text:
Talk:List of political ideologies

Kemalism
Listing Kemalism under Fascism may not be right. I believe this should be reconsidered. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.160.111.68 (talk) 00:10, 8 September 2014 (UTC)

Capitalism
Why isn't Capitalism on the colour bar?

-G
 * Capitalism is an economic ideology, not a political ideology. Capitalism is, however, on this bar. VolatileChemical 23:36, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Bold textThe entire article is based on teh assumption that the major contradiction in politics would go along the authoritarianism-individualism axis. That is highly biased. The author of the article know very well that it is considered smearing to place marxists in the same category as fascists. --212.60.73.2 16:48, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Please read the article again. Marxism is not in the same category as fascists. Electionworld 06:59, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

- Well, I have two questions: (1) What is being disputed on this article? I can't find mentions of the NPOV dispute anywhere... (2) National socialism is just a disambig page pointing to various groups that called themselves "national socialists", some of which had nothing to do with the nazis (or with each other). So, should that disambig page be listed here? -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 19:00, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

I reverted the new categorization. It doesn't seem to be an improvement and in no way communism can be considered as a variant of liberal. These are contradictory. Electionworld 22:05, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

I'm going to revert your revert because you failed to explain how the new categorization is not an improvement, seemingly resting this decision solely on your particular bugaboo regarding communism. It is a clear improvement, because it divides the political world with more categories and more precision, dividing the spectrum of individualism and community (collectivity) into economic and cultural components. This is better. Instead of just the misleading left-right axis or just the communitarian-individualism axis, it uses BOTH. It can also help clarify the difference between European and American conservatism and liberalism (American following the labels shown and European (I think) correlating more to "cultural right" (communitarianism and conservatism) and "cultural left" (liberalism and libertarianism) shown on the diagram). If you question this, please raise the issue here rather than doing a massive revert. I am open to changing particulars, but the general changes are clearly better. I will take "communism" out of the cultural left category, but leave it under liberal in the economic left category. This is because communism is clearly left on economic issues, and I think leans toward the left on cultural issues, certainly on the moral issues they do (religion, abortion, etc.). This would put it in the economic left and cultural left categories (the "liberal" quadrant on the diagram shown, and in American parlance). I am open to persuasion on the cultural issues category, but let's talk about it. -- Chris 09:10, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

P.S. Further making a point of even-handedness ... from the beginning, I had put Nazism in my quadrant (though it is debatable as well). I don't like that ... wanna trade? I'm an American who feels communitarian-centrist longings, and proclaims himself a Christian Democrat, because Republicans are too conservative on economic issues (again, see the diagram) and Democrats are too liberal on cultural issues. You don't like being lumped with commies. I don't like being lumped with Nazis. But unless we are ready to propose a more complicated categorization scheme, then everyone has a blacksheep in the family. -- Chris 15:42, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

 * Please read the article on liberalism and you can clearly see that communism and libralism have noting in common. Liberal is not a synomym of left (neither of right) and this is not an American page. Communism starts with the collective, with class, liberalism starts with individual liberty. There was a well balanced oversight, which whereby the new one isn't. If we cannot agree, we could make an alphabetical list. Electionworld 18:45, 16 December 2005 (UTC)

Proposal for new categories in response to criticism
In response to Electionworld ... Well, in American parlance the categories on the present diagram (liberal, conservative, libertarian, communitarian, center) fit perfectly, when not considering the third axis between anarchy and monarchy, which is probably too complex here. In my estimation, European parlance overly conflates conservative with communitarian and liberal with libertarian (still using American parlance in describing). Europe doesn't seem to allow the economic distinction between free market and social market on the spectrum. In an effort to move beyond terminology issues, and still allow four basic categories, I propose the new diagram to the right. Liberal ---> Social Market Individualism. Conservative ---> Free Market Communitarianism. Communitarian ---> Social Market Communitarianism. Libertarian ---> Free Market Individualism. I think that these new classifications should rectify the situation. What do you think? -- Chris 08:47, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No it doesn't fit. It ignores the meaning of words outside the US. Liberals around the world believe in free market individualism, but differ on the degree of government intervention. The new categorization is still not better than the categorization ad developed in the last months in this article. As I said, I am ready to make an alphabetical list it the old one is considered not neutral POV. Electionworld 21:09, 18 December 2005 (UTC)

 * I think you may be missing the point of the new diagram. The new diagram transcends the label problems.  According to the new categories, all who are free market individualists would be placed under "free market individualism".  Classical liberalism (or just plain "liberalism" according to Euro-parlance) would be under "free market individualism".  Libertarianism would likewise be so classified.  However, American liberalism would fit under "social market individualism".  British liberalism and Labour would also be so classified.  I'm not claiming that liberalism (read "classical" or Euro-parlance) has to fit under the social market individualism (formerly called "liberalism").  That is the whole point, and I think the point of misunderstanding.  Do you feel uncomfortable with categorizing classical liberalism under "free market individualism" and American liberalism under "social market individualism"?  I don't think that the alphabetical list helps because the article isn't just a list of ideologies, but an article that places political ideologies in context, showing how they relate to each other.  That is the point of what I have done. -- Chris 23:07, 18 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It is not yet complete. Please understand: classical liberalism is not the same as European liberalism, European liberalism is not the same as libertarianism. Social market is what most liberals would agree to, but where in the scheme is the planned economy of the socialists? Electionworld 07:31, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

'''There are a multitude of competing political spectrum diagrams. As such, any one diagram is POV.''' The only NPOV way to list ideologies is by "common themes", without making any definite assertions about an overarching political spectrum. Thus, I strongly believe the old classification was better. -- Mihnea Tudoreanu 01:46, 24 December 2005 (UTC)

 * What the hell? Who organized this list, this is terrible. Conservativism listed as "traditional" when in fact the definition of the word "conservative" is less: i.e. less gov't. Liberalism is listed as more personal freedom (or whatever) while it is for MORE gov't. Please, this is _insane_

 * I believe you're not distinguishing classical liberalism from modern American liberalism. --Serge 17:14, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

 * I have added anarchism to Ideologies emphasizing class struggle, in Argentina and Spain (two of the countries where historically anarchism has had a great impact, with anarchosyndicalist unions of hundreds of thousands of memeber, general insurrections and anarcho-communists organizations with great political wight) it is the main branch of anarchism (anarchism as a culturalist individualist ideology is a post-modern higher class invention with no ties to anarchism -Bakunin, Durruti, Makhno-).

my radical revision vs nikodemos'
I'm not satisfied with Nikodemos' recent edit. Although there is no reason to choose his classification over mine, I have one major issue with it: "Focus on social equality" instead of "Focus on the position of the working class". To me it is unclear what social equality is and why socialism would want that and liberalism or anarchism not. Socialism is however better defined as focussing on the working clas (proletariat) this in adaptation of the original version which used the term "class struggle". Socialists unlike liberals focus on the working class. I also prefer to keep anarchism neatly separated from socialism and not mix subtypes of working class-oriented ideologies with individual-oriented ones. I realize that this differences is not entirely indisputable, but I'd prefer to keep the system ordered.

I also see no reason to put the working class oriented ideologies first. The individually oriented ideologies anarchism and liberalism are logical to put first, because liberalism is the first real political ideology of the modern age.

Furthermore, some orderings were deliberately not alphabetical, such as anarchism but instead I tried to form a subclassifcation between more individualist and collectivist types of anarchism.

I hope that we can come to some kind of compromise on these differences. C mon 20:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I am always open to compromise. Let's discuss the issues point by point. I'll start with your recent edits: First, "socialism" can be used with two very distinct meanings: an ideology or an economic system. What is the name of the economic system supported by socialist ideology? Socialism. Yes, I know it's confusing, but that is precisely why the article should explain the issue. Second, the Nazis were not the only ones to use the term "national socialism" - they weren't even the first (see national socialism (disambiguation). Czech national socialists, with their belief in Czech independence and moderate social reform, would be insulted by anyone equating them with the Nazis.

 * Now, regarding the "focus on social equality", keep in mind that the categories are not mutually exclusive. Just because socialists want social equality that doesn't mean that liberals don't. It's just that liberals put individualism first. And yes, "social equality" is vague, but so are all the other criteria for classification (e.g. "tradition" - anything could be "traditional").

 * Anarchism (or at least the collectivist schools thereof) is also very much concerned with social equality and class struggle.

 * As far as the ordering and the classifications are concerned, I have no particular preference. -- Nikodemos 21:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I don't understand your last sentence: you have no preference for any classification; also not for the title of one on socialism? and the inclusion of anarchism? I will assume you do.
 * I don't think we can solve the socialism/corporatism issue here, let's just remove the second economic system, capitalism is clear as an example of economic systems.
 * I realize the term "national socialist" is problematic, Nazism is as problematic for me because it is slang: it would be the same as calling socialism "sozism" or christian democracy "kallotisme" or green politicians "greenies". There is a reason why the article national socialism (disambiguation) is not the article national socialism.
 * Social equality is not only vague, it is also no the core issue of a socialist. The social equality article does not discuss socialism and the socialism article does not discuss social equality. The working class article however discusses socialism and vice versa. The fact that the social equality article is a stub should be indication that this term is not only vague but also not used very often.
 * I don't understand why we can't seek to make mutually exclusive categories, we can at least try.
 * But if we do (as you propose). There is no reason to mix anarchism with socialism: some anarchists (like some liberals) might be interested in social equality, but destroying systems that repress individuals is first.
 * Although I would prefer compromise, I can't really see it now. C mon 22:15, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * You'd be surprised of how compromise can be achieved after sufficient discussion. What I meant with my last sentence ("no preference for any classification") was that I have no particular preference for the order of the sections, or the order of individual articles within a section. This was in response to your objection that you didnot like my efforts to alphabetize the list. I think alphabetical order is good because it is neutral (you can't be accused of any bias), but if you want to change it I won't stop you.
 * I don't understand your objection to using socialism as an example of an economic system.
 * "Nazism" is the most common English word used to describe the ideology of Adolf Hitler. That may not be the case in German, but what is slang in one language may not be slang in another. An English Google search reveals 3,800,000 hits for "nazism" as opposed to only 392,000 hits for "national socialism". So "nazism" is about 10 times more common than "national socialism". The general consensus on wikipedia is that we will use the most popular names for things. Thus the article on the USSR is called Soviet Union and not Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. The article on North Korea is called North Korea and not Democratic People's Republic of Korea.
 * Many socialists have moved away from a working class emphasis in recent decades, and some forms of socialism (e.g. utopian socialism) were never focused on the working class to begin with. The only thing all socialists have in common is their desire for equality.
 * Mutually exclusive categories are logically impossible, because some ideologies clearly belong in at least two categories (e.g. anarcho-communism, or eco-feminism).
 * Some forms of anarchism are already mixed with socialism by their very nature (again, I give you anarcho-communism as an example, but also anarcho-syndicalism and libertarian socialism). An anarcho-communist might be an anarchist first and a communist second, or he might be a communist first and an anarchist second... -- Nikodemos 22:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

 * Okay, we'll order them alphabetically (that is really alphabetically, and not putting Social equality before Gender issues or Foreign policy;
 * Listing socialism creates confusion, because it is also a political ideology. It does not help to clarify why some things should be on the list and somethings not;
 * Nazism appears to be the consensus on wikipedia. I'll have to fight that battle somewhere else;
 * I'm not convinced by your argument on socialism being oriented towards equality. Can you supply me any proof (can also be within wikipedia) of this claim? Furthermore in this reasoning liberalism should be listed as focus on liberty and green politics as focus on sustainability. This kind of classification is different from the one issued here (which uses more neutral terms than values; they are also real focuses and not goals). I'd prefer to keep working class.
 * We'll put some of the collectivist anarchist in the socialist bloc, but not mixed with the "other" category, but under the header "anarchism".
 * Is this a compromise you can live with? C mon 08:07, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I agree with alphabetical ordering (though I believe the "Big 3" categories - individualism, tradition and equality - should take precedence over others, because they define the three main directions of modern political thought). Alternatively, we could return to the order you established before.
 * Yes, it's certainly true that socialism can mean two different things is a source of confusion. That's precisely why we should strive to eliminate that confusion by explaining things...
 * I would have no objection to liberalism being listed as being focused on (individual) liberty, or green politics as being focused on sustainability. Regarding the focus on socialism, I can go look for references stating that it is indeed social equality, though it seems self-evident to me. Perhaps you would find it more acceptable if we said the focus was on society?
 * I agree with your proposal about anarchism in the socialist bloc.
 * We seem to be down to a single disagreement now (the one over the focus of the socialist bloc). I'm definitely happy with our progress. -- Nikodemos 02:44, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Okay three down one to go (although that big three thing? There aren't three big ideologies on a global level). Focus on society? That is certainly the worst classification one could give: political ideologies per definition focus on society and social issues! That is not a criterion that will ever work! Socialism could be said to focus on I could settle for any of these, (except the class conflict because it's highly disputable), as long as there is some consistency between this and other headers. I would not settle for headers like society/collective/group, that's too general. We could try to make a consistent classification for each of the 4/5 categories above and choose one. I have done this here. Alternatively we could classify them by "general ideology", those which for instance have made the template (anarchism/christian democracy/communism/communitarianism/conservatism/fascism/feminism/green politics/islamism/liberalism/libertarianism/nationalism/social democracy/socialism). Although we could collapse several (anarchism/religious ideologies/socialism/conservatism/nationalism/green politics/liberalism/feminism) we would throw out several ideologies which are issue stances (multiculturalism/foreign policy/form of government). I think the 'alternative' route presented here would be most fruitful. C mon 16:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * 1) a social group: the working class/workers/the proletariat/lower classes/the poor/chanceles
 * 2) a strategy: class conflict/proletarian revolution)
 * 3) a source of value: labour
 * 4) a goal: worker/state ownership/control of the means of production
 * 5) a value: substantive equality/equality of outcome/positive freedom

 * I could go with either a classification based on values (e.g. equality), or one based on goals (e.g. collective control over the means of production), or the alternative one you proposed (based on "general ideology"). I dislike the alternative route, however, because there are many hybrid ideologies that would be difficult to classify (e.g. we can all agree that anarcho-capitalism focuses on the individual, but there are bitter disputes on whether it is an anarchist or liberal ideology). A classification by general ideology seems to invite endless debate on the exact nature and origins of the hybrids. I like a classification on values most of all. -- Nikodemos 19:01, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

 * I think the general ideologies one would be most general and least disputable. As I tried to point out here no single ideology is linked to one single value. C mon 20:06, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

 * True, but we could easily list ideologies twice under two different values without raising much of a dispute, whereas if we did it by general ideology we would be inviting chaos. Are you aware of the never-ending debates in Talk:Anarcho-capitalism as to whether anarcho-capitalism really is a form of anarchism? I wish to avoid things like that. -- Nikodemos 20:15, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

We can not avoiding these issues by entering in a debate whether conservatives value freedom, liberals equality and nationalists solidarity. A 'general ideology' typology is simplest. C mon 20:23, 21 October 2006 (UTC).
 * Very well, I agree to the 'general ideology' typology. However, I reserve the right to change it if it causes an edit war some time in the future. -- Nikodemos 20:31, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I propose we discuss such a change here first. I'll make the change to night. C mon 22:16, 21 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Any edit war would necessarily involve long and pointless arguments on the Talk page, so it should be easy for both of us to notice it. -- Nikodemos 01:37, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

New Template: Lib
I just created a new template Template:Lib. (It's my first template). It takes one parameter, declaring whether the use on the page is "liberal", "libertarian", or "both". My idea was to use it to head articles such as Liberal International and Libertarian perspectives on gay rights where it might not be clear at first glance which meaning is intended. This would hopefully ensure consistent usage within an article, and prevent overly verbose unclear repetition from article to article. Feel free to discuss on the talk page Template_talk:Lib. samwaltz 20:39, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Anarchism
The section on anarchism does not belong here because anarchists generally do not form political parties so i will remove it.--Apollonius 1236 (talk) 19:47, 25 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I think a different solution is necessary renaming the article list of political ideologies, because that would 1) show the list nature of the artcicle and 2) allow is to encompass all ideologies and not just party political ones. But we will need an admin for the move because the article already exists and is a redirect to this article. C mon (talk) 06:51, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

New organization
I've made some changes to the list's organization in order to avoid the use of list items as list headers and to cut back on some redundancy. I'm not sure if this is the correct style. I've read Lists but I couldn't see any style guide that addressed the way the list was before, which seemed a bit awkward in my opinion. Please feel free to revert or change the list in case I made a mistake in changing it. Ecto (talk) 22:09, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Missing ideologies
There might be a few ideologies missing from this list. I think "anti" articles like anticommunism, antifascism, or antifeminism should be included on this list but I understand why others might disagree. What does everyone think?

Also, capitalism should be on this list too, even though it has been removed. There are some old discussions about how capitalism is an economic system rather than a political ideology but I think that leaving capitalism off this list has NPOV issues. We probably wouldn't even use the word "ideology" at all today if Marx and Engles hadn't used it to identify the pro-status quo belief system (superstructure) generated by the economic system of the day (the basis), so "capitalism" doesn't just refer to an economic system but also the value system that makes the economic system acceptable to a society. Marx and Engles used "ideology" to distinguish pro-capitalist ideas from the "science" of socialism. When communists talk about "bergousie morality" they're talking about capitalism as an ideology. We might not agree with the communist point of view that capitalism is as an ideology but we should take it into account when making this list in accordance with NPOV.Ecto (talk) 22:47, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

 * I added "National Socialism" after Nazism, but then discovered National Socialism (disambiguation) and National Socialist Party both of which described a number of ideologies or groups that were NOT Nazi. I don't see a previous discussion on how to handle this. I'm sure some would like the ideology not mentioned at all because they think it makes "socialism" look bad. But it makes Wikipedia look bad to not try to distinguish the types here. That being said, I don't have a strong idea of how to do that right now and busy on other stuff, so I'll keep it in mind and see what others think. CarolMooreDC 10:53, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Authoritarianism and Technocracy
This list seems to be rather democracy biased. What of those who are opposed to democracy, or Technocrats (such as myself)? 80.3.68.136 (talk) 18:00, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Way to avoid overlaps of ideologies in groups.
I have noticed many ideologies can fit into 2 or more categories and while this system works fine. I believe it could be massively improved.

If you used scales such as the Political Compass instead it would avoid any possible crossing of political ideologiez. Political Boss (talk) 02:19, 27 November 2015 (UTC)

Categories
What determines an ideology being a "major" field in bold rather than an ideology listed below it? Fascism seems to be radically different enough to be its own category, while many of the environmental ideologies feel like they would be included in some of the other categories. Is Libertarianism even considered a part of the Liberal tradition? Also, should this list be relabeled "List of ideologies" rather than "List of political ideologies" to facilitate the inclusion of economic ideologies such as Capitalism? Communism and Socialism may be political ideologies but economics remains heavily engrained in their beliefs. 158.96.4.13 (talk) 18:38, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
 * I agree with the Fascism. It is dubious to list it under the moniker "Nationalism" as I don't think that Nationalism can be really considered integral to Fascism, nor Fascism a sub-group of Nationalism. There have been "Internationalist" Fascist idealogues such as Werner Daitz who visioned a kind of German-led "European Union" in the 1940s. Also, the Nouvelle Droite has somewhat pan-Europeanist views, although still wanting to preserve "ethno-pluralism". Fascism does require strong adherence to the State and the Leader, but it does not necessarily include strong Nationalist elements, or adherence to the common cultural heritage. It should be noted that at the time most of the Fascist parties, movements and states were operating (20s, 30s, 40s), even Liberals (by this, I mean European Liberals) were often fiercely nationalistic. The point of contention wasn't the Nationalism, but the totalitarian nature of Fascist movements.

 * Libertarianism is clearly a part of Liberal tradition. This is evident in Europe where most of the parties named "Liberal Party", while not being Libertarian, still adhere to a quite laissez-faire economic policy. Adam Smith, the oft-quoted economist in Libertarian circles, was an enemy of Mercantilism and hence, a Liberal. The broad "Liberal tradition" could be defined as belief in Parlamentarism as opposed to Monarchism and in Progressivism as opposed to Conservatism which are characteristics of both (in economic terms) Left-Liberal and Right-Liberal parties.

 * The question of whether Capitalism could be considered an ideology is difficult. Capitalism is, to quote Marx, really a mode of production. But then again, so is Socialism, and yet many movements attempting to establish Socialism as a preferred mode of production call themselves "Socialist" and often include additional political goals they claim are inherent to their "Socialism". Communism as a movement is more consistent, as their stated goal is Socialism, and their means of achieving it is class struggle. The argument against including Capitalism as its own ideology would be that the support of "Capitalist mode of production" is prevalent in many different political movements, even in contemporary Social Democracy. As such, there really isn't an "ideology of Capitalism". JJohannes (talk) 08:06, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on List of political ideologies. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090609075437/http://www.mutualist.org/id32.html to http://www.mutualist.org/id32.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 21:59, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Anarchist communism sections
How come we have two "Anarchist communism" sections? Should they not be merged in one place? --DanielRigal (talk) 11:44, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Missing one-nation conservatism?
Any reason why One-nation conservatism is not included? Is it not considered a political ideology? If so, why? --Jzema 17:50, 1 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I have since added this to the page --Jzema 17:56, 1 April 2018 (UTC)

Unnecessary conflations of distinct ideologies
I'm not sure why, but it seems like some anonymous editor(s) keep insisting on conflating distinct ideologies, such as Socialism and Communism, Libertarianism and Liberalism, and editing out ideologies such as Christian Democracy and Social Democracy. I understand the desire to keep from listing separately ideologies that are generally agreed upon as being variations of the same ideology, such as Mutualism and Anarcho-syndicalism both being branches of Anarchism. However, it is definitely not an idea generally agreed upon in political science that Socialism a branch of Communism, for instance. To support this idea, I wish to cite the following article: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/slavic-review/article/state-of-socialism-a-note-on-terminology/4C742B00BE0D00ED3F0BE855097DE5F7# Please state your reasoning and/or give citations if you wish to make such conflations, whoever you anonymous editors may be. Thanks! Tomabird (talk) 03:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Why remove an informative, unbiased link?
I am mystified as to why the link I added to the page, https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/UsefulNotes/PoliticalIdeologies, was removed by an anonymous editor- there are no external links provided on this page and this was one which gave readers useful and unbiased information on the subject of political ideologies- and this on a Wikipedia page that has been tagged as needing more citations! Thanks. Tomabird (talk) 15:30, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Anonymous users continually deleting content & conflating differing ideologies
I have spent a lot of time adding content to this page and organizing it as rationally as possible, only to have my work undone continually by anonymous user(s) who seem to have some agenda. I know this kind of thing must happen a lot on Wikipedia, but it seems to me to be approaching the realm of vandalism. Any thoughts? Tomabird (talk) 18:48, 7 October 2018 (UTC)

I am this user, I have no agenda, but your distinction between communism and socialism is nonsensical, socialism is an economic system most often used by communists and other lefties, distinguishing between the two is like distinguishing between liberalism/conservatism and capitalism, it's far too complicated to split into separate categories, and the way you've done it is completely arbitrary for reasons I could go into, the way it is now is the way it was before you changed it, so you are the one imposing your perspective, also, all links under the socialism category linked to leninism, so if anyone has an agenda it's you, I have fixed all these, please stop reverting the changes — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.236.245 (talk) 12:25, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply, anonymous user. While it is true that the word "socialism" is used to describe an economic system (or more properly, a set of widely differing economic systems) it is also true that the word "socialism" is used to refer to a wide range of differing political ideologies as well- which you can easily tell by reading the page entitled "Socialism." The same can be said for the word "communism." I concede that it is possible to say that "communism," in a political sense, can be described as a subset of socialism. However, there are many socialists who would be extremely upset at being called "communists," even though both advocate for differing forms of a "socialist" economic system, just as there are many conservatives who wouldn't particularly like being called "liberals" even though they both advocate for differing forms of a liberal economic system. By your logic, we should have one section called "Liberalism/Conservatism." Like it or not, unlike what you claim, "Socialism" refers to both a set of economic systems AND a set of political ideologies, most of which are distinct from communism. This page is a list of POLITICAL ideologies. It is also simply untrue that all links under the Socialism section link to Leninism. That is like saying all the links under the Conservatism section link to Nationalism. There are probably more socialists who would not identify as communists than there are conservatives who would not identify as nationalists. These categorizations are largely arbitrary, but we have to try to be as accurate as possible, largely by avoiding unnecessary conflations. In any case, I am happy to include communism as a variant of socialism. Yours truly, Tomabird. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomabird (talk • contribs) 16:10, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

They did link to leninism, before I changed them all back to how they were, but I see your point, will leave as is now — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.236.245 (talk) 12:07, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Fair enough- I pretty much ended up going with your approach after all, but let me know what you think. I apologize for insinuating vandalism earlier. All the best, Tomabird — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomabird (talk • contribs) 19:45, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

Should Left and Right Libertarianisms be under one section?
I've been thinking that the most proper way to categorize Anarchism and Right-libertarianism would be to put them both in the same section called "Libertarianism," with Left-libertarianism and Right- libertarianism as subcategories. Any thoughts? Tomabird (talk) 20:12, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Heavily disagree, the ideologies are completely unrelated in everything but name — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.236.245 (talk) 12:53, 10 October 2018 (UTC)

Ok- I guess I was thinking along the lines of historical common ancestry, but perhaps the contemporary understanding is more relevant. I have noticed how under one category there tend to be wide ranges of variations of the same ideology from right-wing to left-wing, which I think is quite natural. Any classification is arbitrary, so it all depends what you want to emphasize- historical continuity or what a particular ideology means to the average person today. Thanks for the feedback. yours truly, Tomabird — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tomabird (talk • contribs) 19:53, 11 October 2018 (UTC)

I think Definitely not. The only main similar characteristic between the two is the Anti-authoritarianism. And although this may seem like the most important characteristic, Right Libertarians and Left libertarians have extremely different ideologies and should have there own respective categories. It would be unfair to have Anarcho-Capitalism and Communism in the same category. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 40.137.224.226 (talk) 15:37, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Populism? Interesting...
Should we have a separate section for populism? It's an interesting thought, as I have wondered about it previously, but decided after reading the article on populism that it reflects more of a political approach that various ideologies might pursue, rather than an actual ideology in-and-of itself - but I may be wrong, of course. Thoughts? Tomabird (talk) 14:32, 12 October 2018 (UTC)

It's true. I think we should have a separate section for populism, but we must understand the following. As I read in a news article: "The ideology is the hardware, the populism is the software". Because of this, there are left-wing populism and right-wing populism.--186.59.174.228 (talk) 19:21, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

Major re-ordering
To the IP who has now twice restructured the whole article without any conversation or really even edit summaries, care to discuss what's up? Simonm223 (talk) 14:05, 7 January 2019 (UTC)
 * It doesn't fill me with confidence that you disregarded my advice to break out your edits into smaller chunks and make use of edit summaries. Simonm223 (talk) 16:47, 8 January 2019 (UTC)

Why combine populism with direct democracy?
Populism has nothing to do with Direct democracy. Why combine both of them? It's illogical.--186.59.174.228 (talk) 19:17, 14 January 2019 (UTC)

It kinda does, depending on whether you have a positive or negative view of populism, but I think the whole section needs to go, it's an alright idea but I don't really see how general political movements can really be described as ideologies

Right-libertarianism is a form of conservatism
Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan were conservatives, I don't think anyone would disagree with that, so can we please stop putting them in the same category as classical anarchists? you can call yourselves what you want but I think it makes more sense to delineate sections by the whole background and history of the ideology, rather than just by name alone — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.96.236.245 (talk) 20:36, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Fair enough, although I never heard either Margaret Thatcher or Ronald Reagan describe themselves as "libertarians," although others may categorize their brand of conservatism as something like "libertarian conservatism." By the same token, it makes no more sense to put Noam Chomsky, a self-described libertarian socialist, in the same category as Joseph Stalin, an authoritarian communist- which is exactly what people are doing every time they combine the communism and socialism sections. I think we have to admit that all of these categories have significant overlap, which is natural- ideologies often don't fit into neat, distinct categories, so even making a list with separate sections like we are doing is inherently problematic. The only way I can think of to minimize unnecessary conflation is to have more separate categories- which is why I chose to revert your last edit. Let's see what other editors think... Cheers! Tomabird (talk) 21:46, 31 January 2019 (UTC)
 * That does make sense though, because they are part of the same political tradition, just at opposing ends of it, there is overlap but if we're going to put them in boxes it may as well be boxes that most people would put them into, not boxes based on name alone

Too many sidebars
the footers at the bottom of the article were not displaying due to too many sidebars (post-expand size exceeded). I have removed many of the more minor sidebars and sidebars that were duplicating the footers. please feel free to remove more. we should concentrate on adding footers where appropriate and avoid adding more sidebars since they crowd the article content and have problems when there are too many trying to occupy limited space on the right side of the article. thank you. Frietjes (talk) 14:51, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Special:Diff/959445883 - WP:OR?
Seems like it, but I always feel uneasy about reverting when the list itself is almost entirely unverified info. Second opinion requested. – MJL  ‐Talk‐☖ 03:13, 29 May 2020 (UTC) Thank you for the response! { – MJL  ‐Talk‐☖ 22:22, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * , it seems that the IP is right. Marxism–Leninism was developed by Stalin and his supporters in the 1920s after Lenin's death and became the ideology of the Communist International and later of the Communist bloc, in several cases being also explicity mentioned in the state constitution. Trostkyism was in opposition to Marxism–Leninism which was seen as Stalinism and anti-Stalinist socialists use Stalinism to refer to it. In academia, Stalinism seems to be used to specifically refer to Stalin's policies while Marxism–Leninism is used to refer to the ideology adopted by Communist states.--Davide King (talk) 07:43, 4 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Let's go with that then.

Removed Spam "Source"
I removed the source "The Evolutionary Psychology Behind Politics". It's only cited in the opening after a long list of other sources. It's author is "anonymouse conservative" and appears to be vanity published. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources#Self-published_sources_(online_and_paper) — Preceding unsigned comment added by History8192 (talk • contribs) 04:39, 31 July 2020 (UTC)

Individualism
Could someone please add individualism to this list Bruhwer01 (talk) 17:36, 11 May 2021 (UTC)

Turkey and Mexico
Mexico is North American too, Turkey is also European L1948L (talk) 11:14, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

Requested move 23 September 2021

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. All four !votes (including the proposer) raised valid points. But there is consensus against increasing the scope of this article at this time. (non-admin closure) VR talk 18:31, 24 October 2021 (UTC)

List of political ideologies → List of ideologies – Renaming this to "List of ideologies" will allow for more freedom in what is included, without lengthy debates on which ideologies are political and which are not. It will also remove the need for an expert in politics to review the article, which means that there will be one less problem to solve. Heythereimaguy (talk) 20:01, 23 September 2021 (UTC) — Relisting. Havelock Jones (talk) 07:56, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
 * Question: Do you mean for religious ideologies to be included? That seems like it might get a bit unwieldy. The Ngram remark seems useless, since "ABC" will always be more common than "ABC XYZ" for any strings of ABC and XYZ. — BarrelProof (talk) 00:33, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * @BarrelProof fair point. I'd say it would be best to exclude it for now, as a quick search doesn't come up with anything useful. Focusing on stuff like economic ideologies would be better, in my opinion. What do you think? Heythereimaguy (talk) 01:07, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I think that if the title is List of ideologies, then any kind of ideology would be assumed to be included. A quick web search for "religious ideologies" shows that the phrase is commonly used, and there are a lot of religious ideologies. — BarrelProof (talk) 05:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * I agree: this should include every ideology, including religious ones. 20 million + is significant, the only problem is that none of these provide much information at first glance, except an article in a journal that's paid access. Can you provide some sources that have a decent amount of info about religious ideologies? Thanks! Oh, and one more thing: you're definitely right about Ngram. Heythereimaguy (talk) 14:39, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

 * Absolutely Not This massive mess of an article needs a smaller scope, not a larger one. As for It will also remove the need for an expert in politics to review the article, which means that there will be one less problem to solve. that isn't solving the problem, that's just inviting even more problems by changing the article scope. Not to mention that by expanding the article scope, you wouldn't clear that flag since all the material requiring review would still be there. BSMRD (talk) 15:05, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Disagree - I think "list of ideologies" actually might be a good idea, but something that is a list of lists, if that makes sense. It could link to this list, and to other lists that focus on other ideologies. I think keeping this "list of political ideologies" as its own entity helps the community engage with it, its scope to be understood, etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamzze (talk • contribs)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Reducing the length of this article
There seems to be a lot of discussion over what should/ should not be included within this article. I think that will take some time to deal with. In between this, could we agree a way to minimize the length of this article? It is a little difficult to navigate as it currently stands.

I am not sure what is possible in terms of wiki-tech, but:

- Each section could be wrapped in a {{columns-list|colwidth=18em| so the different article links go across the page, rather than down?

- Each section could be placed within a table and then set to autocollapse?

Any other ideas of what is possible/ accepted editorially + not impacting accessibility would be great to know.

This can then be reversed, if wanted, once/ if the page is reduced in scope of the current ideologies. I think, though, addressing this issue would help this page be more approachable for everyone. Jamzze (talk) 14:24, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Non ideologies
Articals such as the New Deal in the progressive section are not political ideologies and shouldn't be in the article. As to to violate R3 I'm making this so it can be discussed. — RealFakeKim  T  19:05, 26 November 2021 (UTC)

Geolibertarianism as Left-libertarianism?
Georgism is a pro-capitalist economic philosophy with respect to the ownership of private property, Geolibertarianism even more so. It seems wrong to me to list it under Left-libertarianism rather than Right-libertarianism or Other-libertarianism Snoopdigglet (talk) 12:28, 23 March 2022 (UTC)

Chairmanism
This is obscure ideology but it is a ideology none the less and as such I believe it should by located here.

I will try to find the Chairmanist Party website again to further reference this Ideology. Tob 888 (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
 * There needs to be a reliable source showing that it's a notable ideology. ... disco spinster   talk  18:29, 28 April 2022 (UTC)

Non-Scandinavians in the "Scandinavia" section of "nationalism" (and more)
Scandinavia is Sweden, Norway and Denmark. Finns, Sami and Inuits are not Scandinavians or even Germanic (or even Indo-European!) and while Faroese and Icelandic people are Germanic, they're not Scandinavians either. Using "Scandinavia" to refer to the Nordic countries is, well... not very NPOV to say the least. For it to be accurate (and not reflective of Scandinavian expansionism or whatever), the section should be renamed "Nordic countries". I'll rename it myself in a second, but I expect it'll be reverted by one of those "nationalists" the section is about... VHGW (talk) 02:55, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Nevermind, I'm not going to edit it myself because that's not the only part of the "nationalism" section that's a mess. Apparently according to this article, Bulgarian, Chechen, Circassian and Karelian nationalists are now proponents of Russian nationalism... uh. Maybe someone who's better at Wikipedia can figure out how to fix it. VHGW (talk) 03:04, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Actually nevermind the nevermind, looks like it's intentionally organised by country/region even though the linked articles are to the "main" nationalism of that country or the pan-nationalism of the region... except in the case of the Nordic countries, since one doesn't even exist. So I'll edit it, but leave the link to the "Scandinavism" article since it just barely mentions "Nordism" (which isn't really a thing; a lot of Finns think it is, but it's a naive self-delusion entirely different from the anti-Finnish Scandinavianism). VHGW (talk) 03:36, 22 July 2022 (UTC)

Phillipines politics
Tagalog 222.127.75.74 (talk) 14:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

title: Talk:List of political ideologies


text:
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Gobbell

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. humblefool®Deletion Reform 03:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Jack Gobbell
Vanity 66.216.68.28 16:49, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Only returns 53 hits, some not original. Delete. *--WikiFan04Talk 12:22, 18 Jul 2005 (CDT)
 * Delete. Nonsense. --Salleman 17:35, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete - vanity  JoJan 18:56, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, vanity -Harmil 19:05, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete; nn, vanity. Jaxl 19:16, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Can't this be speedied? --Etacar11 00:42, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable vanity. JamesBurns 08:00, 19 July 2005 (UTC)

 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

license: Creative Commons - Attribution Share-Alike - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/


text:
Centennial Field

Centennial Field is the name of the baseball stadium at the University of Vermont in Burlington, Vermont, and is the home of the Vermont Lake Monsters.

Beyond the left-field fence is the former home of the University of Vermont's men's and women's soccer teams, which also served as home field for its men's and women's lacrosse teams, and its college football team (1900–1974).

History
The facility takes its name, Centennial Field, from the fact that the land on which it was built was dedicated to its current purpose on July 6, 1904, at the conclusion of the three-day celebration of the 100th anniversary of the first graduating class of the University of Vermont (UVM). Its first baseball game was on April 17, 1906, with UVM's 10–4 victory over the University of Maine. Larry Gardner was the first batter for UVM. Future-Boston Red Sox pitcher Ray Collins started the game for Vermont and threw the first pitch at the ballpark. Gardner and Collins are among 11 former Catamounts to reach the major leagues, the latest being Matt Duffy, who played for UVM during 2008–2009 and for the Houston Astros during 2015–2016.

In addition to the baseball field, the adjacent soccer field was used by UVM's college football team until 1974, and UVM's men's and women's lacrosse teams in the 1990s through 2006. The school's men's soccer team played there from 1975 to 2011 and the women played there from 1995 to 2011 before moving to Virtue Field on campus. The Centennial Field soccer stands had 5,000 seats and drew America East record crowds during the 1989 postseason when UVM advanced to the NCAA Men's Soccer Championship East Regional Finals with wins over Yale and UConn. Vermont hosted the long-running Smith Barney Men's Soccer Classic at Centennial Field that featured many national powers including UCLA, Stanford, Old Dominion, San Francisco, New Mexico and North Carolina. Its recent women's soccer tournament has featured Indiana, Notre Dame and Villanova.

During the era that Catamounts had a football team, Centennial Field had stands on both sides of the gridiron. UVM's game with UMass in 1966 had a record crowd of 10,000 fans. That season, Vermont featured Little All-American halfback Bobby Mitchell and UMass had future NFL quarterback Greg Landry. The football field was also the home to several Vermont high school state championship games.

The baseball park was part of the sports complex constructed as part of the UVM Centennial celebration. The original wooden baseball bleachers burned on March 12, 1913. The current concrete and steel main grandstand was erected in 1922. Today, it seats 4,415 for baseball.

The first UVM ice hockey game was played on the football portion of Centennial Field. The field's large foul territory comes from the running track that at one time circled the park, including the area where the grandstand currently stands.

In the summer of 2005, Centennial Field was the Vermont stop on ESPN's "50 States in 50 Days" tour. In 2007, it was recognized by ESPN.com's Jim Caple as one of the top 10 ballpark destinations in the U.S. It is also featured in the 2008 book 101 Baseball Places To See Before You Strike Out by Josh Pahigian.

Operation and improvements
Centennial Field showed its age and was in need of repair in 2010 to meet minor league baseball ballpark standards. Much needed upgrades began in earnest after that season with Vermont Lake Monsters owner Ray Pecor investing in over $1 million in improvements prior to the start of the 2012 season, and another $1 million prior to 2013. Pecor made these improvements -including new lights, a state-of-the-art video scoreboard and many field-surface improvements after agreeing with then-UVM president John Bramley on a 20-year lease just $1 per year.

On June 28, 2012, Oakland extended its minor league player development contract through the end of the 2014 season. In the announcement Athletics vice president and general manager Billy Beane was quoted as saying, "The baseball history and community support in Burlington makes it a very special place. We look forward to this partnership growing for many years to come."

Baseball usage
In 2003, 2005, and 2006, the field hosted the America East Conference baseball tournament. In the past, it also hosted American Legion Baseball and was home to the American Legion Northeast Regional tournament in 2007.

On February 20, 2009, it lost its longest tenant with director of athletics Dr. Robert Corran announcing the University of Vermont would discontinue the varsity baseball (and varsity softball) program following the completion of the 2009 season. Corran said at the time that he expected that the university would continue to maintain the baseball field before Bramley stepped in by leasing it to the Lake Monsters for 20 years starting in 2012. The UVM baseball team played its last home game of the 2009 season at Centennial Field on May 12, 2009, when they hosted Bryant University in a midweek non-conference doubleheader.

With the movement of UVM's soccer facility to Virtue Field after the 2011 season, baseball became the primary sport played at Centennial Field. In addition to the Lake Monsters, the Vermont Principals' Association's four state championship games returned to Centennial Field in 2012 after a two-year absence.

Professional baseball franchises
Centennial Field has been home to affiliated minor league and summer collegiate baseball teams through the years.

Burlington Athletics
Dr. Clarence Beecher, a one-time mayor of Burlington and dean of the UVM College of Medicine, led a group that brought the Philadelphia Athletics' Provincial League Class C team to play at Centennial Field in 1955, Vermont's first affiliated minor league team. The Provincial League was founded in 1935 and based in Quebec. The League was affiliated with the National Association from 1940 to 1943 and 1950 to 1955. Between 1950 and 1955, it was a Class C minor-league; the Philadelphia Athletics had an affiliate during this time. In 1954, the American League Athletics were based in Philadelphia and their Provincial League club in Drummondville, Quebec.

Dr. Beecher had been president of the Burlington Cardinals during the Northern League's final season and assumed the same position with the new club when the Provincial League Dummondville club became available in the fall of 1954.

The 1955 Burlington Athletics attracted 51,267 fans to Centennial Field for the season, the second highest attendance in the League. Burlington went 65–64 to finish in third-place, 20.5 games behind the first-place St. Jean Canadians. Burlington pitcher Jack Hale tied for the league-lead in wins with 17. In the playoffs, Burlington beat first-place St. Jean in the first round but lost the championship to the Quebec Braves, four games to one. Two of the 1955 Athletics, pitcher Bob Davis and outfielder Bill Kern would reach the major leagues.

The Provincial League was not financially sustainable and disbanded prior to the 1956 season.

Vermont Reds
Affiliated minor League baseball returned to Centennial Field in 1984 when Mike Agganis moved his AA Eastern League Lynn Pirates from Lynn, Massachusetts to Burlington. The club had been affiliated with the Pittsburgh Pirates and Agganis signed a four-year agreement with the Cincinnati Reds. The club was renamed the Vermont Reds.

The club finished in fourth-place in 1984 and 1985, and in second-place in 1986. The Reds excelled in the post-season and won the Eastern League championship each of these three years. Vermont finished fourth again in 1987 but lost in the League finals. Barry Larkin, Jeff Montgomery, Rob Dibble, Kal Daniels, Chris Sabo, and Norm Charlton all starred in Burlington and became the core of the 1990 World Champion Cincinnati Reds.

Larkin had the most distinguished career of all of the Vermont Reds alumni playing for Cincinnati from 1986 to 2004. A 12-time National League all-star and three-time Gold Glove Award winner, he was the 1995 National League Most Valuable Player and was inducted into the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2012.

Vermont Mariners
After the 1987 season, Cincinnati signed a new affiliation agreement with the Chattanooga Lookouts. The Seattle Mariners had themselves been affiliated with Chattanooga and signed with Agganis and the Burlington franchise. The Vermont Reds became the Vermont Mariners.

The team finished second in the Eastern League behind the Glens Falls Tigers. Vermont made the playoffs but lost to the Albany-Colonie Yankees in the finals. Mariners manager Rich Morales was named Eastern League Manager of the Year and Jim Wilson and Omar Vizquel were Eastern League All-Stars.

Ken Griffey Jr. was selected by the Seattle Mariners with the first pick of the 1987 Major League Baseball draft. Griffey played for the Bellingham Mariners in 1987 and spent most of the 1988 season with the Class A California League San Bernardino Spirit. Griffey was promoted to Burlington and played at Centennial Field late in the 1988 season. He played in 17 games for the Mariners and hit two home runs. In 2016, Griffey was enshrined in the National Baseball Hall of Fame, joining Larkin.

Future major league star shortstop Omar Vizquel spent the bulk of the 1988 season with the Mariners hitting .254 with 30 stolen bases, before he was called up to Triple A in early August, prior to Griffey becoming active. Vizquel that year showed glimpses of his outstanding fielding that would earn him 11 Gold Gloves throughout his big league career, second-most among shortstops in major league history.

By September 1988, with the team in the Eastern League playoffs, Agganis had decided to move the franchise to Canton, Ohio. Canton was building a brand-new ballpark, Thurman Munson Memorial Stadium, which would have a capacity of 5,700. More so, the Canton metropolitan area offered twice the population of Burlington. Agganis told The New York Times, "Our attendance has averaged out to about 85,000 over five years in Burlington. In Canton, we can probably do between 225,000 and 300,000 attendance." The franchise moved to Canton after the 1988 season, affiliated with Cleveland, and became the Canton–Akron Indians.

Vermont Expos & Lake Monsters
Minor league baseball returned to Centennial Field in 1994. Burlington businessman Ray Pecor, owner of Lake Champlain Transportation Co. in Burlington since 1976, purchased the franchise rights of the Jamestown Expos and brought minor league baseball back to Burlington.

The Vermont Expos debuted at Centennial Field on June 16, 1994. They lost 6–5 to the Pittsfield Mets but more than 5,000 fans attended the game.

In the franchise's second season in Burlington, the Expos won the 1995 McNamara Division title and in 1996, it repeated as division champs and captured its only New York Penn League championship.

The Expos passed one million in cumulative attendance during the 2002 season. The team changed its name to the Lake Monsters in 2006, one year after the big league parent franchise Montreal Expos moved to Washington and became the Nationals. The 2005 Vermont Expos are the last professional team to be named the Expos.

In 2011, Vermont changed its major league affiliation from the Washington Nationals (National League) to the Oakland Athletics (American League). That season Vermont returned to the NYP postseason for the first time in 15 seasons by capturing the Stedler Division pennant on the final day of the regular season.

Since the franchise moved to Vermont in 1994, 68 former Expos/Lake Monsters have reached the major leagues (as of July 2015) including future standouts Addison Russell, Orlando Cabrera, Jamey Carroll, Milton Bradley, Jorge Julio, Jason Bay, Ian Desmond, Jordan Zimmermann, Tommy Milone, and Danny Espinosa.

After the cancelled 2020 minor league season, Major League Baseball took direct control of Minor League Baseball and discontinued short-season play. The Lake Monsters were not invited to remain in affiliated baseball. The team was in discussions to continue as a professional baseball team for 2021 but ended up joining the Futures Collegiate Baseball League.

Collegiate Summer Baseball
The summer collegiate Northern League (baseball, 1934–1952) Burlington Cardinals played at Centennial Field from 1935 to 1941 and from 1946 to 1952. The league disbanded when it was not sanctioned by ECAC and NCAA member institutions due to its semi-professional status. Collegiate summer leagues since can include only amateur players.

Among the many future major leaguers who played for the Cardinals, Johnny Podres made his professional debut at Centennial Field in 1950 pitching for Cardinals. In 2005, the Vermont Expos invited Podres back to Centennial Field to throw out the first pitch in honor of the 50th anniversary of the 1955 Brooklyn Dodgers World Series championship.

The collegiate Northern League was revived in the late 1970s through the 1980s and Centennial Field was the home of the Burlington Expos, Burlington A's and the Queen City Royals. The first edition of the Burlington Expos collegiate team was led by current Clemson head baseball coach, Jack Leggett, a native of South Burlington who also was the coach of the UVM baseball team at the time. Future major league pitchers Kirk McCaskill and Mike Rochford hurled for the Expos during the summers.

The Lake Monsters joined the Futures Collegiate Baseball League for the 2021 season.

Historic marker
The Vermont Division for Historic Preservation erected a marker at the ballpark in 1997. It reads,

"Named to commemorate the 100th anniversary of the University of Vermont's first graduating class, Centennial Field has been the home of UVM athletics since 1906. The three ballparks that have stood on this site have hosted semi- professional and minor league baseball, as well as exhibitions by visiting Major League and Negro League ballclubs. The current grandstand, constructed in 1922, is one of the oldest still in use. Among the outstanding players who have graced Centennial's diamond are Larry Gardner, Ray Collins, Tris Speaker, Jesse Hubbard, Robin Roberts, Kirk McCaskill, Barry Larkin, and Ken Griffey, Jr."

title: Centennial Field


text: User:Alex West

title: User:Alex West


text:
United States Air Force Pararescue

Pararescuemen (also known as PJs) are United States Air Force special operators who conduct personnel recovery and combat search and rescue operations as well as other missions for the U.S. military and its allies. Highly trained special operators, PJs are generally assigned to Air Force Special Operations Command (AFSOC) and Air Combat Command (ACC).

Personnel recovery includes rescuing and providing medical treatment to injured or stranded personnel in hostile or remote environments, such as behind enemy lines or in the wilderness. Combat search and rescue operations recover personnel from enemy-controlled territory.

They are attached to other special operations units from all branches to conduct other operations as appropriate. PJs have also supported NASA missions, and have recovered astronauts after water landings.

Long an enlisted preserve, the Pararescue service expanded to include Combat Rescue Officers early in the 21st century. Of the roughly 200 Air Force Cross recipients, 12 are Pararescuemen.

Pre-World War II
As early as 1922, there was a recognized need for trained personnel to go to remote sites to rescue aircrew. In that year, Army Medical Corps doctor Colonel Albert E. Truby predicted that "airplane ambulances" would be used to take medical personnel to crashes and to return victims to medical facilities for treatment. However, it was another two decades before technology and necessity helped to create what would eventually become Air Force Pararescue.

