Escape Artists
The Lounge at the End of the Universe => Gallimaufry => Topic started by: DKT on July 05, 2011, 11:06:18 PM
-
I'm about as left-leaning as you get, but this was a little simplistic.
Nope! Anna's leftier ;D
-
I'm about as left-leaning as you get, but this was a little simplistic.
Nope! Anna's leftier ;D
Are you sure? I'm basically a communist. I also think that not only should gay and polyamorous marriage be legal, I also don't think the government should be in the business of marrying people at all. And I think that pot should be legal (but probably not cigarettes...).
I mean, look, what I'm trying to say here is that my liberalism dick is enormous. Anna's liberalism dick is probably mighty large, but I doubt it's larger than mine ;).
-
I'm not totally sure...but I'm pretty sure ;) Sorry, I couldn't help myself in light of the intro...
And just to show I'm not really trying to get into a big liberal dick judging contest - You both are easily more liberal than I am! :P
-
big liberal dick judging contest
;D I did actually laugh out loud to that. In fact, I would say I guffawed.
-
And just to show I'm not really trying to get into a big liberal dick judging contest - You both are easily more liberal than I am! :P
I say whip them out and slap them down on the table. Let's see who's got the biggest one. Let the forum goers decide! Pics or I call shens!
Me, I advocate being middle of the road. There are good things and bad things about going too far to either side. I like to say that I follow the political theory of the Boston Creme Doughnut: Somewhere in middle lies the juiciest, sweetest place.
-
Are you sure? I'm basically a communist. I also think that not only should gay and polyamorous marriage be legal, I also don't think the government should be in the business of marrying people at all. And I think that pot should be legal (but probably not cigarettes...).
So the government has no say in who or how people get married and pot should be legal, but no one should enjoy cigarettes? Anna might be more liberal...
-
Are you sure? I'm basically a communist. I also think that not only should gay and polyamorous marriage be legal, I also don't think the government should be in the business of marrying people at all. And I think that pot should be legal (but probably not cigarettes...).
So the government has no say in who or how people get married and pot should be legal, but no one should enjoy cigarettes? Anna might be more liberal...
I did write "probably" for a reason. I'm not sure where I fall on cigarettes. Probably in the end I'd be ok with them existing. Maybe. I see no reason to be entirely consistent and well reasoned in my politics in a thread about why the landholders no longer carry swords :P.
-
I mean, look, what I'm trying to say here is that my liberalism dick is enormous. Anna's liberalism dick is probably mighty large, but I doubt it's larger than mine ;).
How about we use political compass scores instead of penises, since I don't have one of those?
Go ahead, post your score.
-
How about the Political Compass?
http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
I'll go first, since I've got no dog in this fight.
Economic Left/Right: -5.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.13
I did wish there was a "not sure" choice for a couple of the questions.
-
I know I've done this before somewhere, but I took it again. My scores:
Economic Left/Right: -5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.10
-
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.85
Impressive, I know. You can touch it if you want ;).
-
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.85
Impressive, I know. You can touch it if you want ;).
:o
Not even Master Yoda has the high of a midichlorian count!
Things are getting very interesting! ;D
-
My results:
Economic Left/Right: -8.00 (I'm not convinced that's accurate.)
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.33 (Please note that a social libertarian is not the same thing as a <shudder> Randian Libertarian)
Wow, ElectricPaladin really is further SouthWest than I am, though not by much. I bet almost all of our answers were on the same side, only differing on which ones were 'Strongly'.
(And thanks, hautdesert, for providing the link - I wasn't entirely sure what people were referring to.)
Also, I agree: some of those questions required either 'Not sure' or 'Don't care' or something.
Edit: fixed some formatting
-
My results:
Economic Left/Right: -6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.72
Wow, I thought I'd be more authoritative than that. I think, yes, the absence of a "not sure" option skewed the results a bit. Though I am grateful for Wilson Fowlie's clarification that Social Libertarian does not equal Objectivist. I mean, slaughtering Splicers in Rapture is one of my favorite pastimes; I'd hate to be a hypocrite.
-
Well I'm not surprised by my results:
Economic Left/Right: -3.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.23
Honestly I thought I'd be closer to the middle, maybe even a little bit more to the right, but eh, thats good enough for my Boston Creme Doughnut theory.
I think the questions weren't very good focusing on hotbutton issues rather than specifc political doctrine. At the very least (like everyone else said) there needs to be a "somewhat agree" and a "no opinion" button.
-
Well, I'll play:
Economic Left/Right: -5.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.15
A little surprised. Also, interesting to see Kevin Rudd (our Prime Minister before the Party raised a coup to oust him) on the scale. Not surprised by his result, though.
-
Economic Left/Right: -5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.00
Bout where I expected to find meself. :P
-
Economic Left/Right: -6.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.79
Buncha whiny lefties here, obviously.
I had trouble because sometimes my answer to the question was, "Well, yes, that's probably true, but it's because X, Y, Z and might not be a good thing," or "Well, it depends on the situation and one can't really make a blanket statement about such things." Of course, that alone puts me solidly on the left, politically, so whatevs.
-
I had trouble because sometimes my answer to the question was, "Well, yes, that's probably true, but it's because X, Y, Z and might not be a good thing," or "Well, it depends on the situation and one can't really make a blanket statement about such things."
This. Precisely this.
(This is an excellent example of why Scattercat is a writer and I am not. :) )
-
Ok, I'll join in the fun :)
Economic Left/Right: -5.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.59
Spindaddy and I can hold down the social moderate end of the see saw to balance the rest of you guys out. ;) These tests never really know what to do with me because I hold several (stereotypically) opposite viewpoints, which incidentally is also why I never know who to vote for... :-\
-
Ok, I'll join in the fun :)
Economic Left/Right: -5.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.59
Spindaddy and I can hold down the social moderate end of the see saw to balance the rest of you guys out. ;) These tests never really know what to do with me because I hold several (stereotypically) opposite viewpoints, which incidentally is also why I never know who to vote for... :-\
haha Throw your horns up if you are a moderate! \m/
I tend to vote to maintain a balance. It's kinda dumb, but in my twisted little world, I think by keeping the liberals and conversatives in balance means that neither can truly pursue their agendas because neither side has enough of a majority. Thus, when rich white guys spend more time fighting each other, I'm able to live a freer happier life.
-
My scores:
Economic Left/Right: -4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.85
Someone should map all these and give us a forum political graph. And if results continue as they have been, we need only show one quadrant!
-
Someone should map all these and give us a forum political graph. And if results continue as they have been, we need only show one quadrant!
Very interesting...I'd like to see that , but I'm afraid I wouldn't know how. If someone does, here are my scores to add ;D
Economic Left/Right: -2.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.10
Still in that same 'ole quadrant!
-
(http://dunlop.id.au/images/EA Forum Political Graph_html_m47440ecf.jpg)
-
Awesome Kibitzer, thanks :D
-
Sadly, I find myself all alone in another quadrant. Sniff. Not telling all you free-wheeling radicals which one, lest you leap the fence into my fabulous gated community of one to part me from my capitalist spoils.
-
Sadly, I find myself all alone in another quadrant. Sniff. Not telling all you free-wheeling radicals which one, lest you leap the fence into my fabulous gated community of one to part me from my capitalist spoils.
What if we tell you it's for the children?
-
I did it yesterday and seem to have forgotten to post - I blame the jetlag. I don't remember the exact scores, but they were both pretty close to -4.5
-
Sadly, I find myself all alone in another quadrant. Sniff. Not telling all you free-wheeling radicals which one, lest you leap the fence into my fabulous gated community of one to part me from my capitalist spoils.
Aww c'mon Turtle! I'll re-do the graph.
-
Nice one, Kibitzer! Thanks!
Interesting how graphics can bring things to light. I hadn't noted before how many of you are in that centre column. Interesting.
-
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.85
Impressive, I know. You can touch it if you want ;).
Excuse me while I whip this out...
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.87
-
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.85
Impressive, I know. You can touch it if you want ;).
Excuse me while I whip this out...
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.87
Dude.
Wow.
-
Oooh! Oooh! Me! Me!
Economic Left/Right: -2.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.90
Pretty much where I thought I'd end up.
-
Oh, it''s nice to see everybody posting scores! Yay!
Here's mine:
Economic Left/Right: -8.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.82
Fowlie, I noted in the intro that my challenge would mostly play out my way to USians, but I see I still beat you out. I am not a communist, obv, though, so Paladin beats me out. However, there are hardly any communists in the U.S. and more that say they are than actually are, so I felt pretty safe in my assessment. And I hedged anyway with the "chances are" because there's always the one exception. By the large, according to the graph, I'll still fall to the left of most.
I'd like to see what it takes to get higher than -8.75 on the economic left/right, since no one has managed it so far. Maybe the test tops out there?
-
So, did it again. Ended up more economically left than last time, but I can't think of what I said differently. Maybe I feel more likely to strongly agree or disagree with stuff than I do in the evening. Here goes:
Economic Left/Right: -6.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.05
If feel there were some cases where my literal nature got in the way of the quiz: "What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state." - that's not true; if what they are doing is planning a terrorist attack, or watching child pornography, or engaged in a murder-suicide pact, I think the state is entitled to some level of interest.
-
Nice one, Kibitzer! Thanks!
Interesting how graphics can bring things to light. I hadn't noted before how many of you are in that centre column. Interesting.
I notice that how the graph is presented makes terms like "moderate" or "centrist" very, very different. Kibitzer's graph makes a nice little "center" right in the middle of the square that we mostly seem to hover around, and suddenly I'm (mostly) a moderate! Of course, some of my neighbors in physical space would, if they knew, think me dangerously radical and extreme--which I'm not, not by a long shot, there's a whole bunch of space for me to move into more extremes.
So, is "center" the middle of the graph (which graph??), some platonic ideal of neutral political opinion (I can't believe I just typed that phrase, my brain might explode trying to parse it out) or is "center" statistical center, and if so of what sample? Or....
Or, what I mean to say is, moderate and center are actually pretty meaningless terms. Lots of people claim them as labels without really thinking what it might mean, beyond "well I think my beliefs are reasonable so they must be moderate."
Sorry for incoherence, caffeine is only just beginning to reach my bloodstream.
-
I am not a communist, obv, though, so Paladin beats me out. However, there are hardly any communists in the U.S. and more that say they are than actually are, so I felt pretty safe in my assessment.
Well, it depends on how you define "communist." Marxist thought is a spectrum of ideas and opinions. I think there are plenty of people in the US who could qualify as some measure of socialist (I count myself among them). And then of course, communism has been verboten in America for so long, I think the average American would have a hard time recognizing or defining actual Marxist thought.
-
I am not a communist, obv, though, so Paladin beats me out. However, there are hardly any communists in the U.S. and more that say they are than actually are, so I felt pretty safe in my assessment.
Well, it depends on how you define "communist." Marxist thought is a spectrum of ideas and opinions. I think there are plenty of people in the US who could qualify as some measure of socialist (I count myself among them). And then of course, communism has been verboten in America for so long, I think the average American would have a hard time recognizing or defining actual Marxist thought.
ElPal self-id'd as a communist. That's why I used the term. I do not self id as a communist, nor do I think anyone can peg me as one, for all that I'm down with to each/for each.
-
Fowlie, I noted in the intro that my challenge would mostly play out my way to USians, but I see I still beat you out.
Well, insofar as it's a contest (and any implication that I ever thought it was was solidly tongue-in-cheek), that's only true for the economic axis. I've long thought I'm more economically conservative than socially (though my score would seem not to bear that out, at least not to the degree I believed it).
"What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state." - that's not true; if what they are doing is planning a terrorist attack, or watching child pornography, or engaged in a murder-suicide pact, I think the state is entitled to some level of interest.
Yes, that question could have been more specific, though I think* that, "what goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults" is, at least in North America, fairly well known to be a euphemism for "sexual activity". If it had been worded "Sexual activity that goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state," would that have changed your answer? 'Cause that's what they meant.
Inspired by (but not really related to) hautdesert's remarks on the centre of the graph and being moderate
I'd be interested to see what correlation there is, if any, between the results of this test in the general population and the degree to which the respondents a) read and b) read speculative fiction.
*If I'm wrong about this, I'd like to know.
-
"What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state." - that's not true; if what they are doing is planning a terrorist attack, or watching child pornography, or engaged in a murder-suicide pact, I think the state is entitled to some level of interest.
Yes, that question could have been more specific, though I think* that, "what goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults" is, at least in North America, fairly well known to be a euphemism for "sexual activity". If it had been worded "Sexual activity that goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state," would that have changed your answer? 'Cause that's what they meant.
Anytime I read "two consenting adults in a bedroom", I always imagine that someone is talking a couple of people dressed up as cartoon characters beating on each other with neon colored sex toys between three and four feet long and perhaps engaging in other activities that have the potential for a rather embarrassing hospital visit.
