DescentBB

roid wrote:The fact that so many of you think that Obama is a Socialist, or that the left is inherently authoritarian

I think we may need to define our terms. What do you mean when you say "socialist"? Are you using socialist as a synonym for leftist?

Because while I would certainly agree that the left is NOT inherently authoritarian, Socialism is.

Socialism

1. a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
2. procedure or practice in accordance with this theory.
3. (in Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.

You have to watch George Will at CPAC 2010

Simply.


Awesome.

this test is a joke. a majority of the questions were so vague as to mean anything

one of the questions. should your child be taught to accept discipline.

what kind of discipline???

discipline to train by instruction and exercise; drill.

or

discipline to bring to a state of order and obedience by training and control.

or

discipline to punish or penalize in order to train and control; correct; chastise.
which one. and there were MANY questions that were the same way.

not to mention it has me as a centrist

Looks about right.

CUDA wrote:this test is a joke. a majority of the questions were so vague as to mean anything

one of the questions. should your child be taught to accept discipline.

afaik the questions are designed to be interpreted subjectively from your viewpoint and worldview, the 4 possible answers (not just 2) helps the process.

If a question about your child being taught to accept discipline, conjures up instant imagery in your head of the virtues of discipline, then you may choose something on the "yes" side.
If it conjures up instant imagery of stifling control, then you choose something on the "no" side.
The strength of your feelings on the matter would dictate if it were weak or strong yes or no.

Your answer to the question will influence how socially authoritarian or socially liberal the quiz considers you.
Authoritarians typically consider childhood discipline to be the most important thing in a child's upbringing - and may opt for military school.
An Anarchist? Not so much.

I guess the beauty of the test is. it probably scares the living hell out of TC and Bettina if I'm a centrist

-2.12,-2.97

About where I would put myself, but I agree that some of the questions did seem a bit vague.

.

I had complaints about this test the last time I saw it. The questions aren't really answerable in many cases.

Political Compass wrote:There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment.

Well, yes, information and entertainment are being merged, but while I think its at times a problem, I don't think "worrying" fits, it CAN be done in a quality way. I finally decided to mark this one yes.

Political Compass wrote:The rich are too highly taxed.

Well, yes, but then, so is EVERYONE, so if I answer yes, am I saying that only the rich are too highly taxed?

Political Compass wrote:A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system

DUH, of COURSE thats an advantage. A dictatorship is one of the most efficent systems of government in existance. BUT, it's not an advnatage thats WORTH the cost!!!!!

Political Compass wrote:Multinational companies are unethically exploiting the plant genetic resources of developing countries.

I'm not even certain what this one MEANS???

Political Compass wrote:It is important that my child's school instills religious values.

It certainly is, but my kid goes to private church school. Does a vote "Yes" imply that I want religion being taught in public schools???? But a vote NO would be an obvious lie, since I obviously think a church school is important enough to sink much time and money into.

In the end, I think the test got me in the correct quadrent, but I should be further down on the libertarian axis.

you gotta remember the point of the test is not to attain your perfect ideogical score \"+50 CAPITALIST AWW YEAH. YOU WIN A CAR\". The purpose is to put you into context with other people's political views. Some pretty extreme and even downright delusional political positions from history are all able to be plotted into the confines of this little graph.

Corrected:

roid wrote:"+50 CAPITALIST AWW YEAH. YOU GO BUY A CAR THEN RESELL IT. NO HANDOUTS YOU BUM".

To be honest, most of my political ideas are socialist, so I don't think the test was getting my perfect score.

roid wrote:Some pretty extreme and even downright delusional political positions from history are all able to be plotted into the confines of this little graph.

I wasn't complaining about the range of possible outputs, I think that makes fairly good sense. I'm complaining that I'm really uncertain how to answer some of the questions.

My point is:

Roid, how the hell would anyone be able to \"answer for\" any of those historical figures that are presented on the graph you're so proud of?

They're all assumptions...and what is the mother of all f___-ups? Assumption.

well according the the Graph, I'm left of Obama and Biden in my thinking.


uhm NOT

CUDA wrote:well according the the Graph, I'm left of Obama and Biden in my thinking.


uhm NOT

Or possibly they are a lot farther right than you were led to believe.

Tankie2 wrote:

CUDA wrote:well according the the Graph, I'm left of Obama and Biden in my thinking.


uhm NOT

Or possibly they are a lot farther right than you were led to believe.

Yes, thanks to this stupid test we can all now see the light...

I see the light, now can you shine it in somebody else’s eyes…

………………………………..............

There is one big problem with this test that makes it not only useless for judging a persons “political compass” but also renders it useless as a side by side comparison….

Lack of questions.

