|
| Thread: The OSM Encyclopedia |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 · NEXT» |
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted December 27, 2008 03:01 AM |
|
|
The OSM Encyclopedia
The credit for this idea goes to JoonasTo. The goal of this encyclopedia is to provide us with some definitions that we can all agree with, so there wouldn't be any confusion about what we mean when we say something. Also, it may be nice for everybody to describe their country's politics (political parties, etc). Anyone is free to contribute. I'll start us off.
1. Politics
1.1. Schools of Economics
1.2. Political Ideologies
1.3. Politics Worldwide
1.3.1 Politics of the United States
1.3.2 Politics of Finland (credit goes to JoonasTo)
Misc. Other
1.1 Schools of Economics
Here are the main schools of economics, from what would be considered left-wing to right-wing.
Marxism. Everyone knows (or should know) what it is. Says that the working class is being exploited, class struggle, labor theory of value, socialism, etc. For obvious reasons, less popular than it once was.
Mercantilism. Protectionism, unchanging volume of global trade, actual support for economic oppression. (To me, it actually sounds a lot like socialism  )
Keynesianism. Says that government spending and extensive regulation and taxation can be used to fine-tune the economy and establish full employment. Though Keynesianism as a whole is no longer popular, many of its ideas are now part of newer schools of economics.
New Keynesianism. Basically, it's like Keynesianism, but with less enthusiasm about regulations (though they admit that they are quite necessary in many cases), taxation, and government spending. The key idea is price stickiness - that prices do not immediately respond to changes in supply or demand.
Neoclassical economics. Marginalist subjective theory of value, minimal (but absolutely necessary) regulations, etc. Dominant school before Keynesianism replaced it.
Classical economics. The school from which the other schools - except for Marxism - gradually developed. Limited but necessary regulation, gold standard, labor theory of value, etc.
Chicago School. Favors even less regulation than the neoclassical school. Marginalist subjective theory of value, monetarism, set rate of inflation, etc.
Austrian school. Favors no regulations at all. Limited or no government, free banking which would result in a commodity standard, marginalist subjective theory of value, etc.
Today, mainstream economics is a combination of New Keynesianism, neoclassical economics, the Chicago School, and a bit of the Austrian School. Of course, different economists lean more towards the ideas of one school than the others, but most combine at least some of the ideas from these four schools.
1.2. Political Ideologies
Lower on vertical axis = more social freedoms
Left-right = regular left-right economic scale.
Extreme conservatism - Far-right both socially and economically. Many of them are also imperialistic. Want to abolish all subsidies and trade barriers, privatize everything (except for the military and police), ban same-sex marriage and abortion nationwide (some even want the death penalty for abortionists), and don't want any environmental protection. An American example would be Tom Coburn.
Liberal conservatism - liberal conservatives are strong proponents of the free market, while being more ambivalent on social issues (although, if pressed, they will fall on the socially conservative side). An American example would be John McCain
Social conservatism - has two meanings. Either it is the social aspect of conservatism, or an ideology on its own. Either way, it is opposed to legal abortion, same-sex marriage, and narcotics. The ideology, while generally supportive of the free market, is less supportive than liberal conservatism, and may favor increased government regulation in certain areas. An American example would be Mike Huckabee.
Neoconservatism - Not as socially conservative as some conservative ideologies, neoconservatives are supportive of the free market in their rhetoric, but in practice often regulate and establish some tariffs. Their main distinction, though, lies in their foreign policy - they are very militaristic, favoring extensive military actions and large military funding. An American example would be Paul Wolfowitz.
Paleoconservatism - socially conservative. Economically, while paleoconservatives oppose government controls in general, they are very restrictive on two important things: trade (they favor very high tariffs) and, above all, immigration. They are the most anti-immigrant ideology, except Fascism. They are not necessarily racist, but view it from a cultural perspective, and think that current immigration policies would destroy a country's culture, and from an economic perspective, saying that immigrants take native-born citizens' jobs. An American example would be Pat Buchanan.
American conservatism - a combination of neoconservatism, social conservatism, and liberal conservatism.
Conservative liberalism - economically right, and are more ambivalent on social issues (although, if pressed, they will fall on the socially liberal side). It's a lot like classical liberalism, but more focused on law-and-order issues, slightly less supportive of regulations, and more militaristic.
Classical liberalism - the original form of liberalism. Center-right economically, left-wing socially. Favors a free market in general, with some regulations to increase its efficiency. Alfred Marshall, Mvass.
Social liberalism - very supportive of social freedoms, and supportive of the free market, although with considerable regulations to prevent the consolidation of power in a small group. American liberalism is more socially moderate social liberalism. Barack Obama is one example of a social liberal.
Minarchist libertarianism - very supportive of social and economic freedoms. Wants to limit government to defense only, and maybe even have it fee-based, rather than tax-based. An American example would be Ron Paul.
Anarcho-capitalism - the ideology of smallest intervention in the citizens' lives - as there is no government! Anarcho-capitalists think that the market could handle law and defense. Murray Rothbard.
Centrism - in the center, obviously. Moderate.
Christian democratism - economically center-left, socially center-right. Heavily influenced by Catholic teachings. Konrad Adenauer.
Fascism - economically center-left, socially extremely authoritarian. Very xenophobic and opposed to immigration, as well as favoring government intervention in the economy (which is why it would be inaccurate to describe it as far-right). Benito Mussolini.
Social democratism - left economically, center-left socially. Often called "socialism", it isn't. It favors private ownership of most of the means of production and market processes in most things, although with an active public sector and with significant regulations. Harold Wilson.
Non-free market greens - includes various ideologies such as eco-socialism, eco-feminism, green syndicalism. Favor heavy government interventions to protect the environment. Ralph Nader.
Theocratic socialism - an extremely totalitarian form of socialism - even more so than communism. Favors religious control over the state, and state (or religious) control of the means of production.
Communism - socially authoritarian and economically far left. Public ownership of the means of production, dictatorship of the proletariat, etc. Karl Marx.
Democratic socialism - ordinary socialism. Public ownership of the means of production, democracy, civil liberties, etc. Far-left, but are opposed to authoritarian communism. Brian Moore.
Anarcho-socialism - socialism without the state, replaced by the commune. Murray Bookchin.
1.3 Politics Worldwide
1.3.1 Politics of the United States
As is well-known, the United States have two major parties and many minor parties. The minor parties do not have any seats in Congress, and are unlikely to gain any in the near future. However, even though there are only two important parties, there is a multitude of views within the party, because internal dissent within parties is much more widespread than in Europe.
Major parties:
Democratic Party - Mostly social liberals. Favor increased government role in the economy, decreased military intervention, and greater civil liberties. Seventy-two million members - largest party in the US. Supported by labor unions, environmentalists, African-Americans, Hispanics, and the educated non-rich.
Republican Party - Mostly liberal conservatives and social conservatives. Favor generally less government regulation, a larger military, and more traditional moral values. Fifty-five million members - second-largest party in the US. Supported by evangelicals and conservative Catholics, farmers, and some of the upper class.
Third parties:
Libertarian Party - Mostly minarchist libertarians, although also has a few anarcho-capitalists. Favor increased social and economic freedoms - less government regulation of the economy, free trade, legalized same-sex marriage, and a less active foreign policy. About 200,000 members.
Green Party - Greens who favor an increased government role in the economy. Favor a less militaristic foreign policy, more social freedoms, and an increased government role in the economy. Has about 305,000 members.
Constitution Party - Paleoconservative. Favor a generally decreased government role in the economy, but support higher tariffs. Support repealing the PATRIOT Act and making the foreign policy less active, but oppose abortion and same-sex marriage. About 350,000 members.
1.3.2 Politics of Finland (credit goes to JoonasTo)
Three major parties with a little over 20% voting each, all are pretty moderate the only exception being the National Coalition party's yes to NATO.