Personally speaking it's my bedroom. Stay the F out of it.* I don't care if my neighbor claims that I'm building a bomb, watching questionable porn or planning on some other abhorrent practice. There HAS to be a point and place where a person can go and not be scrutinized by society. Privacy is a basic right. No matter what my neighbor thinks, 90% of the time I'm in my bedroom all I'm doing is reading a book or sleeping. Ok, ok, there are other activities that take place there, but don't worry, it's between consenting adults.
* Unless of course you are a mid twenties co-ed with loose morals, an oral fetish and have a fondness for neon colors
-
Personally speaking it's my bedroom. Stay the F out of it.* I don't care if my neighbor claims that I'm building a bomb, watching questionable porn or planning on some other abhorrent practice. There HAS to be a point and place where a person can go and not be scrutinized by society. Privacy is a basic right.
So, if you kidnap someone and drag them into your bedroom unobserved to torture and murder them, society must wait for you to leave your bedroom before arresting you? Even if they know very well what you're planning and they know they can stop you if they just step in?
I wasn't talking about cases where someone is saying you're doing something wrong. I was talking about cases where someone is *actually* doing something wrong. I agree with you that people have a right to privacy in their bedroom. I also agree that hearsay shouldn't be a good enough reason to violate that right. But I don't agree that the right to privacy is inviolable, if there is independent credible evidence that it needs to be violated for the sake of others.
Also, and this is very important, the question, interpreted literally, didn't ask what are the boundaries of what the state is allowed to *do* about what goes on in the bedroom. I was just pointing out that I may be doing stuff in the bedroom that is the state's business. That's not the same as saying that the state has carte blanche to do what they want.
-
...who builds bombs in their bedroom, anyway?
???
I think the "right to privacy" is kind of a moot point at this stage of civilization, anyway. I mean, privacy is dead. There are satellites in orbit that can see what you're doing in your bedroom. There could be a satellite watching you or me RIGHT NOW. There are ways to find out what anyone is doing at any given moment. The question is not whether or not it's right to do so, but how we live with it. You can't put the genie back in the bottle.
-
...who builds bombs in their bedroom, anyway?
???
*shifty eyes*
-
...who builds bombs in their bedroom, anyway?
???
I think the "right to privacy" is kind of a moot point at this stage of civilization, anyway. I mean, privacy is dead. There are satellites in orbit that can see what you're doing in your bedroom. There could be a satellite watching you or me RIGHT NOW. There are ways to find out what anyone is doing at any given moment. The question is not whether or not it's right to do so, but how we live with it. You can't put the genie back in the bottle.
I'm not sure I buy that. At this stage of civilization, we have weapons that can kill millions at the push of a button. Does that mean that the right to life is moot? Of course not. It means that there is a moral burden on the people in charge of the weapons of mass destruction not to use them, and that burden translates, partially at least, into practical measures. The fact that it's a whole lot easier to track people now and watch them than it was in the past just means that protecting the right to privacy is now much harder - but that doesn't mean that the basic right has shifted.
Note that as a general rule, I am pro-surveillance technology. I believe that every public action by a person, government, or business should be monitored and accessible to everyone. But that doesn't translate to a belief that every action is public. On the contrary - if I want to live in a society where every public action is watched, I think it's more important than ever to establish where the boundaries of the public eyes are.
-
So, if you kidnap someone and drag them into your bedroom unobserved to torture and murder them, society must wait for you to leave your bedroom before arresting you? Even if they know very well what you're planning and they know they can stop you if they just step in?
I wasn't talking about cases where someone is saying you're doing something wrong. I was talking about cases where someone is *actually* doing something wrong. I agree with you that people have a right to privacy in their bedroom. I also agree that hearsay shouldn't be a good enough reason to violate that right. But I don't agree that the right to privacy is inviolable, if there is independent credible evidence that it needs to be violated for the sake of others.
Also, and this is very important, the question, interpreted literally, didn't ask what are the boundaries of what the state is allowed to *do* about what goes on in the bedroom. I was just pointing out that I may be doing stuff in the bedroom that is the state's business. That's not the same as saying that the state has carte blanche to do what they want.
The question was "What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state."