There are to few questions to get a wide enough sampling of a persons political leanings, and that same lack of questions makes it way too likely to be biased in favor of one person’s leanings or another.

So it’s really only useful relative to those particular questions. And if those questions favor one person over another…

You get it.

Kilarin wrote:It's a darn shame that Ron Paul backed down on his campaign before the end. <sigh>

Kind of a darn shame that Ron Paul is a bit of a nut. Would be nice to have a sane libertarian-leaning candidate...

CUDA wrote:I guess the beauty of the test is. it probably scares the living hell out of TC and Bettina if I'm a centrist

TC's results:



Guess I'm somewhat of a leftie whacko according to the test. But I'm also a humanist, which would also skew the test towards the left if I read their questions right.

I've come up with a name for Obama since I think he's not been very leftist in his policies so far. He's a Nervous Nellie because he's not shown ANY leadership so far, especially in the health care debacle.

So if Silver FJ and TC were in a room, they'd fight to the death? ;P

Why's that? He's entitled to his views and I'm entitled to mine. Only if my personal rights were taken away or if this country became a theocracy would I fight to the death.

Sounds suspiciously like Iran.

ThunderBunny wrote:My point is:

Roid, how the hell would anyone be able to "answer for" any of those historical figures that are presented on the graph you're so proud of?

They're all assumptions...and what is the mother of all f___-ups? Assumption.

Probabaly some Intellectuals studied them. I think enough historical information exists for people to make indepth studies of historical figures and get reasonable results within a relatively small margin of error. But i do admit that Sociology, political psychology etc are far from exact sciences.
i'd give more weight to your objections if you were suggesting alternatives. But my impression of you has been that you're the kindof person who is just as inclined to reject the fields of sociology and psychology OUTRIGHT as "hooey liberal arts pseudointellectual faggotry", yes?

Kilarin wrote:

roid wrote:Some pretty extreme and even downright delusional political positions from history are all able to be plotted into the confines of this little graph.

I wasn't complaining about the range of possible outputs, I think that makes fairly good sense. I'm complaining that I'm really uncertain how to answer some of the questions.

I suppose you could write down the possible RANGE of answers on each question you wish to give, and then go through the test multiple times each inputting different extremes, compare the end results and it will give a general idea on what kindof error range is involved. What i'm suggesting is that you'll be surprised how negligible the difference in your result will truly be (given the extremes that are possible will be much beyond what you would possibly input).

Hm, their reference chart doesn't have anyone in the right-libertarian sector..



I always liked the Dalai Lama

Probabaly some Intellectuals studied them. I think enough historical information exists for people to make indepth studies of historical figures and get reasonable results within a relatively small margin of error.

\"Intellectuals\" making inferred assumptions.

Then again- this political 'inventory' test is vague and arbitrary in wording. It's probably safe to say it makes some pretty wide assumptions within itself.

But my impression of you has been that you're the kindof person who is just as inclined to reject the fields of sociology and psychology OUTRIGHT as \"hooey liberal arts pseudointellectual faggotry\", yes?

Another assumption. How shocking.

ThunderBunny wrote:

roid wrote:But my impression of you has been that you're the kindof person who is just as inclined to reject the fields of sociology and psychology OUTRIGHT as "hooey liberal arts pseudointellectual faggotry", yes?

Another assumption. How shocking.

it had a question mark

roid wrote:

ThunderBunny wrote:

roid wrote:But my impression of you has been that you're the kindof person who is just as inclined to reject the fields of sociology and psychology OUTRIGHT as "hooey liberal arts pseudointellectual faggotry", yes?

Another assumption. How shocking.

it had a question mark

What?! You were asking him if that was in fact your impression?

hahahha!

Fight to the death? I dunno. I think that'd mean my @ss

Works out. My views are so extreme compared to most people I can barely have political speak with them.

Will Robinson wrote:

roid wrote:

ThunderBunny wrote:

roid wrote:But my impression of you has been that you're the kindof person who is just as inclined to reject the fields of sociology and psychology OUTRIGHT as "hooey liberal arts pseudointellectual faggotry", yes?

Another assumption. How shocking. :lol:

it had a question mark

What?! You were asking him if that was in fact your impression?

lulz

more directly: everyone here sees right through rhetorical tricks used to disguise insults, assumptions, etc. as "questions". We've all been around too long for that to work.

Will Robinson wrote:

roid wrote:

ThunderBunny wrote:

roid wrote:But my impression of you has been that you're the kindof person who is just as inclined to reject the fields of sociology and psychology OUTRIGHT as "hooey liberal arts pseudointellectual faggotry", yes?

Another assumption. How shocking.

it had a question mark

What?! You were asking him if that was in fact your impression?

lol. roid asks a question and will goes *derp derp dodge*