LogFAQs > #976881448

Dark_Arbron posted...

Do academics even use those terms in serious discussion? Or do they actually address issues directly and individually instead of relying on sweeping labels?

Ill use myself as an example.

I support civilian gun rights in a limited capacity with background checks and mandatory training.
I support abortion and maternal care.
I support same-sex marriage.
I support universal healthcare.
I support holding police and the rich accountable.
I support prison reform and a focus on mental health and rehabilitation for offenders who genuinely want it.
I supported Australias the Voice campaign.
I am disillusioned with democracy but begrudgingly accept its still the least worst we have.

Am I a leftist? A liberal? Does my opinion on guns and self defence in general pull me a little toward the centre? Call me what you will. I dont need a label to explain myself.

Broadly speaking, liberal, libertarian, anarchist and leftist are useful terms because they speak to absolute values. Conservative, reactionary, and populist are less useful terms, because they are always relative to something else specific in the society they are formed in, such as the difference in what is aimed at being conserved, or what is being reacted against (And how many things are called "populist" without actually achieving popular democratic support? It generally means appealing to some kind of grassroots sentiment, but what does that even mean when grassroots ideas can be planted by projects and owned media from billionaires).

Support for individual gun ownership would be a libertarian position (But it could morph into a leftist position if you specifically support workers being armed instead, for instance). A liberal can gun rights, there isn't anything anti-liberal about it, but they aren't really required to and the individual politics of it will vary depending on the state of the country that the liberal lives in. And the extent to which gun ownership threatens liberalism (For example, the threat of armed revolution by militia groups) can change how a liberal would view guns.

I mean, generally though, people have a mixture of various positions rather than a cohesive ideology because most people -aren't- academics and don't really have consistent theories of politics so much as gut feelings and ideas of self-interest.