To me, I think "Yes, the state has no right to regulate what I'm doing in my bedroom with another consenting adult." I'm reading this as a question specifically about all the flavors of sex and sexual activity. Mostly this due to the proceeding and succeeding questions which also are about sex. Last time I checked, kidnapping and murder are not activities that take place between two consenting adults regardless of the place. Torture... well if you are counting BDSM as torture, then I guess we can count that as an activity between two consenting adults. :) I guess the problem comes down to how far you want to read into the the question. Me, I'm reading "if two consenting people want to engage in hetreo or homosexual activities or even do some wild deviant things to each other in private, they should have the right to do so--provided, of course, both parties are consenting adults."
I wholehearted agree with you when you say " I don't agree that the right to privacy is inviolable, if there is independent credible evidence that it needs to be violated for the sake of others." I especially agrre when someone has violated my privacy or the privacy of my loved ones and carried them off to murder and non-consentingly torture them. Then I believe in violating every right of the person that dared to trespass over my/mine rights. I'm a pacifist, but after a certain point I believe that sometimes you just have to kill the rabid dog.
Making a bomb, conspiracy, kidnap, murder, things that are specifically illegal, dangerous and horrific... these activities could take place in a bedroom. There could be consenting adults present (and dependent on the activity, a non-consenting person) and we could probably make a huge list of things that can be done in a bedroom, but I think this isn't what the 'spirit' of the question is about. It feels like reading into the question beyond sexual connotations is going too far. Yet, I can see and understand how you(generic you, not specifically you) could continually read between the lines of the question and make a list of all the crazy stuff consenting people can do in a bedroom.
In the end, when it comes to privacy I believe that there are certain rights any human being should be allowed. However, I also believe that when you violate the rights of others, you then forfeit your own rights. Society runs best when ALL people follow the laws and norms. The break downs occur when people attempt to live above the law or outside of the law. I also think society runs best when government does not try to regulate every little thing its citizens do and the citizens take the responsibility for their own actions. To me, that would be a perfect world, but alas, that will never happen.
Also, I just had some cheesecake and damn it was awesome.
-
I notice that how the graph is presented makes terms like "moderate" or "centrist" very, very different. Kibitzer's graph makes a nice little "center" right in the middle of the square that we mostly seem to hover around, and suddenly I'm (mostly) a moderate! Of course, some of my neighbors in physical space would, if they knew, think me dangerously radical and extreme--which I'm not, not by a long shot, there's a whole bunch of space for me to move into more extremes.
So, is "center" the middle of the graph (which graph??), some platonic ideal of neutral political opinion (I can't believe I just typed that phrase, my brain might explode trying to parse it out) or is "center" statistical center, and if so of what sample? Or....
Or, what I mean to say is, moderate and center are actually pretty meaningless terms. Lots of people claim them as labels without really thinking what it might mean, beyond "well I think my beliefs are reasonable so they must be moderate."
Sorry for incoherence, caffeine is only just beginning to reach my bloodstream.
kbitzer's (awesome) graph is only representing the lower left quadrant of the full graph, because that's where everyone's scores fell. so technically the exact center would be the upper right corner of his graph, making Spindaddy and Bdoomed the most "center" of those graphed. :) I definitely think that the sub-population being polled here is highly skewing the results and a survey of the general populace would find people on all four quadrants.
I thought I'd also chime in since I self-identified as "moderate". I tend to use that word since I like various platforms from both the democrats and the republicans but I'm not firmly on either side. For certain issues I make a great democrat and a horrible republican, but for other issues it's the exact opposite. This is hard to express in a small number of words so I just go with "moderate." :)
-
Sorta slightly OT but related -- any of you read Bob Shaw's "Slow Glass" and related stories? (They're collected into a book called Other Days, Other Eyes.) It ends up that slow glass is used as the ultimate surveillance tool with the government using tiny glass beads seeded in paint, dropped from the skies, sown everywhere. This is nowhere you can go unobserved. I think the argument that privacy is basically over is pretty close to the truth. And I think the current generation will increasingly see it as unimportant since they've never had it. Which reminds me of another book by Arthur C Clarke and Steven Baxter called The Light of Other Days where time-viewing technology becomes ubiquitous and abolishes privacy. As it's happening there's some passages that describe young people unconcernedly embracing new technology without thought of privacy.