-Social Democrats(SDP),social democrats in centre-left who would still privatise most state's companies, last three presidents have been from social democrats, around 60000 members, largest supporter base in the worker class in big towns, abandoned real social democratism in the 90s depression and are currently on the low, in the opposition where they are failing quite miserably,
-Centrists(Keskusta),centrist in centre right but still uphold the state's welfare system, agrarians, largest party with almost 200000 members, largest supporter base in the countryside and small towns, going through modernisation and transforming to more right than the older somewhat leftist style, pretty stable, in the government,
-National Coalition Party(Kokoomus), wikipedia says liberal conservatism but that's probably because they say yes to NATO since they vote for pretty big individual freedoms in social sector, closer to liberalists, right, around 50000 members, largest supporter base in the businessmen, currently on the high, important members know how to sell themselves, seek and get a lot of media coverage, the most active party of the three big ones, in the government,
And few important smaller ones:
-Left-Alliance(Vasemmistoliitto),8% voting, they are the true socialists of Finland with quite strong even radical views sometimes, left, pretty stable, in the opposition where they seem to have more voice than the bigger social democrats,
-True Finns(Perussuomalaiset),4% voting, populists and nationalists, conservatives, right,anti-EU and anti-immigrant, on the rise, very charismatic leader whose responsible for most of their success, only party to demand for keeping strong presidential rights, some questionable members, in the opposition,
-Green League(Vihreä liitto),8% voting, green values, social liberals, centre-left, rising party, in the government,
-The Swedish Party(Svenska Folkpartiet),5% voting, classical liberals, right, represent the Swedish speaking population, the Åland representative belongs to this party, a long line of being in the government, stable, currently in the government,
-Christian Democrats(Kristillisdemokraatit),5% voting, center economically, center-lefts socially and in traditional christian values such as poverty and family, stable, in the opposition,
And six small unimportant ones, three communist parties, one nationalistic party, seniors party and a benefactor of the poor party.
None of the parties are against current social welfare system. And in reality the three big ones are not so different from each other. Their opinions only differ in some cases. Seems that the national coalition party is trying to change this though.
Misc. Other
Recommended reading
About economics:
Freakonomics - a lighthearted look at economics. Doesn't really dig into theory, but shows why economics is cool. No adherence to any particular school of economics.
Naked Economics - the book that got me into economics in the first place. Great book - light reading, but very informative. Written from the left wing of the neoclassical school of economics. Though I still agree with 95% of this book's ideas, there are a few things I disagree with after studying economics a little bit more.
Economics for Real People - an excellent introduction to the Austrian school of economics. Not quite as easy to read as Naked Economics, and has a few significant things I disagree with, but is nevertheless very much worth reading. But if you read this, read it after Naked Economics.
Capitalism and Freedom - an excellent book by Nobel Prize-winning economist Milton Friedman, founder of the Chicago school of economics. Pretty good book, and I agree with most of the things he says in it. Though there are a few mistakes, IMO.
The Communist Manifesto - Everyone knows what this is, of course. After reading all of the others, read this one for the lulz. It has historical value, and makes a few interesting points about several things, but is mostly nonsense.
The following books I have not read, but are classics, and should be read. I should get to reading them when I find the time.
The Wealth of Nations - the classic of classics. The foundation of Classical economics. One problem, though: it's hard to read, being written in the typical style of the time. Some of the things in it are antiquated, but the majority still holds true. I did try to read it, but found it too boring.
Das Kapital - Marx's famous and extremely long work on economics. It's a lengthy work that attempts to describe and criticize classical economics. It's three volumes long.
Principles of Economics - not to be confused with the economics textbook by Gregory Mankiw (which I hear is also pretty good), Marshall's book lays the foundation of neoclassical economics. Very influential in its time, and in recent times its ideas have experienced quite a renaissance.