Even so, there were developments in critical technologies. In 1940, two United States Forest Service Smokejumpers, Earl Cooley and Rufus Robinson, showed that parachutists could be placed very accurately onto the ground using the newly invented 'steerable parachute'. These parachutes, and the techniques smokejumpers used with them, were completely different from those used by Army airborne units. It was in that year that Dr. (Captain) Leo P. Martin was trained by the U.S. Forest Service Smokejumper Parachute Training Center in Seeley Lake, Montana as the first 'para-doctor'.

World War II
During the first months after America's entry into the war, there was very little need for air rescue. As the war progressed, a U.S. strategic bombing campaign was launched, and air rescue began to play a key role.

Rescue units were formed around the globe under the operational control of local commanders. While training, techniques and equipment varied, one rule was constant: "Rescue forces must presume survivors in each crash until proved otherwise."

Search and rescue of downed aviators in the continental United States fell primarily to the Civil Air Patrol, a civilian aviation group under the command of the Army Air Corps. The CAP would usually send in ground crews after locating a crash site; however, they would sometimes land small aircraft and they did experiment with parachute rescue teams.

With Canada's entry into WWII in 1939, former Canadian fighter ace Wop May was put in charge of training operations and took over command at the No 2 Air Observer School in Edmonton, Alberta. Edmonton was one of the common stops for A-20 Boston, B-26 Marauder and especially B-25 Mitchell bombers being flown to the Soviet Union as part of the lend-lease program. When these aircraft went down, typically due to mechanical or navigational problems, the crew often survived only to die attempting to make it out of the bush. May's school was often asked to supply aircraft to search for downed planes, but even when one was spotted there was often little they could do to help. May decided to address this problem.

In early 1942 May asked for volunteers from his civilian servicing crew, and about a dozen agreed to join. With basically no equipment, the instruction consisted of "jump and pull" and windage was calculated by throwing an Eaton's catalogue out the door. Early operations were comical, but in early 1943 May sent two volunteers, Owen Hargreaves and Scotty Thompson to the smoke jumpers school in Missoula, Montana to be trained by the U.S. Forest Service. After six weeks they returned home with borrowed steerable equipment to train two other volunteers, Wilfred Rivet and Laurie Poulsom. Soon the unit was conducting operational jumps, and by 1944 May's persistence had paid off and an official para-rescue training program started. For his work, May was awarded a Medal of Freedom with Bronze Palm in 1947 by the USAAF.

In the European Theater, there was very little opportunity for ground rescue. Most flights were over enemy-occupied territory, where a landing meant immediate capture. In the UK area of the European Theatre, the British military was at the time creating its own Royal Air Force Mountain Rescue Service which would be based largely on civilian mountain rescue doctrine. The RAFMRS rescued many American aircrew, or recovered remains, from USAAF crashes over its UK territory. As crashes during over-water flights created a great many casualties, the Eighth Air Force initiated a 'sea rescue' group. From its creation in 1943 until the end of the war, the recovery rate of aircrews downed at sea rose from less than five percent to over forty percent.

In the vast reaches of the Pacific Theater, a plane crash meant almost certain death from exposure to the elements. The Army formed several squadrons in theater specifically to aid and rescue downed flyers—both at sea and on islands—with great success.

The China Burma India Theater (CBI) was the birthplace of what would eventually become pararescue. Here was a unique combination of long overland flights through territory that was loosely held by the enemy and survivable. Dominating the flying in the CBI was 'The Hump' route: cargo flights that left India carrying thousands of tons of vital war supplies had to cross the spine of the Himalayas to reach their destinations in China. Every day thousands of flight crews and their passengers risked their lives making this passage in C-46 and C-47 aircraft. Many of these flights never arrived at their destinations due to mechanical problems, weather and mistakes. Crews forced to bail out or crash land faced weeks of hardship in tracing a path back to civilization, enduring harsh weather, little food, and the injuries they sustained during the crashes.

Capt. John L. "Blackie" Porter—a former stunt pilot—is credited with commanding the first organized air rescue unit in the theater. Known as "Blackie's Gang" and flying out of Chabua, India, they were equipped with two C-47 aircraft. One of their first rescue missions was the recovery of twenty people who had bailed out of a stricken C-46 in August 1943 in the Naga area of Burma; an area that contained not just Japanese troops, but tribes of head hunters as well. Among the twenty was CBS reporter Eric Sevareid. The men were located and supplies were dropped to them. The wing flight surgeon, Lt. Col. Don Flickinger, and two combat surgical technicians, Sgt. Richard S. Passey and Cpl. William G. MacKenzie, parachuted from the search planes to assist and care for the injured. At the same time, a ground team was sent to their location and all twenty walked to safety.

Although parachute rescues were not officially authorized at the time, this is considered by PJs to be the birth of Air Force pararescue. Eric Sevareid said of his rescuers: "Gallant is a precious word: they deserve it". A few short months later, Capt. Porter was killed on a rescue mission when his B-25 was shot down.

In 1944, General William H. Tunner took command of Air Transport Command operations in CBI. Declaring the rescue organization to be a 'cowboy operation', he appointed Maj. Donald C. Pricer commander of the 1352nd Army Air Force Base Unit and assigned him several aircraft for the mission. In addition to fixed-wing aircraft, early helicopters were deployed to the CBI for use in rescue, marking the start of a long association between rotary-wing aircraft and air rescue.

Post–World War II
Recognizing the need for a unified organization to perform search and rescue, the Army Air Force formed the Air Rescue Service (ARS). Officially established on 29 May 1946, the ARS was charged with saving the lives of aircrews who were involved in aircraft disasters, accidents, crash landings, ditchings or abandonments occurring away from an air base, and with being world-deployable to support far-flung air operations.

In the area around an air base, the air base commander had search and rescue jurisdiction through the Local Base Rescue (LBR) helicopter units. However, these were limited to a 135 mi radius around the base due to the range and payload limitations of the aircraft. In order to reach beyond this limitation, Pararescue teams were authorized on 1 July 1947, with the first teams to be ready for fielding in November. Each team was to be composed of a Para-doctor and four Pararescue technicians trained in medicine, survival, rescue and tactics. Pararescue was given the mission of rescuing crews lost on long-range bomber and transport missions and to support other agencies when aerial rescue was requested.

A mission earlier in 1947 was the final impetus for the formal creation of Air Force Pararescue. In May, Dr. (Capt) Pope B. 'Doc' Holliday parachuted out of an OA-10 Catalina into the Nicaraguan jungle to aid a crewmember who had parachuted from a crippled B-17 Flying Fortress. His actions earned him the Bronze Star and made him another of Pararescue's early legends.

Shortly after Pararescue teams were authorized, the 5th Rescue Squadron conducted the first Pararescue and Survival School at MacDill Air Force Base in Florida. The core of instructors were experienced officers and enlisted men who were recruited from all branches of service. The commandant of that first school was pilot 1st Lieutenant Perry C. Emmons, who had been assigned to the Office of Strategic Services (OSS) during World War II. At the close of the war, Emmons and six sergeants flew prisoners of war out of Thailand, earning his group the nickname "Perry and the Pirates", after the popular comic strip Terry and the Pirates. After the war, Emmons completed Airborne School at Fort Benning, Georgia, becoming only the second jump-qualified Air Force pilot.

Clobbered Turkey
In late 1947, the crash of the B-29 "Clobbered Turkey" in Alaska brought home the need for specialized, well-trained Pararescuemen. On 21 December, the "Clobbered Turkey" hit a mountain and when the wreck was spotted on the 27th, Medical Corps 1st Lieutenant Albert C. Kinney, First Sergeant Santhell A. London, Air Force cold weather expert and T-5 Leon J. Casey—none of whom were trained Pararescuemen—volunteered to jump onto the crash site, located 95 miles north of Nome. The team encountered poor visibility, extreme temperatures and high winds on the site and as a result, all three died. Casey's body was found 7 mi from the crash site, swept there by the surface winds. Two members of the crew of the "Clobbered Turkey" who set out to seek assistance also died a few miles from the site. When civilian bush pilots William Munz and Frank Whaley finally arrived at the crash site two days later, they found that the remaining six members of the crew—who had stayed with the aircraft—had all survived. Dr. Kinney's body was not located until July of the next year.

In 1949, due to a shortage of available doctors, Medical Service Corps officers replaced Para-doctors on the teams, receiving the same training as the enlisted Pararescuemen. One of the first of these officers was John C. Shumate, a pharmacist, who was appointed commandant of the Pararescue and Survival School.

At this time the Air Rescue Specialist Course was created at the School of Aviation Medicine, Gunter Air Force Base, Alabama. Designed to teach Pararescuemen the skills needed to determine the nature and extent of injuries and to administer treatment, the course was taught by Medical Corps officers with previous Pararescue experience, including Dr. Pope B.'Doc' Holliday, Dr. Rufus Hessberg, Dr. Hamilton Blackshear, Dr. Randal W. Briggs and Dr. Burt Rowan.

Korean War
As Pararescue grew, PJ teams were assigned to every Air Rescue Service squadron to provide global coverage. By 1950, the unification of all the formerly independent Air Rescue Squadrons under the umbrella of the Air Rescue Service was complete.

In 1950, North Korea attacked across the 38th parallel and began the Korean War. This was an opportunity for Air Rescue to put training into practice and to develop theories into policies. One of the key new concepts was rescue of stranded personnel from behind enemy lines. This, along with evacuating critically wounded men from aid stations close to the front, were Air Rescue's primary missions.

Pararescuemen were a normal part of Air Rescue crews for these missions. Their medical and tactical skills made them invaluable for evacuation and rescue missions of this type.

Pararescuemen were often called upon to leave the helicopters that carried them in order to assist the personnel they were sent to rescue. This might call for an extended stay behind enemy lines and overland travel of several miles. The longest of these 'Lone Wolf' missions lasted seventy-two hours.

By the end of the war in 1953, Air Rescue had evacuated over eight thousand critical casualties and rescued nearly a thousand men from behind enemy lines.