(BTW I've been updating the graph)
-
so, i have this spanner, i thought I'd throw it into the works
Economic Left/Right: 4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.46
I'm a good old fashioned British liberal; economically right wing, socially progressive.
put that in your pipe and smoke it, lefties (oh wait, you don't have pipes, because you're all hippies)
I'm actually surprised by the concentration of lefties we have in this place, I though we might at least have a bit of variation. I'm hoping that some other folks with some economic sense will come forward now and reverse this scary trend towards economic oppression on this forum.
-
kbitzer's (awesome) graph is only representing the lower left quadrant of the full graph, because that's where everyone's scores fell. so technically the exact center would be the upper right corner of his graph, making Spindaddy and Bdoomed the most "center" of those graphed. :)
But what makes that place the "center"? The person(s) who designed the test called that "center" and put it in the middle of the graph, but why that place? You could draw the graph any way you wanted and each time there'd be a different center. There's nothing objectively "center" about that middle point on the test's graph. That's what I'm saying. No matter what graph you draw, you're forcing a particular center to appear, "center" is not inherent in the actual data, it's an artifact of a particular interpretation.
There's nothing objectively "center" about, say, not totally agreeing with Rs or Ds. In, say, a climate where the right-leaning bit of the sample has shifted way, way to the right, "I don't totally agree with either side, I go right down the middle" actually puts one further right than this graph would call "center."
I'm just saying, "center" with no other points of reference (opinion is split between R and D, score on the political compass test, in relation to a good sample of the population of whatever country you vote in, whatever) is meaningless.
-
Well now. That's changed the graph just a leetle bit.
C'mon @FireTurtle!!
-
put that in your pipe and smoke it, lefties (oh wait, you don't have pipes, because you're all hippies)
hippies have different types of pipes ;)
and kibitzer...you are too cool for posting that graph! thank you!
-
Harumph! I object to being compared to a hippie! Bunch of spoiled children having a tantrum. I believe in social progress, not taking a hit and banging a tambourine. Tambourines never solved anything.
...and give me some of that cheesecake. I'm starving.
-
put that in your pipe and smoke it, lefties (oh wait, you don't have pipes, because you're all hippies)
hippies have different types of pipes ;)
touche.
they're allowed that kind of pipe, but i silently disapprove.
-
Harumph! I object to being compared to a hippie! Bunch of spoiled children having a tantrum. I believe in social progress, not taking a hit and banging a tambourine. Tambourines never solved anything.
...and give me some of that cheesecake. I'm starving.
Sure! But first you have to agree to my political agenda! I used to use Kool-aid, but no one likes it anymore and backs away way too fast.
My cheesecake, it brings all the people to the yard!
-
Well it's not better than mine!
...wait...
-
kbitzer's (awesome) graph is only representing the lower left quadrant of the full graph, because that's where everyone's scores fell. so technically the exact center would be the upper right corner of his graph, making Spindaddy and Bdoomed the most "center" of those graphed. :)
But what makes that place the "center"? The person(s) who designed the test called that "center" and put it in the middle of the graph, but why that place? You could draw the graph any way you wanted and each time there'd be a different center. There's nothing objectively "center" about that middle point on the test's graph. That's what I'm saying. No matter what graph you draw, you're forcing a particular center to appear, "center" is not inherent in the actual data, it's an artifact of a particular interpretation.
Okay, now I see better what you were getting at. Based on the website's graph of various political leaders (historical and recent), it looks like they've simply made the various extremes determine the boundaries of the graph and thus the center is defined by the breadth of left and right over the past 100 years or so. This strikes me as a fairly useful rubric because no one period of right- or left-leaning should be enough to shift the entire graph.
However, I'm guessing you might argue that 100 years is still a relatively limited time frame, and I agree that it would be interesting to see if adding the major political leaders of known empires would change the graph at all. For instance, where would Julius Caesar and King John of England (who was forced to sign the Magna Carta) fall on this graph? Which begs the question, do we really know enough about some of the historical leaders to accurately place them, and does the concept of right and left even apply to the politics of their time?
There's nothing objectively "center" about, say, not totally agreeing with Rs or Ds. In, say, a climate where the right-leaning bit of the sample has shifted way, way to the right, "I don't totally agree with either side, I go right down the middle" actually puts one further right than this graph would call "center."
I'm just saying, "center" with no other points of reference (opinion is split between R and D, score on the political compass test, in relation to a good sample of the population of whatever country you vote in, whatever) is meaningless.