General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money - John Maynard Keynes's famous work laid down the principles of Keynesian economics. Though I've heard it's not easy reading, and few accept all of Keynes's ideas, they have certainly been influential and experience a revival from time to time.
Human Action and Man, Economy, and State - I'm putting these two together because they're both fundamental works of the Austrian school. Human Action is a more philosophical book, while Man, Economy, and State is more focused on economics, and advocates anarcho-capitalism. Obviously, these books contain all the aspects - positive as well as negative - of Austrian economics.
Evolutionary Socialism - the foundation of modern social democracy. Argues that socialism can be achieved by gradual democratic means, and that it is not necessary to cast off capitalism all at once.
It isn't finished yet. Others are free to comment or add suggestions.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 09:17 PM |
|
Edited by JoonasTo at 22:15, 28 Dec 2008.
|
So political overview of Finland then.
Three major parties with a little over 20% voting each, all are pretty moderate the only exception being the National Coalition party's yes to NATO.
-Social Democrats(SDP),social democrats in centre-left who would still privatise most state's companies, last three presidents have been from social democrats, around 60000 members, largest supporter base in the worker class in big towns, abandoned real social democratism in the 90s depression and are currently on the low, in the opposition where they are failing quite miserably,
-Centrists(Keskusta),centrist in centre right but still uphold the state's welfare system, agrarians, largest party with almost 200000 members, largest supporter base in the countryside and small towns, going through modernisation and transforming to more right than the older somewhat leftist style, pretty stable, in the government,
-National Coalition Party(Kokoomus), wikipedia says liberal conservatism but that's probably because they say yes to NATO since they vote for pretty big invidual freedoms in social sector, closer to liberalists, right, around 50000 members, largest supporter base in the bussinessmen, currently on the high, important members know how to sell themselves, seek and get a lot of media coverage, the most active party of the three big ones, in the government,
And few important smaller ones:
-Left-Alliance(Vasemmistoliitto),8% voting, they are the true social democrats of Finland with quite strong even radical views sometimes, left, pretty stable, in the opposition where they seem to have more voice than the bigger social democrats,
-True Finns(Perussuomalaiset),4% voting, populists and nationalists, conservatists, right,anti-EU and anti-immigrant, on the rise, very charismatic leader whose responsible for most of their success, only party to demand for keeping strong presidential rights, some questionable members, in the opposition,
-Green League(Vihreä liitto),8% voting, green values, social liberals, centre-left, rising party, in the government,
-The Swedish Party(Svenska Folkpartiet),5% voting, classical liberals, right, represent the swedish speaking population, the Åland represetantive belongs to this party, a long line of being in the government, stable, currently in the government,
-Christian Democrats(Kristillisdemokraatit),5% voting, a mixture conservatism(they'd prefer free market and even taxes for example) and social democratism(give more money to the poor and families), traditionall christian values on such things as poverty and family for example, stable, in the opposition,
And six small unimportant ones, three communist parties, one nationalistic party, seniors party and a benefactor of the poor pary.
None of the parties are against current social welfare system. And in reality the three big ones are not so different from each other. Their opinions only differ in some cases. Seems that the national coalition party is trying to change this though.
Well that's enough for a while. I'll try to do the finnish tri-partite of power next when I can.
Oh and the parties definitions are so they fit in Mvass' table.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 09:38 PM |
|
|
Are you sure that the Christian Democrats are right economically and left socially? Shouldn't it be the other way around?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 09:43 PM |
|
|
Hmm, that wasn't what I meant now that I see it. I meant they are right in such economic matters as free trade and taxes but left in such things as monetary help for the poor. I'll find a better way to put it.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 09:55 PM |
|
|
But helping the poor is economic an economic issue as well. Perhaps they'd be better described as economically centrist and socially right (they are socially right, correct?).
Economic issues - trade, economic aspect of immigration, welfare/social security, minimum wage, education, health care, etc.
Non-economic - same-sex marriage, abortion, same-sex adoption, military, drugs, social aspect of immigration, nationalism, etc.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 10:19 PM |
|
|
Edited. Better?
