Political Compass time, bois

Here it is again, post where you're at: https://www.politicalcompass.org

OCT 2010

image

MAR 2012

image

FEB 2013

image

SEP 2014

image

JUN 2016

image
/(?##~##)/

Comments

  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    Holy shit dude, according to this you identify as "Anarcho-Communism." Of course these are only labels though, I doubt they're totally accurate. IE a true communist state would actually be very anti-authoritarian but one has never existed.

    image

    I believe this image needs a repost:

    image

    Anyways here are mine:

    FEB 2013

    image

    SEP 2014

    image

    JUN 2016

    image

    It seems I've been pretty consistently in the "Left-Libertarianism" zone then. I'm surprised my ideology hasn't changed much because I know a lot more about government than I did back then, though I do remember my original entry (which I can't find anymore) was a fair bit lower down and to the left.
    "Gas giants don't discriminate. They have gas for everyone." -ASG

  • edit: also holy shit elm, you are left

    I used to be more left.

    I expected to be more libertarian.

    But I hold rather extreme views on some subjects, so that may have skewed it.

    I identify as politically retarded, since I never have, and probably never will, follow or understand politics. It's a terrible illness, I should get a pension.
    image
    ➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈
    image
    [7:45 pm] Kerlc: Being a cuck is great'
    Futanari Loli Nazi Succubus Squad ~☆「Sieg Heil」 Your Heart Into Ecstasy!!
    ふたなり・ロリ・ナチス・サキュバス・スクアッド~☆あなたの心をエクスタシーへ「ジークハイル」しよ!
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    The more I look at this test while taking it, the more I realize how flawed it is.
    image
    That's not a question about opinions, it's a factual statement.

    EDIT: Mine hasn't really changed either.

    Economic Left/Right: -6.13
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.74
    image

    Also Elm might be a bit TOO left.
    "I am sorry but if you don't like cake you're literally hitler
    Like I'm pretty sure an entire chapter of Mein Kampf is all about how much he loathes cake" - Kerlc, 2016

    [3:35:15 AM] Kerlc: they have boobs
    [3:35:18 AM] Kerlc: but they still have 12

    [10:00:19 AM] Kerlc: I actually prefer the penetration
  • Ye, I was a bit miffed at that question too.

    I just interpreted it as 'what is your opinion of one-party states;
    ➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈
    image
    [7:45 pm] Kerlc: Being a cuck is great'
    Futanari Loli Nazi Succubus Squad ~☆「Sieg Heil」 Your Heart Into Ecstasy!!
    ふたなり・ロリ・ナチス・サキュバス・スクアッド~☆あなたの心をエクスタシーへ「ジークハイル」しよ!
  • Posts: 1,153
    image



    image







    Anyway yeah this test is definitely a bit biased towards the libertarian side honestly. Also they put famous figures in spaces and quadrants that I disagree with.

    Holy shit dude, according to this you identify as "Anarcho-Communism." Of course these are only labels though, I doubt they're totally accurate. IE a true communist state would actually be very anti-authoritarian but one has never existed.

    image

    I believe this image needs a repost:

    image

    ...

    Those labels are pretty accurate. I honestly don't know much about anarcho-communism, maybe I'll read up on it more. But like I still think a state should exist, so the compass really isn't an exact representation of views.
    /(?##~##)/
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    2016 for me:
    image
    I see I have moderated a little.


    edit: also holy [swear] elm, you are left

    I used to be more left.

    I expected to be more libertarian.

    But I hold rather extreme views on some subjects, so that may have skewed it.

    I identify as politically retarded, since I never have, and probably never will, follow or understand politics. It's a terrible illness, I should get a pension.
    image

    Arguably, not getting involved means you're immune to the disease of it.

    The more I look at this test while taking it, the more I realize how flawed it is.
    image
    That's not a question about opinions, it's a factual statement.

    As I understand it', the importance is on the word 'significant'. Is it better that it is fast over the diversity of opinions that can come in a multi-party state? Is it better to go slow to hear all out or go fast and get work done? That's how I see it as a harder question. While the test isn't perfect, I find it a useful source to explain international multidimensional politics to people who don't realize as well how large the scope of politics can really be.
    Elmzran said:

    image



    image







    Anyway yeah this test is definitely a bit biased towards the libertarian side honestly. Also they put famous figures in spaces and quadrants that I disagree with.


    Holy shit dude, according to this you identify as "Anarcho-Communism." Of course these are only labels though, I doubt they're totally accurate. IE a true communist state would actually be very anti-authoritarian but one has never existed.

    image

    I believe this image needs a repost:

    image

    ...

