Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[stummel]

hm, somewhere between nelson mandela and dalai lama. more dalai lama, though.

Economic Left/Right: -4.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.69

[Granite26]

Spoilerized rant about the lack of 'my opinion doesn't effect my beliefs about what the government should be doing' in the questions.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment.

People saying this test has a libertarian bent are wrong...  In a Libertarian mindset, these questions are meaningless...

For example :

The prime function of schooling should be to equip the future generation to find jobs.

and

Schools should not make classroom attendance compulsory.

take as given government schools...

Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all.

takes it as given that what art is is an inherently political decision.

The businessperson and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and the artist.

Even better... either or, and the middle path is ours?

And you aren't alone, Cthulhu

[Dr. Johbson]

Yay for me.

[Servant Corps]

Purpley is "US Libertarian Party".
Red is Sterotypical Stalinist Comrade Squad.
Green is US Democratic.
Blue is US Republican.

I seen nobody posted a Blue result yet.

[Leafsnail]

Really?  Damn, looks like I got lots of the questions wrong then.  Perhaps it's the LCS views of heavy violence and stuff...

[Mohreb el Yasim]

it was a bit strange like test,
it gave me:
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.97

however i always tougth i am more anarchist and not at all communist :s
i think there migth also be some problems with the results, cause i am sure i misunderstude some questions ... (for example on the last page there was a statement about "the pornographie that should be legal for adults if made by adults who agree to make it" (or like) ... but it IS legal for adults so i don't see what it is talkin' about ...)
anyway it is not accurate test ... there is even no: "no opignon" choices ...

[Granite26]

OKCupid's political test is significantly better...

[E. Albright]

The prime function of schooling should be to equip the future generation to find jobs.

and

Schools should not make classroom attendance compulsory.

take as given government schools...

The former certainly does not. Consider post-secondary education: should colleges try to produce "well-rounded" graduates by requiring civics, culture, science, and/or language courses (i.e., standard "liberal artsy" general ed stuff), or should they teach nothing but courses focused with laser-like precision on the subject of the students' degrees? This question has nothing to do with the funding model of the school, and everything to do with the perceived purpose of education.

Taken as worded, the second one doesn't either: it talks about attending classes, not attending school. But that's something of an odd question, albeit not wholly without merit, and I expect most quiz-takers read it as school attendance.

[Granite26]

Somewhat true, but unless schools are government funded or involve government funding, how is the purpose of education a political function? (same with the art question...)  When they say schooling, I don't think private standards awarding or the training a company offers or a seminar offered at the local museum, I think the education system, specifically K-12 and government approved colleges.  I'd imagine that implication is true for 99% of the populace.  "The money you give the government to spend on education should be spent..."

The second question has similar connotations.  Forcing students to go to 'school' compulsorily implies that there is an agency with the power of compulsion (I.E. government) that has the power of definition over what is an acceptable school. 

As written, I read the question as 'should children be forced to attend government sanctioned schools', as opposed to home-schooling.  This is a big non-authoritarian talking point because some parents don't want their children to be forced to learn about evolution(coworker was homeschooled because of this), taught outright economic lies(economists are pretty universal about monopoly laws not protecting consumers), or sing the praises of the president(Did you hear about this?).


I guess the point I was trying to make is that a lot of these issues are personal opinions and take it for granted that if I had my way, my personal opinions would be legislated into law.

[SniHjen]

I just took that test, or rather I started, but question 2 is wierd.

I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.

What does Support mean here?

I will always go "yay denmark"

OR:

I will try and make my country better.

because if optionA, then I strongly disagree, but if optionB, then I strongly agree.


"You cannot be moral without being religious."'

STOP WITH THE BLODDY NOT NOT!

just write "In order to be moral, you must be religious"

It's less confusing worded statement that way.


Anyways, I'm a Gandhi clone.

and the other quiz, the one linked by Servant Corps, gave exactly the same answer.


Edit: wrote "just" instead of "you", don't know why.

[Leafsnail]

Well, the double negative is justified there, I feel.  "You can be moral and religious" is a different statement, as is "All religious people are moral".

[SniHjen]

Well, the double negative is justified there, I feel.  "You can be moral and religious" is a different statement, as is "All religious people are moral".

I did not write "can", but "must"

In order to be moral, you must be religious

Thats how the question was worded, just with two "not" in there.

"You cannot be moral without being religious"

[E. Albright]

I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.

What does Support mean here? [I will always go "yay denmark" OR: I will try and make my country better.]

because if optionA, then I strongly disagree, but if optionB, then I strongly agree.

It's closer to option A. It refers, I would say, to unreserved nationalism, and in principle would mean that you would not openly express disagreement with anything your nation did (this sort of attitude is usually limited to questions of war and the like), and to never suggest that other nations that disagree with it could possibly have been right to do so. But that's just in principle; in practice, it's almost always limited to going "Yay Denmark!" no matter what.

That's the baggage normally packed into the phrase "right or wrong" in this context. It's... kinda icky, yeah.

[EuchreJack]

I thought it was more "patriotism" than nationalism.  Basically, I took it to mean, "How fucked up can my goverment get before I move to Canada/take up arms/hide in the woods?"

Needless to say, I either answered disagree or strongly disagree.  But the CIA already knew that...

Also, I disagree with the assessment that the Democratic party is the Green Grid.  I'd put them somewhere in the low Red myself, with always wanting to "Control" things.

Example Issue and Democratic Response:
Issue: Company doesn't hire enough minorities, for any reason.
Democrats: Ok, We'll MAKE you take these minorities!  (That's certain not to make you hate them more...)
Issue: Some people don't have health care.
Democrats: Ok, you now MUST have health insurance, and the Companies MUST pay for it, even if they're quite small.
Issue: Gun Control
Demorcrats: Oh no!  Someone could get hurt!  Let's ban ALL of them, and ensure that only criminals have them!

If the Democrats DON'T come across as Over-Protective Parents, you're not paying attention.

Not that I like those Greedy Bastards in the Republican Party any better...

You know, I'm starting to like the CCS idea more and more, just to balance things out...

[HAMMERMILL]

I always score in the dead center of this test and that apparently makes me more of a left-wing radical libertarian then 75% of the the leaders of the free world and I have to say I think thats a bit inaccurate.