This foreboding is fa...
I think leaving Kratos in charge of a country would be a terrible, terrible idea.
Just look what happened to ancient Greece when he got his way.
In all seriousness, I'm pro-kratos, anti-archy. And not just because Kratos gets to rip off Helios' head and use it as a flashlight.
Edit: whoops. I made a mistake, I meant "progressive" and I accidentally wrote something else.
edited 1st Aug '11 4:20:09 PM by deathjavu
Look, you can't make me speak in a logical, coherent, intelligent bananna.
I changed accounts.
![[up]](https://static.tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pub/smiles/arrow_up.png "[up]"){kind=icon}
Dammit, you ninja'd my intended response! 
So you're neo-conservative / plutocractic nationalist.
I changed accounts.
No, I think it means that he thinks Asskicking Equals Authority.
More seriously, though, can we have non-fancy definitions of all these terms. I'm kind of confused...
I am now known as Flyboy.Please use the terminology given everyone.
TU NE CEDE MALIS CLASS OF 1971
Arche refers to a positive attitude towards the (usually traditional) social order. Kratos refers to the coercive power of the state.
And under this schematic, I'd be a theoconservative.
edited 1st Aug '11 3:24:16 PM by Cojuanco
Decemberist
Definitely anti-archy, pro-kratos.
The sin of silence when they should protest makes cowards of men.
Fuzzy Orange Doomsayer
I have no idea whether I'm classified as pro or anti kratos according to this. I certainly don't want the government to kill me, but I don't want anyone else to kill me, either, and I rely on the government to make sure that people who'd want to kill me go to jail.
That's Feo . . . He's a disgusting, mysoginistic, paedophilic asshat who moonlights as a shitty writer—Something Awful
Pro-Freedom Fanatic
Definitely anti-archy, and anti-kratos.
edited 1st Aug '11 7:03:44 PM by SavageHeathen
You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.
Anti-archy, pro-kratos. Progressive. No surprise there.
Tyrannicidal Maniac
Anti-archy, anti-kratos.
Enjoy the Inferno...
And here I was thinking that this thread would be about a God of War / Archie comics crossover, with that whole Betty and Veronica issue finally getting settled, Kratos style (if you know what I mean)...
But seriously though, I'm feeling that the choices here are kind of forced. They try to paint it like it's not exactly an extreme, but it still sounds like you're either authoritarian or super-liberal. I guess I like my middle grounds a bit too much, but I'll go with Pro-Archy, Pro Kratos.
edited 2nd Aug '11 9:17:33 PM by SgtRicko
I'd say I'm anti-archy, not entirely anti-kratos.
This foreboding is fa...
As with all tests and classification systems, we all want to feel we can't be lumped and that some aspect of ourselves is not completely defined by the closest category- and to some extent that's true. *
But categories aren't made to be completely accurate, they're meant to be semi-meaningful generalizations, because generalizations are useful to the point of being a near necessity.
edited 2nd Aug '11 9:29:49 PM by deathjavu
Look, you can't make me speak in a logical, coherent, intelligent bananna.
Citizen
I don't think that this list is particularly descriptive or useful. Any political ideology that isn't pure anarchism depends on the use of the state's coercive power to achieve their desired goals.
Political beliefs are more about what goals to achieve and how to achieve them. By definition, politics deals with one's relationship to the state and how the state should behave. All but the most radical libertarians would agree that the state should at least provide law enforcement, military protection, courts and certain public works, and that the state should use its coercive power to raise the funds to pay for those services.
Reducing things down to Archy and Kratos is a vast oversimplification. Sure, people like things to be nice and tidy, but trying to boil it all down to two or three axes doesn't really work.
What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly.I will categorize the response of the people who didn't fully label themselves:
- MS:democractic progressivism
- SH&MRDA:libertarian individualism
edited 3rd Aug '11 9:42:22 AM by secretist
TU NE CEDE MALIS CLASS OF 1971
Moar and Moar and Moar
This. The whole Kratos aspect of it is relatively pointless. As an example I don't see much of a difference in this regard between enforcing property rights and having environmental regulations.
I also really don't think that libertarianism can blanketly be seen as being anti-archy, or at the very least I don't think it's automatic. I've met a lot of libertarians who are pretty big on the whole ranking thing, to the point where they support libertarian policy because it'll make the distinctions between the ranks bigger.
Edit: The strange thing is if you don't look at it as binary, you can easily move from left to right on the spectrum pretty cleanly by ONLY looking on the views on archy. Probably indicates that this factor alone...that is, how much success should be rewarded, and more importantly, how much failure should be punished, is probably more indicative of our political views than any other factor.
edited 3rd Aug '11 9:46:06 AM by Karmakin
Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserveI think by libertarians, the author categorizes left libertarians
and right libertarians seperately, ie democractic progressive/radical and libertarian individaulists respectively. In Amercia, when you use the word, it is usually exclussively the latter group.
Factions show how diverse libertarians are.
edited 3rd Aug '11 9:46:46 AM by secretist
TU NE CEDE MALIS CLASS OF 1971
Moar and Moar and Moar
See, in terms of right-wing libertarianism, I simply don't see how it doesn't end up in an extremely archy-type society. I can understand left-wing libertarianism (like SH above, as an example), in tearing down all institutions, lowers everybody to the same level.
There's also that if one sees Objectivism as a major influence on modern libertarianism, Objectivism at its core is an extremely pro-archy belief structure.
Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve
I changed accounts.
Can I get a response, here? I seem to have grabbed the Idiot Ball. Can someone explain the terms we're using in a method that isn't as obtuse as the OP?
I am now known as Flyboy.Paleolibertarianism has it's own article. It was modeled after paleoconservatism.
Rockwell wrote in 2000, before himself abandoning the description, that "paleoism" is not dead, but that Buchanan is not the right person to lead a middle class revolt. Rockwell writes:
The libertarian faction of the [paleo] movement saw that far too many compromises were being made to accommodate Buchanan's increasingly idiosyncratic and statist political views. His anti-free market, pro-trade union bias was now out of the bag; indeed, it became a central theme of his campaign. The idea behind the paleo turn was to decry ideological sellout, not follow some ambitious politician down the same road![12]
edited 3rd Aug '11 10:06:05 AM by secretist
TU NE CEDE MALIS CLASS OF 1971
Moar and Moar and Moar
Yup. EXTREME amounts of Archy there.
Kratos is approving of force by the government. That is, the ability to collect taxes, regulate behavior (public and/or private), etc.
Archy is approving of rank and hierarchy. See my post above. Economically, it's how much should we reward the successful and (more importantly) how much we should either let the unsuccessful be punished or actively punish them. Socially and culturally, it's things like the idea that Christians should be thought of as better people than atheists.
Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve
I changed accounts.
Oh, ok. Under those definitions I'd go pro-kratos, anti-archy, I guess. There's probably more implications here which ruins that, but...
edited 3rd Aug '11 10:07:10 AM by USAF713
I am now known as Flyboy.Neoconservatism and Paleoconservatism is a good article to sum up the differences. Actually, paleocons consdier neocons to be a form of liberalism. They argue neocons are strawmen created by the left to shadowbox with.
Paleoconservatism, [1], and Theoconservatism are three forms of Conservatism allegdely (see Pc vs NC artcile).
edited 3rd Aug '11 10:12:06 AM by secretist
TU NE CEDE MALIS CLASS OF 1971
In his book Eight Ways to Run the Country: A New and Revealing Look at Left and Right, Brian Patrick Mitchell identifies four main political traditions in Anglo-American history.[27] Mitchell analyzed modern American political perspectives according to their regard for kratos (defined as the use of force) and archē or “archy” (defined as the recognition of rank), grounding this distinction of archy and kratos in the West's historical experience of church and state and crediting the collapse of the Christian consensus on church and state with the appearance of four main divergent traditions in Western political thought:
Mitchell charts these traditions graphically using a vertical axis as a scale of kratos/akrateia and a horizontal axis as a scale of archy/anarchy. He places democratic progressivism in the lower left, plutocratic nationalism in the lower right, republication constitutionalism in the upper right, and libertarian individualism in the upper left. The political left is therefore distinguished by its rejection of archy, while the political right is distinguished by its acceptance of archy.
For Mitchell, anarchy is not the absence of government but the rejection of rank. Thus there can be both anti-government anarchists (Mitchell’s "libertarian individualists") and pro-government anarchists (Mitchell's "democratic progressives", who favor the use of government force against social hierarchies such as patriarchy). Mitchell also distinguishes between left-wing anarchists and right-wing anarchists, whom Mitchell renames "akratists" for their opposition to the government’s use of force.
In addition to the four main traditions, Mitchell identifies eight distinct political perspectives represented in contemporary American politics:
A potential ninth perspective, in the midst of the eight, is populism, which Mitchell says is vaguely defined and situation-dependent, having no fixed character other than opposition to the prevailing power.
I'm individualist / libertarian (anti-archy, anti-kratos) with some flip floping to and from paleolibertarian (ambivalent towards archy, anti-kratos) sometimes.
edited 1st Aug '11 3:11:06 PM by secretist
TU NE CEDE MALIS CLASS OF 1971