Vietnam War
The Vietnam War was a pivotal conflict for the Pararescue teams. The Air Force's scope of operations became so large that demand for Pararescue teams expanded as well. The use of helicopters caused new tactics utilizing the speed, distance, and support they could provide. Rescue "packages" were created utilizing FACs (Forward Air Controllers), rescue escorts (such as AH-1 Cobras or A-1 Sandys), protective fighter CAP (Combat Air Patrol), HC-130 "King" Hercules for Rescue Mission Coordination and helicopter refueling, and the HH-3 Jolly Green Giant, HH-43 Huskie, and HH-53 Super Jolly Green Giant helicopters to provide fast rescue for pilots shot down far behind enemy lines. An elite corps of USAF Firefighters, Airborne Rescuemen/Firefighters, were part of these rescue operations. Pararescue personnel were part of these packages to provide medical assistance for injured aircrew as well as the ability to patrol for missing aircrew that might have been unconscious or dead.

Pararescue team members would be inserted to conduct LSO (Limited Surface Operations) searches while the escorts maintained an aggressive patrol to provide instantaneous support. Sometimes they would be inserted to search for personnel who were being forced to escape and evade; in such cases the mission might last for days. The Pararescue teams racked up an impressive record; during the conflict, only 19 aircrew were awarded the Air Force Cross. Ten of those were awarded to Pararescue forces.

Modern era
Pararescuemen have continued to play an integral part in the US military in Iraq and Afghanistan during the Global War on Terror and beyond. Deploying with other Special Operations Forces (SOF) teams, Pararescuemen continue to fight and save lives on the battlefield.

Training and structure

The process of becoming a "PJ" is known informally as "Superman School". Almost two years long, it's among the longest special operations training courses in the world. It also has one of the highest training attrition rates in the entire U.S. special operations community, at around 80%.

Pararescue trainees are first required to complete United States Air Force Basic Military Training at Lackland AFB, then they are required to pass the Special Warfare Preparatory Course and Special Warfare Assessment and Selection at Lackland AFB (replacing the previous Pararescue Indoctrination Course). Following that is a long string of courses including Combat Dive School, Army Airborne, National Registry for Paramedic, Survival (SERE-C), and Military Free-fall Parachutist. Upon completing the aforementioned, a pararescue trainee is required to then complete the Pararescue Apprentice Course, which combines all the prior skills and adds a few more. Once a Pararescueman has completed the pipeline, he is assigned to a Rescue or Special Tactics team as per the needs of the Air Force. Graduates assigned to Rescue Squadrons will receive on-the-job operational upgrade training. Graduates assigned to Special Tactics Squadrons attend portions of Advanced Skills Training at the Special Tactics Training Squadron along with Air Force Combat Controllers in order to complete most of their operational upgrade training.

 * Special Warfare Preparatory Course (SW Prep), Lackland AFB, Texas (8 weeks)

This course is designed to give candidates the best possible chance of getting through selection. They are coached in collegiate-level strength/conditioning, running, swimming, nutrition, physical therapy, and other specialties. This course is currently only for Non-Prior Service aircrew, while Prior Service aircrew attend a condensed two-week course.

Indoctrination Course (currently A&S) Training Gear is essentially made up of a high volume face mask, a silicone snorkel, rocket fins and booties. The mask and snorkel are key throughout training, being used in water confidence training such as water inserted into the mask throughout the training, simulating the effect of being underwater regardless of whether submerged or not. Mask and snorkel recovery is a key portion that is tested on, in which the trainee has to recover the mask and snorkel from the deep end of the pool, "clearing" the mask of water while still submerged and "clearing" the snorkel of water as well. These two can be referred to as key training tools. Items such as rope and booties can be used to further increase the intensity of water confidence training.

This is the actual selection course, where aspiring PJs will learn water confidence techniques, rehabilitation, physical conditioning, running, and nutrition, among other vital skills. A&S is divided into two segments: Field Phase and Selection Phase; Field Phase (2.5 weeks): Time is spent in the field, sleeping in makeshift lodging in cots with sleeping bags. Pool work consisting of surface swimming, water confidence, running, rucking (walking with a loaded backpack), grass & guerrilla drills, calisthenics, and extended training days. Selection Phase (1.5 weeks): Candidates will be administered tests, surveys, critiques, and interviews. Instructors will compile all relevant information and select only those candidates that meet the required standards.
 * Special Warfare Assessment and Selection (A&S), Lackland AFB, Texas (4 weeks)

The course is extremely demanding, candidates are pushed to their physical and mental limits, with an attrition rate of about 75 percent.

Students learn the basic parachuting skills required to infiltrate an objective area by static line airdrop. This course includes ground operations week, tower week, and "jump week" when participants make five parachute jumps. Personnel who complete this training are awarded the basic parachutist rating and are allowed to wear the Parachutist Badge.
 * Army Airborne School, Fort Moore, Georgia (3 weeks)
 * Special Warfare Combat Dive Course, Navy Diving and Salvage Training Center, Naval Support Activity Panama City, Florida (8 weeks)

The course is divided into four blocks of instruction: (1) Diving Theory, (2) Infiltration/Exfiltration Methods, (3) Open Circuit Diving Operations, and (4) Closed Circuit Diving Operations. The primary focus of AFCDC is to develop Pararescuemen/Combat Rescue Officers and Combat Controller/Special Tactics Officers into competent, capable and safe combat divers/swimmers. The course provides commanders with divers/swimmers capable of undertaking personnel recovery and special operations waterborne missions. AFCDC provides diver training through classroom instruction, extensive physical training, surface and sub-surface water confidence pool exercises, pool familiarization dives, day/night tactical open water surface/sub-surface infiltration swims, open/closed circuit diving procedures and underwater search and recovery procedures. The session culminates with a waterborne field training exercise.

 * Army Military Free Fall Parachutist School, Fort Liberty, North Carolina, and Yuma Proving Ground, Arizona (4 weeks)

This course instructs free fall parachuting (HALO) using a high performance parafoil. The course provides wind tunnel training, in-air instruction focusing on student stability, aerial maneuvers, air sense and parachute opening procedures. Each student undertakes a minimum of 30 free fall jumps including two day and two night jumps with supplemental oxygen, rucksack and load-bearing equipment.

This course teaches basic survival techniques for remote areas using minimal equipment. This includes instruction of principles, procedures, equipment and techniques that help individuals to survive, regardless of climatic conditions or unfriendly environments, and return home. Also includes Underwater Egress Training (1 day) at Naval Air Station Pensacola, Florida, this course teaches how to safely escape from an aircraft that has landed in the water. Instruction includes principles, procedures, and techniques necessary to escape a sinking aircraft. This course teaches how to manage trauma patients prior to evacuation and provide emergency medical treatment. Phase I is seven weeks of emergency medical technician basic (EMT-B) training. Phase II (EMT-P) lasts 30 weeks and provides advanced medical training and instruction in minor field surgery, pharmacology, combat trauma management, advanced airway management, and military evacuation procedures. Graduates of the course are awarded National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians-Paramedic (NREMT-P) certification. This is the culmination of approximately two years of pararescue training. This course includes field medical care and tactics, mountaineering, shooting, combat tactics, advanced parachuting, and helicopter insertion/extraction qualifications. Upon successful completion of this course, each graduate is awarded the maroon beret and qualifies aircrew as pararescue recovery specialists for assignment to any Pararescue unit worldwide. After the new PJ arrives at their first unit, training continues for another 450 days. This is called a progression tour. An instructor will be with the new PJ at all times until they've completed this training. Much of it covers the same skills learned during initial "pipeline" training but to a higher proficiency level. This training will qualify the new PJ to work as an element leader, in charge of a two-person PJ team on a helicopter.
 * Survival, Evasion, Resistance and Escape (SERE), Fairchild AFB, (3 weeks)
 * Pararescue EMT-Paramedic Training, Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico (37 weeks)
 * Pararescue Apprentice Course, Kirtland Air Force Base, New Mexico (22 weeks)
 * Continuation Training

PJs will also attend medical refresher courses to keep them current as National Registry of Emergency Medical Technicians. PJs will experience two-week hospital internships in the emergency department, labor and delivery, surgical intensive care, pediatric emergency department, operating room, and a two-week ambulance rotation with an assignment to an Advanced Life Support EMS unit responsible for responding to a variety of 911 emergency calls.

Pararescue and Advanced Pararescue Orientation Course
Since the 1950s, Air Force Pararescueman have provided training and mentorship for Civil Air Patrol cadets. This was formalized in 1977 with the introduction of Pararescue Orientation Course (PJOC) at Kirtland AFB, New Mexico. PJOC was later taught at Fort Knox, Kentucky and George Washington National Forest, Virginia. The course is one of the hardest national cadet special activities and teaches CAP cadets fundamental survival and rescue skills such as shelter building, land navigation, and rock climbing. Advanced Pararescue Orientation Course (APJOC) began in the 1980s and was taught only at Kirtland AFB. In 2003, both programs were cancelled. PJOC returned in 2004, but APJOC did not see its return until 2008 when the course was moved to Davis-Monthan AFB, Arizona. APJOC builds upon the skills learned at PJOC and exposes cadets to life in an operational Pararescue or Special Tactics Squadron. The course culminates with a Combat Rescue Training Exercise. During APJOC, both PJOC and APJOC are Civil Air Patrol National Cadet Special Activities provided by United States Air Force Pararescue.

Pararescue Creed
It is my duty as a Pararescueman to save life and to aid the injured. I will be prepared at all times to perform my assigned duties quickly and efficiently, placing these duties before personal desires and comforts. These things we (I) do, that others may live.

Originally titled "The Code of the Air Rescueman", it was penned by the first commander of the Air Rescue Service, (then) Lieutenant Colonel Richard T. Kight and is also still used by the Air Force Rescue Coordination Center (AFRCC).

Green Feet
This tradition arose during the Vietnam War, at which time the most commonly used USAF helicopter was the CH-3E, nicknamed the Jolly Green Giant due to its enormous size and olive drab exterior. The tradition came about when pilots, navigators, enlisted aircrew, or other military personnel were in need of rescue. After these personnel were rescued, they would proceed to receive the temporary ink-stamped "tattoo" of the green feet on their buttocks due to the fact that the Para Jumpers "saved their ass."

Origin of term "Para Jumper"
The term "Para Jumper" is a retronym of the initials "PJ" which represent the Military Duty Identifiers; P =Parachutist and J= Diver, that were used on an Air Force Form 5 (Aircrew Flight Log) to identify anyone who is on board in order to jump from the aircraft. Pararescuemen originally had no "in-flight" duties and were listed only as "PJ" on the Form 5. The pararescue position eventually grew to include duties as an aerial gunner and scanner on rotary wing aircraft, a duty now performed by aerial gunners. Currently, aircrew qualified Pararescuemen are recorded using aircrew position identifier "J" ("Pararescue Member") on the AFTO form 781.

Maroon Beret
The maroon beret worn by Pararescuemen and Combat Rescue Officers was authorized by HQ USAF in 1966 and is the second beret to be authorized for universal wear, after the U.S. Army Special Forces Beret. The beret symbolizes the blood sacrificed by fellow Pararescuemen and their devotion to duty by aiding others in distress.

Pararescue Flash
The flash is a variant of the original Air Rescue Service emblem that was designed by Bill Steffens and implemented in 1952. The significance of the original ARS emblem is described as follows: The angel holding the globe is emblematic of protection and rescue from danger. The red robe is significant of the valor with which the Air Rescue Service carries on its humanitarian mission. The blue shield is indicative of the sky which is the field of operations and the golden light represents a ray of hope for those in need of the Air Rescue Service.

Notable pararescuemen

 * Ramón Colón-López, Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Chairman (SEAC), was one of the first six airmen to be awarded the newly created Air Force Combat Action Medal in 2007. He was also an interim Commandant of the Pararescue and Combat Rescue Officer School at Kirtland AFB. He would later serve as 4th Senior Enlisted Advisor to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
 * Jason Cunningham, Senior Airman, was posthumously awarded the Air Force Cross for actions on 4 March 2002, during the Battle of Takur Ghar. Technical Sergeant Kerry Miller's Silver Star was upgraded to the Air Force Cross for actions as the Combat Search and Rescue Team Leader on 4 March 2002, during the Battle of Takur Ghar.
 * Scott Fales, Master Sergeant, was a recipient of the Silver Star for his heroic action in the Battle of Mogadishu, Mogadishu, Somalia, in 1993. In addition Retired Air Force Master Sgt. and pararescueman Scott Fales received U.S. Special Operations Command’s highest honor when he was awarded the 2012 Bull Simons Award in Tampa, Florida, 23 May. Fales was also recognized by the Jolly Green’s Association performing "Rescue of the Year" twice in his career and in 1992 he was one of the Air Force's 12 Outstanding Airman.
 * Wayne Fisk, Technical Sergeant, earned a Silver Star for his role in the Son Tay Prison raid in November 1970, and another Silver Star for participating in the SS Mayaguez rescue in May 1975. During the Mayaguez rescue, Fisk was the last U.S. serviceman to personally engage the enemy in Southeast Asia. Other medals earned during his five tours in Vietnam include the Defense Superior Service Medal, the Legion of Merit, the Distinguished Flying Cross with Oak Leaf Cluster, the Meritorious Service Medal with oak leaf cluster, and the Air Medal with 17 oak leaf clusters.
 * Duane D. Hackney, Airman Second Class, was awarded the Air Force Cross for actions while recovering a downed pilot in North Vietnam, on 6 February 1967. He is also the most decorated enlisted man in the history of the U.S. Air Force with 24 awards for valor and more than 70 awards and decorations in all.
 * Jon K. Hoberg, Technical Sergeant, earned a Silver Star for his role in the Son Tay Prison raid in November 1970.
 * Larry W. Maysey, Sergeant, was awarded the Air Force Cross for actions in a night recovery of an infiltration team in which several recovery aircraft—including his own—were shot down in Southeast Asia on 9 November 1967.
 * Josh Appel, Captain, and Christopher Piercecchi, Technical Sergeant, were the pararescue team who recovered Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell and his Afghan rescuer from a village the SEAL had sought shelter in. Luttrell had been seriously wounded and the rest of his team were killed in a firefight with Taliban fighters during Operation Red Wings. Several days later, they also retrieved bodies of Luttrell's teammates. Appel later worked as an emergency room physician. Piercecchi received the Pat Tillman 2011 scholarship and also completed medical school, eventually specializing in thoracic surgery.
 * William H. Pitsenbarger, Airman First Class, was posthumously awarded the Air Force Cross for his actions during the Vietnam War. His medal was later upgraded to the Medal of Honor.
 * Arden "Rick" Smith, Tech Sergeant, of the New York Air National Guard was lost at sea during the events chronicled in the Sebastian Junger book The Perfect Storm after the helicopter he was in was unable to refuel and had to ditch in the ocean.
 * Tim Wilkinson, Technical Sergeant, was the first recipient of the Air Force Cross since the Vietnam War for his actions during the 1993 Battle of Mogadishu. Wilkinson was portrayed by Ty Burrell in the 2001 film Black Hawk Down which chronicled the events of the Battle of Mogadishu.
 * Wil Willis, Staff Sergeant, (former U.S. Army Ranger) was the star of a Military Channel show entitled Special Ops Mission and later served as the host of Triggers: Weapons That Changed the World on that same network. Willis has also appeared as a weapons expert on the History Channel's Top Shot, and is the host of Forged in Fire.
 * Ivan Ruiz, Master Sergeant, was a PJ of the 22nd Special Tactics Squadron who received the Air Force Cross on December 10th, 2013 for his actions in saving the lives of two of his teammates while contributing to 11 Insurgents killed.

Active duty units

 * ACC Shield.svg Air Combat Command
 * 23d Wing.jpg 23d Wing
 * 347threscuegroup-emblem.jpg 347th Rescue Group—Moody Air Force Base, Georgia
 * 38th Rescue Squadron.jpg 38th Rescue Squadron
 * 563d Rescue Group - Emblem.png 563d Rescue Group—Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona
 * 48 Rescue Sq emblem.png 48th Rescue Squadron
 * 58th Rescue Squadron.jpg 58th Rescue Squadron—Nellis Air Force Base, Nevada

 * Shield PACAF.png Pacific Air Forces
 * USAF - 18th Wing.png 18th Wing—Kadena Air Base, Okinawa, Japan
 * 31st Rescue Squadron.jpg 31st Rescue Squadron

 * United States Air Forces in Europe.svg United States Air Forces in Europe
 * 31st Fighter Wing.png 31st Fighter Wing--Aviano Air Base, Italy
 * 31st Fighter Wing.png 31st Operations Group
 * 57th Rescue Squadron

 * Shield of the United States Air Force Special Operations Command.svg Air Force Special Operations Command
 * 24th Special Operations Wing insignia.jpg 24th Special Operations Wing, Hurlburt Field, Florida
 * 720th Special Tactics Group insignia.jpg 720th Special Tactics Group, Hurlburt Field, Florida
 * 21st Special Tactics Squadron insignia.jpg 21st Special Tactics Squadron, Pope Field, North Carolina
 * 22 STS.jpg 22nd Special Tactics Squadron, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, (McChord Air Force Base), Washington
 * 23rdSTS.jpg 23rd Special Tactics Squadron, Hurlburt Field, Florida
 * 26th Special Tactics Squadron.jpg 26th Special Tactics Squadron, Cannon Air Force Base, New Mexico
 * 724th Special Tactics Group insignia.jpg 724th Special Tactics Group, Pope Field, North Carolina
 * 24th STS badge.jpg 24th Special Tactics Squadron, Pope Field, North Carolina
 * 353d Special Operations Group Emblem.jpg 353d Special Operations Group, Kadena Air Base, Japan
 * 320th STS.jpg 320th Special Tactics Squadron, Kadena Air Base, Japan
 * 352d Special Operations Wg emblem.png 352d Special Operations Wing, RAF Mildenhall, United Kingdom
 * 321st STS.jpg 321st Special Tactics Squadron, RAF Mildenhall, United Kingdom

Air National Guard units

 * US-AirNationalGuard-2007Emblem.svg Air National Guard
 * ACC Shield.svgtionally Gained by Air Combat Command
 * 106th Rescue Wing.png 106th Rescue Wing—Francis S. Gabreski Air National Guard Base (New York Air National Guard)
 * 103d Rescue Squadron.png 103d Rescue Squadron
 * Logo of the 129th Rescue Wing, USAF.jpg 129th Rescue Wing—Moffett Federal Airfield (California Air National Guard)
 * 131st Rescue Squadron emblem.jpg 131st Rescue Squadron
 * Shield of the United States Air Force Special Operations Command.svg Operationally Gained by Air Force Special Operations Command
 * 123d Airlift Wing.png 123d Airlift Wing—Louisville IAP (Kentucky Air National Guard)
 * 123rd Special tactics squadron insignia.jpg 123rd Special Tactics Squadron
 * 142d Fighter Wing.jpg 142nd Fighter Wing—Portland International Airport (Oregon Air National Guard)
 * 125th Special tactics squadron insignia.jpg 125th Special Tactics Squadron
 * Shield PACAF.png Operationally Gained by Pacific Air Forces
 * 176th Wing Insignia.png 176th Wing—Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson (Alaska Air National Guard)
 * 176th Operations Group
 * 212th Rescue Squadron emblem.jpg 212th Rescue Squadron

Air Force Reserve Command units

 * AFR Shield.svg Air Force Reserve Command
 * ACC Shield.svgtionally Gained by Air Combat Command
 * 920th Rescue Wing.jpg 920th Rescue Wing—Patrick Space Force Base, Florida
 * 920th Operations Group
 * 308 Rescue Sq emblem.png 308th Rescue Squadron
 * 304th Rescue Squadron.jpg 304th Rescue Squadron—Portland International Airport/Portland Air National Guard Base, Oregon
 * 943d Rescue Group.png 943rd Rescue Group—Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Arizona
 * 306 Rescue Sq emblem.png 306th Rescue Squadron

Former units

 * 57th Air Rescue and Recovery Squadron—Lajes Field, Azores (inactivated on 1 December 1972)

title: United States Air Force Pararescue