Political Compass - beat this, cucks

Is Xunzian a communist? (I use to go by the name Joker. You remember me, right?) :wink:

I feel there isn’t any kind of political compass to fit my views accurately. Not much of an intellectual market for a pessimistic anarchistic nihilist individual autonomy supporter.

I know who you are and was that ever in doubt?

The quiz is bad.

Who is your hero? Who do you want to be when you grow up?

Yes, there was a doubt which is why I asked. That doubt is now layed to rest.

Heroes? Heroes are for people that do not have full faith in their own capabilities to latch onto. Don’t really have any heroes but then again I’ve always had a thing against heroism.

Yes, the quiz looks like just another gross over simplification.

Heroes can also be people looked up to in a way that makes the observer feel they are themselves superior in some way. Hero sports persons for those into sport, conservatives for those who want to think they are in the superior class, and royalty so they got a figurehead. So people say they are royalists or support the queen, do so because if the queen is ‘better than’, then by including themselves in that in some way, means people think they belong to an upper echelon of individuals ~ part of that pyramid. In short its all about opeupmanship, and being in the winning or ‘better than’ group.

I completely agree with this result. I always considered myself a conservative/libertarian/centralist.

The test could use a few more dimensions, like are you a democrat, or oligarch?
Are you a military interventionist, or isolationist?
An egalitarian, or elitist?
But then, philosophically minded people tend to be more ahistorical and broadminded than John and Jane Doe. We think of nearly all the possibilities.

I could see a third dimension that focuses on federalism vs decentralization, but there ain’t enough dimensions for what ya’ talking about.

Gloom, I agree that more dimensions would be better, and it is probably a curse of taking a philosophical mindset that standard categorizations tend to breakdown around our worldviews (imagine that). But some of the distinctions I’d like to see made are hard to articulate, let alone score. My personal misalignment is that I think government should be both strongly redistributionist and significantly more hands off, e.g. eliminate the minimum wage and implement a basic income. Whether that’s a net left or right position is not straightforward (I think of it as left, but in my experience lefties often don’t).

Mack, the dimensions are just 1-10 scales, there can be as many as we want, we just can’t plot them all at the same time in a way that our puny human minds can grasp. Although at some point, we wouldn’t be dealing with a political compass as much as a psych profile.

That’s a good dichotomy you bring up.
You can be an authoritarian or libertarian and still be a federalist or decentralist.
Myself I’m more of a decentralist myself, I think.
There’s a lot of dimensions you could come up with, probably dozens, I guess the trick is finding the right balance, introducing an extra dimension to your typology when there’s a need, when it’s an important issue, and it can’t be adequately encompassed by existing dimensions.
Anybody else have any they think should be on the test?

Yes it’s very subjective, issues matter to some individuals and societies more than others, and so the others get ignored, or somewhat artificially and arbitrarily lumped in with issues we’re more cognizant of.

At least an US Neo-Liberal. :wink:

How on earth did Is_Yde_opN come out as left-leaning? :confused:

Is_Yde_opN, explain yourself?

:laughing:

Too easy
chart.png

Fascinating that people put stock in “what category am i in” tests.

So you’re Carl the cuck.

The test is nonsense.

The 1st question already reveals a false dichotomy: humanity vs corporate interests. As if there’s no other option.

It’s all good.
I’m not that much more to the left than Hitler, according to their own evaluation.

It’s a modern compass and the labels are wrong.

Left=Shitlib
Right=Cuckservative
Authoritative=Having an opinion and taking it seriously
Libertarian=What the authors of the test value themselves

For me… neither option in each question applied, so I couldn’t actually do the test at all. :neutral_face:

I could do neither either, because I think political definitions are too ambiguous in this day of age.

The sense of it seems to indicate a world in which, Democracy has dimmed its shiny light of intending
plausible objectives. The idea worked as long as Democracy as an institution had

ideal paradigms, such as that based on the rights of
man. Much overlooked was the changing of these absolute rights to the relative socially distributed ones, resulting in the inescapable unequal
distribution of wealth, and on differing regional
levels of advantages.

This can only be compensated by the NWO’s widening of
markets, which conceivably can fund the change from a status quo of regional inequality, toward equilibrium, in social, economic and political
integration.

That an authoritarian form of government is needed
to pull this off, is because democratic social cohesion
can not be achieved , as long as the social erosion of society at large within such a system could not
come to terms with a capitalist system.

How can it, when the articles to the constitution of a democratically constituted way , consisting equal rights to life liberty and enjoyment increasingly
deviate toward an increasing possession of such
rights by those who can afford those rights.

The whole issue of Capital is under seige, and only a
NWO may afford a relative safety net of the poor of
the Western “democracies”, integrated with lower poor standards yet in the third world countries.
Suddenly the poor of Western industrial Capitalistic societies will not appear as poor any more, they will gain class by virtue of such integration.

This is why there has been so much Western rhetoric
about the human rights, in the third world countries.

Their rights are literally loaded with violations en Masse, compared to which ‘our form of government’ sustains the faux model of what those rights entail.

With this in mind, Trump, is the perfect man to prove the advantages of a system, where there still are
vestiges of the freedoms of speech, of assembly, and
representation.

That these are fast becoming clad in the sufferance of
and the indignities of hyperbole and rhetoric ,loaded
with hypocrisy only understood by simple and honest, down to earth formulas of social ideas,
is beyond the capacity of those represented, and those who represent.

A simple diagram would do disservice to either.
Trump is the perfect post modern force in politics,
beyond evaluation.

"
.