Their views on the issues below.
Economic issues - trade(right), economic aspect of immigration(right), welfare/social security(left), minimum wage(right), education(left), health care(left), etc.
Non-economic - same-sex marriage(no cause), abortion(centre), same-sex adoption(no cause), military(against), drugs(against), social aspect of immigration(for), nationalism(against), etc.
Quite the mixture, huh?
Note that finns are mostly protestants and as such church doesn't ban same sex marriages, abortion or women priesthood.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 10:23 PM |
|
|
Awesome. Took a lot of work, I guess.. Recommending this for a QP.
____________
We reached to the stars and everything is now ours
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 10:25 PM |
|
|
Joonas:
So I'm going to put them as economically center and socially center-left, okay?
Doomforge:
Thanks.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 28, 2008 10:27 PM |
|
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 06:41 PM |
|
|
I actually wonder about this little thought...
To what extent could it be said that Socialism puts more focus on emotions whereas Capitalism puts more focus on rationalism? When it comes to the difference...
____________
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 06:51 PM |
|
|
That's a very interesting question, although perhaps this thread isn't the best place to discuss it. I would, however, say from personal experience that people with more left-wing views tend to be more emotional and softhearted. Usually, the people yelling, "Aw, look at dat cuuuuute kitty!" have views that are left-of-center.
Although when it comes to social issues, many people who are more or less rational about economics tend to lose their rationality.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Moonlith
Bad-mannered
Supreme Hero
If all else fails, use Fiyah!
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 06:56 PM |
|
|
By that definition I'm not a socialist at all I want to murder cute little kitties when I see the--....
*hides signature* Please don't look.
____________
|
|
Binabik
Responsible
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 07:06 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Usually, the people yelling, "Aw, look at dat cuuuuute kitty!" have views that are left-of-center.
*shakes head*
People sure have some wierd ideas.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 07:26 PM |
|
|
That was just an example. In general, left-wingers tend to look at things on a more emotional level. If they go into a poor person's house and see how poor he is, they blame his employer without second thought.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
Asheera
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Elite Assassin
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 10:19 PM |
|
|
I don't really see the connection between finding a kitty cute and being soft-hearted. Nor the connection between being soft-hearted and a socialist. Not all socialists are emotional, you know, they're just not as greedy as the capitalists.
____________
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 10:22 PM |
|
|
Quote:
That was just an example. In general, left-wingers tend to look at things on a more emotional level. If they go into a poor person's house and see how poor he is, they blame his employer without second thought.
*Cough*generalising*Cough*
I'd blame the guy living in the house first. Then I'd blame his bad luck. Why would I blame his employer? That makes no sense! The employer pays him afterall.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 10:25 PM |
|
|
Socialists emotional?
I knew it Stalin was an emotional bastard 
you learn new things everyday it seems
(although if you take me, I am somewhat emotional )
Hmm, is this supposed to be only about politics?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 10:43 PM |
|
|
Asheera:
There's a difference between finding a kitty cute and being all "OOOOOH!!!! A CUTE KITTY!!!!"
Joonas:
Are you sure you're a social democrat? 
Both:
Of course it's a generalization. That's why I said "in general". But I tend to notice that people who are more emotional tend to be more left-wing economically. Just a personal observation.
TheDeath:
I suspect Stalin didn't care about socialism at all. I think he just saw it as a program for him to get to power.
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 10:47 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I suspect Stalin didn't care about socialism at all. I think he just saw it as a program for him to get to power.
So he was pretty rational...
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
JoonasTo
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
What if Elvin was female?
|
|
posted December 29, 2008 10:48 PM |
|
|
"Are you sure you're a social democrat?"
Indeed. I am. But that doesn't equal idiot. I tend to think that a lot of things could be done better. Blaming a company that gives work to a man for him being poor isn't exactly rational.
____________
DON'T BE A NOOB, JOIN A.D.V.E.N.T.U.R.E.
|
| |
|
|