    Those labels are pretty accurate. I honestly don't know much about anarcho-communism, maybe I'll read up on it more. But like I still think a state should exist, so the compass really isn't an exact representation of views.
    What makes you say it is biased towards libertarian views?

    On that more complex chart, that's an interesting look at it.

    On Elmzran's movement, I find it interesting how dramatic the move was.
    How do you say no to someone who asks you to say no?
    - Random Question Number 289

    These Random Questions were not paid for by anybody.
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    image

    Smash the state, kids.


    MORE DETAILED THOUGHTS FOLLOW:

    image
    [11:00:05] Kerlc: this fucking question doe
    [11:00:27] Kerlc: I mean of course people who can pay can afford to get the best stuff
    [11:00:33] Kerlc: that's not even a goddamn question

    [11:01:29] Tankman: I think it's supposed to be a question about should they

    [11:01:47] Kerlc: "Should they" questions are fucking stupid questions
    [11:02:02] Kerlc: "Oh should this happen"
    Don't mean much if it does and it will
    [11:02:24] Kerlc: people who can afford it will buy their own personal doctors and personal hospitals if they cannot do it any other way
    [11:02:48] Kerlc: this question is basically "Do you think it's right people with money can spend money?"
    [11:02:52] Kerlc: IT IS NOT EVEN A QUESTION

    [11:03:56] Kerlc: Or that question you linked
    [11:04:05] Tankman: that one is just stupid

    [11:04:08] Kerlc: Yes
    [11:04:14] Kerlc: it's not even a matter of opinion
    [11:05:04] Kerlc: it's a widely accepted fact in the politological field that the more people with different opinions you have to coordinate, the more time it takes to reach a decision
    [11:05:10] Kerlc: hell it's not even politology
    [11:05:13] Kerlc: it's common fucking sense
    [11:05:26] Kerlc: try to reach an agreement with your racist uncle to see what I mean
    [11:06:05] Tankman: I don't think my uncle is racist?
    [11:06:17] Kerlc: Everyone has a racist uncle
    [11:06:24] Kerlc: sometimes the racist uncle is your grandfather
    [11:06:26] Kerlc: your father
    [11:06:28] Kerlc: your grandma
    [11:06:31] Kerlc: your mum
    [11:06:34] Kerlc: your brother
    [11:06:37] Kerlc: or your cousin
    [11:06:42] Kerlc: every family has a racist uncle
    [11:06:46] Kerlc: :3

    image

    [11:07:02] Kerlc: Now this is just vague as fuck
    [11:07:06] Kerlc: I mean
    [11:07:16] Kerlc: it's a waste of time to try and rehabilitate a 90 year old serial killer
    [11:07:29] Kerlc: because he'll croak in 5 years
    [11:07:38] Kerlc: also what do you mean by "rehabilitate"?
    [11:07:50] Kerlc: make them fit to join the society at large?
    [11:08:07] Kerlc: Or make the voices inside their head stop?
    [11:08:34] Janzo Malek: the latter, please.
    [11:08:51] Kerlc: The voices never stop
    [11:09:10] William "Tankman": can confirm
    [11:09:13] Kerlc: they're just replaced with an endless loop of this:
    [11:09:14] Kerlc:

    image

    [11:09:33] Kerlc: PFFFFFFFFFFFFT
    [11:09:35] Kerlc: FUCK OFF
    [11:09:37] Kerlc: FUCK RIGHT OFF


    In conclusion: Smash the state, kids. Smash the state.
    [12:49] William "Tankman": yuri loli spaceshipgirls
    [15:42] Jalern: I want to fuk r63 loli mao
  • 2016 for me:
    image
    I see I have moderated a little.

    In what way did you moderate? I notice you are almost as far out as Elm.
    "Gas giants don't discriminate. They have gas for everyone." -ASG
  • After some verification and research, I found this was my stance in 2014.

    2014:
    image

    Since 2014, though, I have occasionally taken it again on my own time. Some times in 2015, I was more extreme than either towards the bottom left. I guess I am not that different from 2014, but from 2015, it is comparatively moderate. I still feel somewhat extreme on some of the issues, but it also depends on the way of framing it I use. If I go by what I have well researched only, I don't necessarily know enough to comment on some of the issues which makes this test incomplete.
    How do you say no to someone who asks you to say no?
    - Random Question Number 289

    These Random Questions were not paid for by anybody.
  • Tests are for weaklings with no convictions.

