Given that in their FAQ they give a bunch of the usual rationalizations for how Fascism is actually right-wing, I'd say it was created by left-wing academics.
Take the political compass test.
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
Given that in their FAQ they give a bunch of the usual rationalizations for how Fascism is actually right-wing, I'd say it was created by left-wing academics.
Nonsense, that's pure conjecture. It is quite clear from the actions of the Labour and the Conservative parties that they are authoritarian due to their war on drugs and mass surveillance and other eroding of civil liberties in the name of anti-terrorism. They have been labelled as authoritarian quite correctly.
Given that in their FAQ they give a bunch of the usual rationalizations for how Fascism is actually right-wing, I'd say it was created by left-wing academics.
Except they plot fascist parties like the Nazis as centre and Stalin as left...
Seems like you have some personal vendetta against the political compass creators.
Last edited:
they are loaded, but so are manifestos. The faq even tells you this.
and yes a lot of them can be and are in the faq and other places on the sites.they are ploted by the manifestos and are updated when elections are called.
and wtf no, it turns out that most people aren't into the policies of the main parties, but vote for them for one reason or another.
Not really, on the grounds that US political parties are not the arbitrators of Right or Left Wing. A number of things correlate with particular parties in the USA (and this correlation is exaggerated by the fact that they are effectively a two-party system) but that correlation doesn't make it part of the political theory. In particular, I'm looking at religion.
I hate some of these questions. For example:
I agree with that statement. A single party system does have that benefit, however a single party system would be horrendous in practice, so I strongly disagree with them on principle.
Either way, my result is pretty much what I expected and got last time IIRC. I'm Ghandi apparently. Where's my nukes?
Maybe the actual point of the question is trying to find out if you can still see the positives in a negative and if you are willing to accept that there are good things in ideas you disagree with.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
Am I the only right wing GDer so far ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 3 Aug 2008
- Posts
- 10,477
- Location
- Bath, England
Last time I took this I was a bit more centre and a bit more libertarian. I don't think I am any less liberal (that is probably picking a couple of agrees over stronglies or something) but it is true that I am probably a touch more left leaning.
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
And do you think that's a right or left wing ideal?
If he considers himself right wing then one would assume the answer to that question would be right wing.
The UK's benefits system is somewhat the antithesis of this. Individuals who choose to be unemployed and have kids are rewarded with statutory maternity pay while the minimum wage earner pays 32% income tax to fund it whilst struggling to afford rent.
It's a bigger question than just Worker vs Shirker.
I know I work a lot less hard than people who earn less than half what I do. Why am I so relatively well rewarded?
Soldato
- Joined
- 15 Feb 2012
- Posts
- 3,308
- Location
- 2
See my first post.
Oh yeah, nice one. I was expecting more though, tbh. Surely our Daily Mail nutters would be top right quadrant ?
Deleted member 66701
Deleted member 66701
If you're unemployed you don't get stat mat/pat pay.
I'd consider "reward for hard work" to be a left wing ideal as well - after all, "A fair day's wage for a fair day's work" is a leading tenet of nearly all socialist parties, trade unions and other worker collectives.
That's because you are fairly rewarded for the work you do.
If hard work was rewarded the most, care workers, brickies and Amazon packers would be the ones driving around in Rolls Royces
Last edited by a moderator:
