What would the previous poster's politics be in a historical time/place?

[wimp]

Judaea, 30s AD

Pharisee, who quietly comes around a la Paul.

1990's Afghanistan

[KaiserDave]

I don't know much about this poster, but I'll guess an ex-communist supporter of anti Taliban resistance. Probably went on to oppose the Americans though.


Russia, 1905

[Not Me, Us]

I don't know much about this poster, but I'll guess an ex-communist supporter of anti Taliban resistance. Probably went on to oppose the Americans though.


Russia, 1905

Social democrat sympathetic to the revolutionaries but skeptical of Marxist groups. Either a constitutionalist or a republican.

Minnesota, 1930s

[certified hummus supporter 🇵🇸🤝🇺🇸🤝🇺🇦]

Supporter of Napoleon's return from Elba. Probably K.I.A. at Waterloo

In Konstantiniyye during the Great Eastern Crisis or immediately after the Second Constitutional Era.

Welp, I got a very easy one. Hardcore Teddy Roosevelt 1912 supporter

Lol

"Here is how Roosevelt can still win the White House" - me circa 1912
[skip]

[PSOL]

Farmer-Labour supporter

220 BC China

[KaiserDave]

Yellow turban rebel agitating the people to revolt!

Japan 1941

[MR DARK BRANDON]

Anti axis powers, yet not entirely vocal about it.


Anywhere in the US 1900-1910

[TheReckoning]

Supportive of the progressive movement.

South Africa, 1990

[Ancestral Republican]

Casual National Party supporter, but not aggressively so.

Ireland, 1922-23

[KaiserDave]

Probably instinctually anti-treaty, but I think Michael Collins would win him over to the pro treaty side. Crane is much more of a Michael Collins than a Éamon de Valera


1945 Yugoslavia

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Anti axis powers, yet not entirely vocal about it.

More specifically, I think KaiserDave would tepidly support the Japanese Empire itself (at least in public; in private I think he'd be much more critical) but oppose its alliance with Germany. This was a more acceptable position at the time than being outright antiwar, but was still on the leftmost edge of what was acceptable, which I think suits KaiserDave's personality fairly well.

In 1945 Yugoslavia I think he'd be pro-Tito but anti-Stalin, an avowed socialist but not necessarily communist or ML--basically the sort of person who came into favor as Tito's regime went on rather than falling out of it.

For me, the time of Christ. Assume I'm a Jew who's a Roman citizen, like Saul of Tarsus. Assume also that I have no specific personal relationships with Jesus, any of His disciples, any famous emperors or generals, or any other important-in-retrospect figures of the time.

[TheReckoning]

Skeptical, yet intrigued, of the radicalism of Christ. Would’ve likely opposed his execution, but wouldn’t have been entirely against any criticism of him.

USSR, 1990

[Arson Plus]

Anti-Communist; Someone who'd like Yeltsin.

Canada, 1993.

[S019]

Staunch NDC supporter


New York State, 1958 election

[Dr. MB]

This isn’t a “who would you support in the previous election” thread. But I guess in that era S019 would be a fan of Rockefeller and probably lean toward the Republicans.

1917 Russia

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

Russian peasant in the mir searching for Bigfoot in the surrounding forest. Somewhat confused when red/white soldiers commandeer his house in the midst of a battle.

Nixon-era US.

[Battista Minola 1616]

Cath in Nixon-era USA would be a Catholic liberal Republican à la John Volpe

Portugal 1979?

[Brother Jonathan]

From what I gather from reading about Portugal at the time (I'm largely unfamiliar with Portuguese politics), probably a former supporter of the Carnation Revolution and generally a supporter of the Socialist Party, but with a fair deal of sympathy for the PSD under Sá Carneiro due to their shared Catholic socialist leanings (though not to the extent of being willing to vote for the PSD very enthusiastically, as it was still broadly part of the right).

United States in the 1930s

[KaiserDave]

Oh this is a privilege!

I would assume Brother Jonathan would oppose some of the "excesses" of the New Deal, but I do believe he would support many of the initial moves as necessary to save capitalism and preserve social cohesion. Best comparison that comes to mind (while still a bad one) is Charles Evans Hughes. Probably votes for Landon, I'm not sure if he votes for Hoover in 1932 or not though. Probably not an isolationist and not at all an America Firster, but wary of war like any sensible individual.


Italy 1945

[Geoffrey Howe]

Left-leaning and looking forward to voting for a republic, but will ultimately side with the pro-Western forces.

England, 1970

[KaiserDave]

Definitely a Tory, but not committed to any specific ideological camp (Heath, Monetarists, Powell).

1871 Paris

[Battista Minola 1616]

Left-leaning and looking forward to voting for a republic, but will ultimately side with the pro-Western forces.

More precisely, KaiserDave in 1945 Italy would be a member of the Partito d'Azione (Action Party) likely having fought in the Resistance with the units of Giustizia e Libertà (Justice and Freedom) in the recent past. He would be a strong reformist - a Rossellian "liberal socialist" - and a committed republican, perhaps more radical than his current self is but also still someone fond of good old pragmatism. He would have a broadly sympathetic view of the Socialists and a not totally adversarial one of the Communists and even of the Christian Democrats, with high hopes for the current national unity government led by Actionist Ferruccio Parri.

In 1871 Paris I think he would start out fairly supportive of the Commune but become progressively more disenchanted with it, probably avoiding to participate in the National Guard, trying to stay true to his socialistic and anti-authoritarian - but not anarchist - beliefs. By the end of the year he would be more interested in working for left-wing causes within the Third Republic system.

Tuscany 1963? Pretend I am a father of four children and I own a stationer's with my wife.

[Geoffrey Howe]

Definitely a Tory, but not committed to any specific ideological camp (Heath, Monetarists, Powell).

1871 Paris

I'm not sure there really was a "monetarist" camp to speak of. The expression hadn't really entered the vocabulary and I think the idea only really got going seriously after the oil crisis (even if the intellectual groundwork had already been started). Insofar as it was committed to reducing expenditure and dealing with inflation, the whole party was sort of monetarist. People often trace the beginning of a monetarist current to the resignation of Peter Thorneycroft and Enoch Powell in 1958, so if there was a monetarist wing it was the Powell wing.

Btw, you are right I would definitely be a staunch Tory and on the right of the party, but pro-European and not allied with the Monday Club types. Incidentally, before 1968 (Rivers of Blood) Enoch Powell was mainly known as an economic liberal/proto-Thatcherite so I might have voted for him in 1965 without hindsight. Geoffrey Howe nearly did but was convinced to vote for Heath in the end, and I agree Heath was much better than Maudling. Heath was obviously a failure (Europe aside), though IMO he could have become one of the greatest PMs - but that's another subject entirely. I wouldn't have done the nonsense of voting Labour in 1974 which some on the right like Ralph Harris did.

skip

[KaiserDave]

Definitely a Tory, but not committed to any specific ideological camp (Heath, Monetarists, Powell).

1871 Paris

I'm not sure there really was a "monetarist" camp to speak of. The expression hadn't really entered the vocabulary and I think the idea only really got going seriously after the oil crisis (even if the intellectual groundwork had already been started). Insofar as it was committed to reducing expenditure and dealing with inflation, the whole party was sort of monetarist. People often trace the beginning of a monetarist current to the resignation of Peter Thorneycroft and Enoch Powell in 1958, so if there was a monetarist wing it was the Powell wing.

Btw, you are right I would definitely be a staunch Tory and on the right of the party, but pro-European and not allied with the Monday Club types. Incidentally, before 1968 (Rivers of Blood) Enoch Powell was mainly known as an economic liberal/proto-Thatcherite so I might have voted for him in 1965 without hindsight. Geoffrey Howe nearly did but was convinced to vote for Heath in the end, and I agree Heath was much better than Maudling. Heath was obviously a failure (Europe aside), though IMO he could have become one of the greatest PMs - but that's another subject entirely. I wouldn't have done the nonsense of voting Labour in 1974 which some on the right like Ralph Harris did.

skip

My ignorance is showing!

Thanks for the lesson

(Skip)

[GregTheGreat657]

Would’ve supported Disposing Louis Phillipe, although would have reservations about instating Napoleon III on the grounds that the previous Napoleon was a tyrannical war monger.

Judea, 30s AD

Pro Jesus living and wanted to secede from Rome

13 Colonies, 1776