Each type of car is a metaphor for the political organization/theory (not dissimilar to this, but mine are less humorous.) Feel free to add your own!

Democratic cars have fifteen seats, two steering wheels, and no headlights.

Bureaucratic cars have four flat tires and never start when you need them the most.

Communist cars all look the same and most don't work.

When socialist cars break down, the mechanic takes parts from the newest models and puts them in the oldest clunkers.

No two libertarian cars use the same parts, but they crumple like tin cans in a crash.

Anarchist cars are like compact libertarian cars that don't start.

Democrat cars come in all colors, but they all have mediocre engines.

There are two types of Republican cars: the high-speed sports cars, and pickup trucks that break down every week.

Anarcho-primitivist cars doesn't exist.

wut







But seriously, you may want to explain how you thought of those, since I don't associate any of those political beliefs with any of your car descriptions.

The cow analogy is better.

I'll see if I can find it.

He posted the link to it in the OP.

Democracies struggle with opposing factions within themselves. Politicians only focus on getting re-elected the next term, and don't plan for the country's real future.
Bureaucracies are terribly inefficient.
(Soviet) Communism tries to make everything the same (or at least on the outside), but the government gets lots of "profit" (the cars that actually work). Plus, in the real world, Soviet cars were of low quality.
Steal from the rich, give to the poor.
Libertarians advocate great personal freedoms (such as "no seat belts required").
(Stereotypical) Anarchists want great freedoms, too, but some want to form small communities. These communities won't cooperate very well.
The Democratic Party (USA) is the party of minorities, and is more liberal than the republicans (most advocate a certain amount of socialist programs).
The Republican Party (USA) wants to allow great inequality in wealth (either naturally or artificially). Then rich are the sports cars, and the poorer people are the pickup trucks. I thought of Ford's cars with this one (they've made some great cars but now their models are inferior to Toyota ).

Derp. My bad.

Funny, but definitely lacking on the quality standards here.

>>Null

This is pretty difficult.

I would say an Anarchist car destroys roads as it passes over them.

A Revolutionary car has no steering wheel or brakes.

Your definitions for some of those are a little skewed, and extremely biased. What makes the "cow" analogy so amusing is that it is comparing the cows to the very basic understanding of the political systems. You're adding too much opinion to them (i.e. Democrats not planning for a real future, or worrying about anarchist communities rather than a fundamental disregard for government and laws).

I think Captain is dead on with his "Anarchist" car.

²

, but only at the end. The rest of the paragraph was :meh:

Federations are formed between the communities. The associations are voluntary.

They do set laws (unlike everyone likes to think).

Based on my understanding of anarchy, there is no government and there are no laws which can control people. But maybe that's just one sect of anarchism? It's funny that anarchism could have sects.

Put it in H!

the best one

And
You can't just compare a 'car' to a political ideology. What makes the cow example easier to relate to, is that the idea is to do with the property and owning of the cattle, not the cattle themselves.

humorfail.

Cardinal, don't go ruining everyone's fun. I'm a Humor major, and I find Captain's Anarchist car both accurate and funny.

Fixed that for yea.

Yeah, that too.

Quote from Fire_Kame

Quote from poison_us

Cardinal, don't go ruining everyone's fun. I'm a Humorous major, and I find Captain's Anarchist car both accurate and funny.

Fixed that for yea.

No. I was making an ironic joke, which you obviously didn't catch. Ms. Lowbrow, humor is something that is different between each individual, though most people have agreements upon what is humor and what is not. Even the thought of a college offering a "Humor" major makes me laugh, because two people will never agree on every single aspect of what is humor and what is not.

TL;DR: I was making an ironic joke, which you obviously didn't catch. Ms. Lowbrow, humor is something that is different between each individual, though most people have agreements upon what is humor and what is not. Even the thought of a college offering a "Humor" major makes me laugh, because two people will never agree on every single aspect of what is humor and what is not.