts: 32

If you get enough support then have fun, otherwise I think its a pretty unneeded forum.

7 · Joined: 10 Nov 2005 Posts: 32

Haha I doubt there will even be anymore votes. DOWN WITH THE SOCIALIST HQ!

Red Flag · Posted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 7:10 pm Post subject:

7 wrote: Haha I doubt there will even be anymore votes. DOWN WITH THE SOCIALIST HQ! Don't speak too soon, they are tied right now. Althought I sure as hell wouldn't want Don as my leader. Sorry Don.. :(

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1447 Location: Lisbon

Red Flag wrote: 7 wrote: Haha I doubt there will even be anymore votes. DOWN WITH THE SOCIALIST HQ! Don't speak too soon, they are tied right now. Althought I sure as hell wouldn't want Don as my leader. Sorry Don.. :( Who says I have to be leader?

Red Flag · Posted: Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:33 pm Post subject:

I do believe that's a no Quixote.

Don Quixote · Joined: 24 May 2005 Posts: 1447 Location: Lisbon

Red Flag wrote: I do believe that's a no Quixote. I do believe that you and the rest of the Radical HQ are motherf***ers! :-D have a nice day.

PricklySponge · Joined: 11 May 2005 Posts: 7769 Location: Hawaii

Don Quixote wrote: Red Flag wrote: I do believe that's a no Quixote. I do believe that you and the rest of the Radical HQ are Motherf***ers! :-D have a nice day.

:owned:

Red Flag · Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2005 2:34 am Post subject:

Wow he didn't even get a warning, im glad that the Admins feel the need to pity the handicapped on P.C. :lol: