Sh*t you're liberal about/Sh*t you're conservative about

[Indy]

[J.K. Gregg]

[Indy]

What are you posting that in response to?

[J.K. Gregg]

You. I think you may have missed it. A bunch of communists started talking about equality or some other horse shit like that. Precocity, you know better than to feed the animals.

[Indy]

No I saw it (this morning).

You're right, but why the need for labels? Back to my idea about dealing with things on a case-by-case basis.

The labeling thing (to me) means that people are going to automatically make assumptions about you if you say something like I'm a communist/liberal/conservative/anarchist/Libertarian, etc.

IMO it's just a distraction.

[J.K. Gregg]

I understand that perspective, but I think there is utility in labeling systems of thought. Besides, they exist. We can't ignore them.

[Indy]

OK, but if that's necessary, it's time for a reboot like you said earlier. What has existed to this point no longer applies.

[J.K. Gregg]

[Indy]

Sure lay it on me. Just FYI, in research surveys there's something known as a response scale. Example of a two point:

-Agree
-Disagree

Three point:

-Agree
-Neither Agree/Disagree
-Disagree

Five point:

-Totally Agree
-Somewhat agree
-Neither agree/disagree
-Somewhat disagree
-Totally disagree

I'm thinking a five-would probably cover everybody (close enough at least) instead of our current two-point.

[J.K. Gregg]

Before I reveal the mind-blowing spectrum alternative, let me respond to this.

Having a position on an issue is all fine and dandy, but the reasons why is what gives rise to systems of thought like conservatism or libertarianism.