What am I?

 

WSJ

What am I? That is a big question like ‘Who am I’ and ‘Why am I here?’

The question I am posing and trying to answer is a much simpler one:  What am I politically?  What is my political bent, affiliation, or persuasion.

I used to kinda sorta be a Republican but not so much since whatshisname hijacked the party.  I was once a Democrat, when I was much younger.  My cousin David and I refer to ourselves as fiscal conservative and more liberal when it comes to social policies. It seems like an oxymoron (David is the oxy and you guessed it, I am the…).  In this polarized world, it puts us in the middle of the two poles and thus earns us the criticism from both sides.  This accounts for the ‘I will not vote for Trump and cannot vote for Biden’ dilemma I am currently in.

The internet says we, as fiscal conservates and liberals on the social agenda, are in the Classical Liberal category.  This is not the monicker I would have ever used or guessed might be a category for us.  I have come to learn that Classic Liberalism is a political ideology that emphasizes individual freedom, limited government, and the protection of civil liberties. Rooted in the Enlightenment principles of the 17th and 18th centuries, it advocates for a free market economy, private property rights, and the rule of law. Thinkers like John Locke, Adam Smith, and John Stuart Mill significantly influenced this ideology, promoting the idea that government should serve to protect individual rights and that economic freedom leads to prosperity and innovation. Classic Liberalism supports minimal state intervention in personal and economic affairs, asserting that individuals are best suited to make decisions about their lives and welfare.  OK… I could be a Classical Liberal; emphasis on the ‘classical’ part.

On June 11, 2024, the Wall Street Journal had an article/poll, What Type of Voter Are You? Take Our Poll to Find Out:  A WSJ/NORC survey shows a more nuanced picture of the U.S. electorate than simply red and blue.  They classified voters into five categories:

• The conventional left wing is represented by traditional liberals. They are primarily defined by their left-leaning positions on social and economic issues.
• Separate from traditional liberals, a distinct faction of disaffected pluralists has arisen. They are economically and socially liberal but are deeply disillusioned with the political and economic system in the U.S.
• Libertarians share some traits with conservatives and some with liberals. They are economically conservative but socially left-leaning.
• What is typically considered the right wing is made up of traditional conservatives. They hold right-leaning views on both social and economic issues.
• The conventional idea of right and left has given way to new divisions. An emerging group of populists has moved to the fore, in part because of the ways former President Donald Trump has reshaped traditional Republican orthodoxy. Populists are socially conservative but hold some traditionally liberal economic views, such as supporting Social Security and other government social programs.

WSJ

I took the poll like five times over the last month.  I took it repeatedly because I never saved the results and thus had to take it again each time I thought I was going to write this bloggy bit.  I came out, not surprisingly, as a Libertarian in three out of five times.  Libertarian is their most centrist category.  The other two times?  I was disaffected pluralist once and a populist the other time.  It seems that my views waffle a tad on some of the polling questions depending on the day, my mood, and my horoscope.

No matter what the classification, here is a summary of how I see things at this point in time.  I think the competition inherent in capitalism is good.  It moves the world forward.  I believe in laissez-faire but also there should be enough government regulation to keep the laissez-faire, well, fair.  I believe no one should go hungry in this country, everyone should have access to education and healthcare, and we should try to right social wrongs.  No one should be in physical danger in their neighborhoods.  We should have the kind of infrastructure a modern, wealthy, country like ours should have.  Most people cannot plan for retirement; thus we need to have a programs/systems that work and are viable into the future.  We need to assess where we are and have a plan that gets to where we want to be in a fiscally sound way which may include prioritizing domestic spending over international policing.  I have been general in describing my platform simply because these issues are complex and require a lot of really smart people setting goals and the plans to achieve those goals.

 Of course, this is a completely normative view and does not reflect the reality we live in today of wild policy changes depending on which party has the presidency and a congressional majority.

Can we ever get to my normative vision?  Sure, it is possible but if asked to assign a probability of this actually happening in the next 5-10 years, I would say less than 5%.

So, why hang on to something that is not likely to happen?  I should probably find a poll that gauges my optimism and hope for the future to answer that question.