Well, as Iamafish has reminded us, just because the center of our graph is falling to the left of the graph's center, that doesn't mean we are proving the rubric to be at fault. I know plenty of people who would fall squarely in the upper right quadrant, whose scores would serve to balance ours and place the center back in the center of the graph.
-
Was considering putting some worlds leaders on there, per the original site, just for comparison...
-
Do it! I'm curious how I compare to Stalin. I've been compared.
Long story...
-
Well, I come back for a little trip up the coast and now I've gotta eat the crow. So Electric Paladin's actually leftier (or graphically speaking, southier?) than Anna. My bad.
Mmmmmm, tasty crow, if a bit crunchy.
-
...who builds bombs in their bedroom, anyway?
???
No kidding. That's what the basement is for. That way it blows up the WHOLE house when your stupid homemade piece of crap goes off....
:)
-
Ok, so, for what it's worth, I'm slightly below Gandhi and the Dalai Lama on Anarchy/Libertarianism ... which comes as a surprise to me...
Economic Left/Right: -6.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.56
There were some questions I did not agree with that I thought I could not answer fairly (the biggest being those who can work should not expect help from society; regardless of what *I* feel, I'm pretty sure that's how my society feels)...
-
Not sure how I didn't end up more towards the commie side. Probably disagree/strong disagree.
Economic Left/Right: -8.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.05
Strongly pro-equality, pro-minority, pro-gay, pro-women.
Strongly anti-corporation, anti-religion.
Do not get me started on the effects lobbyists and corporations have had on the US government on a town, state, and federal level. I get very, very angry, and will use many bad words, some of which do not exist yet.
-
Do not get me started on the effects lobbyists and corporations have had on the US government on a town, state, and federal level. I get very, very angry, and will use many bad words, some of which do not exist yet.
Those snorflcot argelflat shindamble orfroms! I'd like to turpistl their cambles and gorwaffle their horblabs. The gnerbs.
-
This question bothered me:
There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment.
If you're talking about passing off propagandist looney-toonism as news *coughFOXcough*, I strongly agree. If you're talking about educational shows that are both informational and educational, then I strongly disagree.
-
Also this one:
An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Are they talking about the modern interpretation of this, that it is right to murder someone in response to someone else getting murdered, or the ancient interpretation that a punishment should fit the crime?
-
My thoughts on this question:
All people have their rights, but it is better for all of us that different sorts of people should keep to their own kind.
"Can you imagine what food would be like if this was the case? The horrors!"
-
Updated with monkey and cow's scores. I tried to add political leaders but apparently my LibreOffice Calc-fu just isn't good enough.
-
Allrighty. Well I've waited long enough to return to this thread that I no longer remember my scores. ::)
That being said, I know I was economically +1.6 ish, and the other one I was -1.6 ish. So. There.
Honestly, I think my scores will wiggle given what has been going on in my life. If I've paid my taxes recently (yesterday- I'm self-employed, Its irritating sometimes). If a patient has recently been unbelievably rude to me when I know they are actually not going to pay me. If a patient has blamed me for not being able to fix some huge problem that is entirely or at least the majority their fault. If I had a totally wonderful incredibly ill patient that I could not do enough for....my occupation lives at the crossroads. I stand there, look both ways and realize that no matter how I step, I will be hit by a semi-truck, and that I have to cross the road.
-
Updated for FireTurtle (as promised!), who bravely sides with iamafish.
<Salutes>
-
no alone anymore!!!! yaaaay
i'm still waiting for the underground group of libertarians to rise up and challenge you socialist to a fight to the death.
I could be waiting a while.
-
Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but i'm busy catching up after an extended absence from this most awesome of forums (most of whom i suspect i will not be politically compatible with—thank God there's more to life than politics; I think this forum alone is proof that the arts need to exist; it gives us a space in which to civilly discuss our differences and similarities), and this is a fascinating thread! So anyway, I'm still taking this test. I'm very annoyed that there is no "I don't know" or "I don't care" button. Also, some of these questions are egregiously unclear: what constitutes a "religious value," for instance? 'Thou shalt not kill' could be considered a religious value, not merely a social value (that's an extreme, I admit, but still… I can't say equivocally that all "religious" values don't have social value). Stay tuned… let me finish this thing…
Interesting results (to me):
Economic Left/Right: -3.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.05
-
Updated for birdless! And also: bigger and maybe a little clearer.