    Sieg Zeon.
    image
    image
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    Maybe one day I will be as left as Elm so we can further the agenda of our G L O R I O U S M O T H E R L A N D.
    image


    Aaaaaaaaaaaand now it's time for the disagreements.
    Kerlc said:


    image
    [11:00:05] Kerlc: this fucking question doe
    [11:00:27] Kerlc: I mean of course people who can pay can afford to get the best stuff
    [11:00:33] Kerlc: that's not even a goddamn question

    [11:01:29] Tankman: I think it's supposed to be a question about should they

    [11:01:47] Kerlc: "Should they" questions are fucking stupid questions
    [11:02:02] Kerlc: "Oh should this happen"
    Don't mean much if it does and it will
    [11:02:24] Kerlc: people who can afford it will buy their own personal doctors and personal hospitals if they cannot do it any other way
    [11:02:48] Kerlc: this question is basically "Do you think it's right people with money can spend money?"
    [11:02:52] Kerlc: IT IS NOT EVEN A QUESTION

    This is not how I'd interpret the question. The question is about whether or not wealth should be the key of high-quality medical care. It's not about whether rich people should be able to spend their money on the services they want, it's a question about whether or not everyone should have the right to quality medical care.

    Put in more extreme terms:
    "Should the rich have the privilege of dying less(, because they make more money.)?"
    Socialist: "No, everyone should have the equal right to not die, regardless of wealth."
    Capitalist: "Yeah, they've earned their right to not die through hard work."


    The more I look at this test while taking it, the more I realize how flawed it is.
    image
    That's not a question about opinions, it's a factual statement.

    I think you're ignoring the important keyword here: "Advantage."
    It is a question about opinions. Do you think that democracy is advanced by one-party states? Because I definitely do not see it that way. Like the statement posits, in a one-party state there are no disagreements, because the controlling party is, well, in control - theoretically allowing more time for progress instead of arguments. But as far as I'm concerned, one party states are not known for their prosperous democratic freedoms, because it's going to be hard to disagree with a government composed of one ideology when the media is so controlled.
    This is still not our universe.
  • Gheiter said:

    Maybe one day I will be as left as Elm so we can further the agenda of our G L O R I O U S M O T H E R L A N D.
    image


    Aaaaaaaaaaaand now it's time for the disagreements.


    Kerlc said:


    image
    [11:00:05] Kerlc: this [swear]ing question doe
    [11:00:27] Kerlc: I mean of course people who can pay can afford to get the best stuff
    [11:00:33] Kerlc: that's not even a goddamn question

    [11:01:29] Tankman: I think it's supposed to be a question about should they

    [11:01:47] Kerlc: "Should they" questions are [swear]ing stupid questions
    [11:02:02] Kerlc: "Oh should this happen"
    Don't mean much if it does and it will
    [11:02:24] Kerlc: people who can afford it will buy their own personal doctors and personal hospitals if they cannot do it any other way
    [11:02:48] Kerlc: this question is basically "Do you think it's right people with money can spend money?"
    [11:02:52] Kerlc: IT IS NOT EVEN A QUESTION

    This is not how I'd interpret the question. The question is about whether or not wealth should be the key of high-quality medical care. It's not about whether rich people should be able to spend their money on the services they want, it's a question about whether or not everyone should have the right to quality medical care.

    Put in more extreme terms:
    "Should the rich have the privilege of dying less(, because they make more money.)?"
    Socialist: "No, everyone should have the equal right to not die, regardless of wealth."
    Capitalist: "Yeah, they've earned their right to not die through hard work."


    The more I look at this test while taking it, the more I realize how flawed it is.
    image
    That's not a question about opinions, it's a factual statement.

    I think you're ignoring the important keyword here: "Advantage."
    It is a question about opinions. Do you think that democracy is advanced by one-party states? Because I definitely do not see it that way. Like the statement posits, in a one-party state there are no disagreements, because the controlling party is, well, in control - theoretically allowing more time for progress instead of arguments. But as far as I'm concerned, one party states are not known for their prosperous democratic freedoms, because it's going to be hard to disagree with a government composed of one ideology when the media is so controlled.
    That explains how I understood it as well.
    How do you say no to someone who asks you to say no?
    - Random Question Number 289

    These Random Questions were not paid for by anybody.
  • Posts: 0
    Gheiter said:

    Maybe one day I will be as left as Elm so we can further the agenda of our G L O R I O U S M O T H E R L A N D.
    image


    Aaaaaaaaaaaand now it's time for the disagreements.


    Kerlc said:


    image
    [11:00:05] Kerlc: this fucking question doe
    [11:00:27] Kerlc: I mean of course people who can pay can afford to get the best stuff
    [11:00:33] Kerlc: that's not even a goddamn question

    [11:01:29] Tankman: I think it's supposed to be a question about should they

    [11:01:47] Kerlc: "Should they" questions are fucking stupid questions
    [11:02:02] Kerlc: "Oh should this happen"
    Don't mean much if it does and it will
    [11:02:24] Kerlc: people who can afford it will buy their own personal doctors and personal hospitals if they cannot do it any other way
    [11:02:48] Kerlc: this question is basically "Do you think it's right people with money can spend money?"
    [11:02:52] Kerlc: IT IS NOT EVEN A QUESTION

    This is not how I'd interpret the question. The question is about whether or not wealth should be the key of high-quality medical care. It's not about whether rich people should be able to spend their money on the services they want, it's a question about whether or not everyone should have the right to quality medical care.

    Put in more extreme terms:
    "Should the rich have the privilege of dying less(, because they make more money.)?"
    Socialist: "No, everyone should have the equal right to not die, regardless of wealth."
    Capitalist: "Yeah, they've earned their right to not die through hard work."
    That is not how I interpret the question at all. It asks only if the rich should be able to afford better healthcare, not whether or not they should receive higher standards of healthcare simply because they make more money.

    The question is after all "Should those with the means be able to get higher standards of healthcare", which is a stupid question in all political systems and beliefs apart from full-blown communism (and even then because they eliminate the "those with the means" part) because people with the means to do so will always seek out a better standard of healthcare, regardless of how good the baseline is.

    As far as I can interpret it, the question has nothing to do with how good the standard healthcare is, and entirely revolves around the question of whether or not the rich should be able to buy themselves better healthcare (which they will, regardless of the standards already present).

    A much better question, more in-line with your interpretation (and far less needlessly vague) would be "Should only the ones with the means to pay be given the highest standard of healthcare?"
    Gheiter said:



    The more I look at this test while taking it, the more I realize how flawed it is.
    image
    That's not a question about opinions, it's a factual statement.

    I think you're ignoring the important keyword here: "Advantage."
    It is a question about opinions. Do you think that democracy is advanced by one-party states? Because I definitely do not see it that way. Like the statement posits, in a one-party state there are no disagreements, because the controlling party is, well, in control - theoretically allowing more time for progress instead of arguments. But as far as I'm concerned, one party states are not known for their prosperous democratic freedoms, because it's going to be hard to disagree with a government composed of one ideology when the media is so controlled.
    But the lessened time to reach decisions IS a significant advantage of one-party states. The question does not ask whether or not such states advance democracy or uphold personal freedoms. The question merely asks whether the lessened time required to reach a decision is an advantage of a one-party system. Which it is. Single-party, authoritarian governments are far better at resolving crises precisely because of that fact and people have historically flocked towards authoritarian, one-party systems during times of crisis exactly because the proper democratic process seemed slow and inefficient and the one-party, authoritarian governments seemed decisive and efficient in reaching agreements and remedying the situation quickly.

    Now, one simply cannot walk past the fact that one-party systems are also incredibly prone to being abused, inevitably get corruption-ridden, suppress the individual rights and liberties of individuals and are in general incredibly easy to game and the people on top inevitably end up more concerned with their own power than the well-being of the people or the state.

    However, the question does not ask you about any of those things, all of which are significant disadvantages and a potent reason why such a system should never be attempted, and exclusively asks you whether or not the efficiency of a one-party state is an advantage or not. Which one cannot deny it is.
    [12:49] William "Tankman": yuri loli spaceshipgirls
    [15:42] Jalern: I want to fuk r63 loli mao
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    Hey folks, this is me.
    >tfw all the degenerates in this thread
    image
    image
  • edited June 2016 Posts: 0
    image
  • Posts: 1,153
    The Swamp of Degeneracy
    /(?##~##)/
  • middle or bust.

    who needs a side anyway.
    ➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈➈
    image
    [7:45 pm] Kerlc: Being a cuck is great'
    Futanari Loli Nazi Succubus Squad ~☆「Sieg Heil」 Your Heart Into Ecstasy!!
    ふたなり・ロリ・ナチス・サキュバス・スクアッド~☆あなたの心をエクスタシーへ「ジークハイル」しよ!
  • Posts: 0
    Smash the state, kids.
    [12:49] William "Tankman": yuri loli spaceshipgirls
    [15:42] Jalern: I want to fuk r63 loli mao
  • Mokushi said:

    image

    Fixed link:
    image
    Kerlc said:

    Smash the state, kids.

    I'm working on it. Wait, is this obedience to a rebellion state?
    How do you say no to someone who asks you to say no?
    - Random Question Number 289

    These Random Questions were not paid for by anybody.
  • Posts: 0

    Mokushi said:

    image

    Fixed link:
    image
    Cheers.
Sign In or Register to comment.