Your political compass

Superewza said:
To be truly Socialist (read, not an isolated and bullied state in a Capitalist world) a system must be mostly self sufficient. That's why a global revolution, or at very least a mass international uprising is far more likely.
Click to expand...

No it's not more likely or it would have happened.

basically you're saying billions of people must change their entire outlook on life for it to work. in other words it can't work

Nothing that requires everyone to work can work.

Also you must require a substantial drop in quality of life for the planet to become self sufficient.

How wil lyou deal with black marketeers?
 
This is a rediculas test. a lot of the questions force you to go down paths you may not wish to pick. Further more it seems to me that most of them are more aimed at the left wing than the right wing. Or the ones aimed at the right wing are just extremist and thus you wouldn't pick them.

Apparently I am getting on for ghandy in the bottom left yet I am well known for being a strong torry and would have expected my self to be close to thatcher.

I would take this test with a pinch of salt.
 
Tefal said:
No it's not more likely or it would have happened.

basically you're saying billions of people must change their entire outlook on life for it to work. in other words it can't work

Nothing that requires everyone to work can work.

Also you must require a substantial drop in quality of life for the planet to become self sufficient.

How wil lyou deal with black marketeers?
Click to expand...

*cough*English Civil War*cough*Révolution française*cough*Russia 1917*cough*Tunisia*cough*Egypt*cough*Libya*cough*

Sorry, developed a terrible cough there. It has happened before, and it will happen again. Agree with Marx's teachings or not, you cannot debate the fact that an inferior system of managing affairs will inevitably be replaced by a superior one. Pretending that this is the peak of human achievement is absurd.

People do change their minds, all the time. Why all this kerfuffle in the middle east? Because all the tricks the state had played on their people, all the fear that had kept them quiet for so many years just went away. A united people with no fear is the most dangerous weapon you could imagine - an instrument for change. It's happened before and it will happen again.

We all must become less materialistic, but that's a given. Please, please read The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, it explains this far better than i ever could.

It doesn't 'require everyone to work' because that implies that you're stuck with the stigma of 'work'. People don't spend their lives doing nothing, they have interests, stuff to keep themselves occupied. If people can do what they want to do and not have to worry about money then the underlying unhappiness with life just disappears.
 
Tefal said:
out of curiosity, how will you impose left wing economics without authoritarian laws?



Ie what will you do when businesses and rich people leave the country when you try to take too much from them?
Click to expand...

Well with all these things the phrase authoritarian always relates towards the attitudes of government towards the populous (demos or the people who vote in society for other phrases). So in effect the idea is that the economic policy is designed to help most of the people instead of on the few advantaged people in good places (but not the mental no economy nonsense spouted from marx and others).

The real point is to define the role of the state to ensure that everyone gets the best opportunity to anything in life, instead of everyone just being given fairly equal opportunity (but those with more money inherently given a bit of a leg up). In economic terms its accepting that realistically we shouldn't (and in theory dont need to) rely on "the rich" to ensure our economy works.
 
8igdave said:
This is a rediculas test. a lot of the questions force you to go down paths you may not wish to pick. Further more it seems to me that most of them are more aimed at the left wing than the right wing. Or the ones aimed at the right wing are just extremist and thus you wouldn't pick them.

Apparently I am getting on for ghandy in the bottom left yet I am well known for being a strong torry and would have expected my self to be close to thatcher.

I would take this test with a pinch of salt.
Click to expand...

Agree with this. Same; I'm closer to Thatcher but came out bottom left.
 
I would love to know what people had to put to actually get even close to the right hand side tbh. Seems that when ever I speak about politics some socialist comes up screaming at me for how I am an evil person who wants the rest of the world to be poor.
 
Superewza said:
*cough*English Civil War*cough*Révolution française*cough*Russia 1917*cough*Tunisia*cough*Egypt*cough*Libya*cough*
Click to expand...


isolated incidents that each consisted of a tiny percentage of the planets population seperated by years?

Lets see shall we,

England is still capitalist,

France definitely capitalist (and quite protectionist),

Russia nope still capitalist (if still suffering from it's brief period of socialism),

Egypt, who knows how it'll end but I'm gonna guess they'll stay capitalist.


