To answer the OP, which I realise I didn't, I'm an eco-socialist with a slight predisposition for authoritariansm in the economic sphere, but tending towards liberalism in the social. That's being as honest as I can about my principles.
Ironically I work in an area of public and commercial law, in which the law is based on free market economic principles derived from the theory of comparative advantage.
Perhaps ironically I have therefore come to believe that if we are to have "the market" at all (and not a command economy, for which I have some theoretical fondness), then we should have as free a market as possible. I have developed an intense dislike for governments which intervene in the market when it suits them for political purposes, while espousing free market principles at other times, when that suits them.
In terms of recent examples, the US Govt should have allowed General Motors to collapse. Comparative advantage. It's capitalism. Good businesses succeed and bad businesses fail, in the long run promoting economic efficiency. The US Govt was deeply hypocritical in intervening to save GM.
Likewise, the UK Govt should not have bailed out our banks. Royal Bank of Scotland and Lloyds should have been allowed to go bust. If you purport to believe in the market you have to allow it to operate. To do otherwise is hypocrisy.
)
No Such Thing as Racism
)
)
)