Peroreoieroier
In our inverted Third Way , reconcile the synth center left socioeconomic views from the below socioeconomically Leftish/Progressivish ideologies of Left Wing Paternalistic Conservatism esque ideologies and also from here here with synth center right economic and civil views
This is eerily similar to these ideologies below:
Conservative Social Democracy[edit | edit source]
Conservative Social Democracy is a form of moderate conservative, reformist socialism believing in moderation and compromise with capitalist opposition in order to guide their country. It is different, though similar on the bottom line, to 
Paternalistic Conservatism as paternal conservativism justifies welfare by the concept of 
Paternalism that the state should protect and assist the less fortunate in society while conservative social democracy justifies welfare as a tool for socialism and the trade unions and working class.
- Conservative Social Democracy
Social Democracy
Anti-SJW
Social Nationalism
Reformist Marxism (Some, self proclaimed)
Keynesianism (few)
Fusion Populism (Many, modern)
Paternalistic Progressivism (like some parts of Social Democracy)
A combo of Russian paternalism + Bourgeois-Middle Class Communism/Russian Neoliberalism
Paternalistic Progressive Conservatism/SocDem-PatCon synthesis (like One Nation Conservatism)
Far Left Paternalistic Conservatism
Bleeding Heart Common Good Capitalism Libertarianism fusion
Genuinely populist, post-Ronald Reagan strain in the GOP
A Socialist-Left wing Libertarian paternalism version of Pro Worker Rightist/ management-controlled “yellow” unions./Working class conservatism
Frederich Hayak's acceptable type of Socialism
Egoist (Post Left Anarchist) pro Greed
Ayn Rand: Ethics and politics (in a world where her thinking was left wing)
From Wikipedia
In ethics, Rand argued for rational and ethical egoism (rational self-interest), as the guiding moral principle. She said the individual should "exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself".[155] Rand referred to egoism as "the virtue of selfishness" in her book of that title.[156] In it, she presented her solution to the is–ought problem by describing a meta-ethical theory that based morality in the needs of "man's survival qua man".[3] She condemned ethical altruism as incompatible with the requirements of human life and happiness,[3] and held the initiation of force was evil and irrational,[157] writing in Atlas Shrugged that, "Force and mind are opposites".[158]
Rand's ethics and politics are the most criticized areas of her philosophy.[159] Several authors, including Robert Nozick and William F. O'Neill in two of the earliest academic critiques of her ideas,[160] said she failed in her attempt to solve the is–ought problem.[161] Critics have called her definitions of egoism and altruism biased and inconsistent with normal usage.[162] Critics from religious traditions oppose her atheism and her rejection of altruism.[163]
Rand's political philosophy emphasized individual rights, including property rights. She considered laissez-faire capitalism the only moral social system because in her view it was the only system based on protecting those rights.[164] Rand opposed collectivism and statism,[165] which she considered to include many specific forms of government, such as communism, fascism, socialism, theocracy, and the welfare state.[166] Her preferred form of government was a constitutional republic that is limited to the protection of individual rights.[167] Although her political views are often classified as conservative or libertarian, Rand preferred the term "radical for capitalism". She worked with conservatives on political projects, but disagreed with them over issues such as religion and ethics.[168][169] Rand denounced libertarianism, which she associated with anarchism.[170][171] She rejected anarchism as a naive theory based in subjectivism that would lead to collectivism in practice.[172]
Several critics, including Nozick, have said her attempt to justify individual rights based on egoism fails.[173] Others, like libertarian philosopher Michael Huemer, have gone further, saying that her support of egoism and her support of individual rights are inconsistent positions.[174] Some critics, like Roy Childs, have said that her opposition to the initiation of force should lead to support of anarchism, rather than limited government.[175][176]
Comments
Post a Comment