Libya, again hell with that place i'm not even sure if they win there won't just be a scorched earth policy put in place, let alone turn to socialism.

Sorry i don't quite see how any of these say that the whole world of 6 billion people, russia even today only being <2.5% of that shows world wide change to socialism and the shedding of money.






Sorry, developed a terrible cough there. It has happened before, and it will happen again.
Click to expand...

No a a world wide unified political revolution has never happened, heck most fo the time the socialist countries couldn't even agree.

Agree with Marx's teachings or not, you cannot debate the fact that an inferior system of managing affairs will inevitably be replaced by a superior one. Pretending that this is the peak of human achievement is absurd.
Click to expand...


Never said it was, i say the the sytem will slowly change and get better as it goes (aside from the odd stumble) so far socialism has never succeded, humans have always shown that unless we fundamentally change our basic nature it never will.

Atm capitalism wins and has done throughout history.

You're saying we will revert to a much more primitive and less flexible system which does not make sense.
People do change their minds, all the time. Why all this kerfuffle in the middle east? Because all the tricks the state had played on their people, all the fear that had kept them quiet for so many years just went away. A united people with no fear is the most dangerous weapon you could imagine - an instrument for change. It's happened before and it will happen again.
Click to expand...


You're right people always do change their mind, but the chances of 6 billion (and fast approaching 7 billion) of them all changing them to the same thing is about as likely as god coming down to earth and telling everyone he exists and that his name is bob.

We all must become less materialistic, but that's a given. Please, please read The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists, it explains this far better than i ever could.
Click to expand...

Good luck with that one.

How are you going to fight the materialistic people who retain all the nice high end weaponry?

It doesn't 'require everyone to work' because that implies that you're stuck with the stigma of 'work'. People don't spend their lives doing nothing, they have interests, stuff to keep themselves occupied.
Click to expand...

We can't feed everyone that requires work, massive amounts of work.

Hobbies and interests will not produce enough.


If people can do what they want to do and not have to worry about money then the underlying unhappiness with life just disappears.
Click to expand...

typically along with the ability to put food on the table, unless it's handed to them which will very quickly produce resentment in those that have to do long hard hours producing the food, and will soon think "why the *** should i give it to those guys who give me nothing" or "i don't want to work the fields any more i quit" and then what do you do when you can't replace them all.
 
pcgraphpng.php


It is about right I guess. I just like a healthy balance between state influence and social responsibility. However I am more inclined to like business over state spending. Quite a moderate I am.
 
Tefal said:
Explain how my dislike for the wording of an old quote is hypocritical?:confused:

I don't care about the content simply the wording, it's jarring.

Or are you saying the wording of mine is jarring?:confused:
Click to expand...

I was pointing out the hypocrisy in having that signature in the first place when your main priority is to cling on to the current system.
 
Superewza said:
I was pointing out the hypocrisy in having that signature in the first place when your main priority is to cling on to the current system.
Click to expand...

a) It's not my sig

B) I don't think we should keep the current system forever, i don't think we should keep anything forver. I think everything should changer as it's needed sometimes more socialist, sometimes more capitalist, sometimes more liberal and sometimes more authoritarian and everything in between as the situation requires. Rigidity will inevitably lead to failure.

C)I'm pretty sure castiel doesn't think the current system is perfection and shouldn't be changed, but i don't want to put words in his mouth.

D) not all change is good change, the systems that fail are weeded out just like mutations in animals that are not useful, so far extreme socialism has been one of those failures, but a compromise has worked excellently. (hardly surprising the mongrel is healthier than the thoroughbreds)

E) Even if you believed the current political and economic system was perfect you could still change the world for the better, to think otherwise you would have to be very obsessed with this one small aspect of the world.
 
pingwing said:
Not to be cheaky but you understand the sdlp stands for the social democratic and labour party... So in the mainland its voting labour (but up here its also voting for the old civil rights for catholics party too)
Click to expand...

But if you actually check on the website they have Labour depicted as somewhere nearer to Thatcher!

In terms of countries it looks like Sweden are closest to my result. Wouldn't mind moving there tbh, the women are hot!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom