Cyber Soldier Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 See I'm an equalist (centrist to our US counterparts meaning I'm, in British terms, a "Liberal Socialist", (please bear in mind this is by no means the same politics as you might consider these words in the USA)) I have spoken with Flakdragon via PM and while I consider him slightly to my right I still think of him as a legitimate debating opponent, Sekiryu slightly more to the right but that is (in my personal opinion) due to lack of equalist education rather than staunch right wing indoctrination. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Just in case you guys are really interested on where you stand: http://www.politicalcompass.org/ An interesting test And I almost guarantee you would be surprised. --- Your political compass Economic Left/Right: -5.12 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.28 --- Anarchist Liberatarian. Go figure Link to post Share on other sites
Cyber Soldier Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 How interesting. http://www.politicalcompass.org/printableg...8&soc=-3.44 Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 *blinkblink* Are we related? Link to post Share on other sites
Cyber Soldier Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Oh no I wouldn't presume to be related to the almighty Though I have to say that I'm probably more militant than you but then that might be more to do with my youth, oh wise one. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Hey, Im not the Almighty I may be a minor god, but WierdoTransvestite is still the boss of me Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Blackgoat Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 OSHI- Really... I suppose that has more to do with the US perception of things, as in France, being pro-abortion, gays friendly etc. is not really considered as a political position anymore, but more as an individual philosophy thing (well, if you except the morons of extreme-right) I'd consider myself as a man of most freedoms, dedicated to the "greater good" (chorus: "The Greater Good!") and viscerally in love with true democracy that represents the entierety of it's people and is ready to listen to all of their needs. As for economic matters, I can tell that this is a test made on US (still close to Brit's though) since my position is more center-right in France. But again, we voted against the EU constitution because it was considered as too economically liberal, whereas it was regarded in the UK as being not liberal enough... (at least that's my perception of if) Well, I think I'd still better not talk about this result to the military commission that will check my case and maybe allow me to become an Army Officer... too much of a free-thinker I believe, and too close to Gandhi... Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Well I did one to what I think is the rough ideals of a convervative evangelical just so make sure the test wasnt biased...it did give an authoritarian right result, but oddly not as right wing as Thatcher. If anyone scores more to the right than Thatcher on that test, I hope that person never becomes a politician or there WILL be death camps! --- I'd consider myself as a man of most freedoms, dedicated to the "greater good" (chorus: "The Greater Good!") [...] Well, I think I'd still better not talk about this result to the military commission that will check my case and maybe allow me to become an Army Officer... Youre joining the Tau army? Ace! Thats why Id never make it in the army. I dont like orders and Im WAY too free spirited. Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Blackgoat Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Yeah, oddly enough, I'm free spirited, but I kinda like being part of a hierarchy... Maybe to answer my lack of comprehension of my place in the society otherwise. The army shrink I met told me that from my logical tests, I'm almost too intelligent (!1!OMFG!!!1), and from the psycometric test that I'm too unorganised, resting too much on my ability to react quickly to plan anything, and also that I was too much of a teamworker (hell, I got a degree in project management, so I'd better!) where they seem to look for individualistic bastards ready to have their cannon fodder wasted on order... I'll see, maybe I'll be so exotic that they will want me to join! EDIT: Tau Army... that's Warhammer 40k right? don't really get it, but it's been a while since I've known anything about W40k... Link to post Share on other sites
WeirdoTransvestite Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Hey, Im not the Almighty I may be a minor god, but WeirdoTransvestite is still the boss of me Damn right I am. Link to post Share on other sites
The XM8 Man Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Max Brooks for President!! Link to post Share on other sites
sekiryu Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 I would take the test, but seeing as how I haven't taken any economic courses, I don't know what the *fruitcage* "protectionism, "free market", "predator multinationals" are. And seeing how I can't decipher "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" into Layman's English instead of some confusing prose..... .....yeah. Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 It's the basic tenant of Communism - take from everyone according to their ability to pay and give back to everyone according to what they actually need Link to post Share on other sites
Lithium Jack Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Wow, wasn't expecting that Link to post Share on other sites
sekiryu Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 I thought the tenant of Communism was give everything to the government and starve to death...... Link to post Share on other sites
Cyber Soldier Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 It's the basic tenant of Communism - take from everyone according to their ability to pay and give back to everyone according to what they actually need I think you mean the basic tenant of Socialism, not Communism Link to post Share on other sites
sekiryu Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 What's the difference? They both get people killed Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Was just about to say that The basic tenet of Communism is that noone goes without. As Ive posted previously elsewhere, my 2 years as a paid-up member of the Communism Party showed me that ideals and actual practice are worlds apart. Link to post Share on other sites
Cyber Soldier Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 What's the difference? They both get people killed So do capitalism, facism, libralism and any other political ideal you care to mention Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Wait...dude. We are trying to reason with someone who cant be bothered to work out for himself what 'free market' economies are or what a 'predatory multinational' is...but is happy to debate what Communism is when he obviously has no grounding in even its most basic principles. Basically, he believes what he has been conditioned to, and theres no arguing with that... Link to post Share on other sites
Hedganian Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 That's true of many people. Makes for really poor debates, and really "good" wars. Link to post Share on other sites
sekiryu Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 but is happy to debate what Communism is when he obviously has no grounding in even its most basic principles. Stalin's mass murder is "no grounding" in how bad Communism is? Link to post Share on other sites
wolfstein5 Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Stalin's mass murder is "no grounding" in how bad Communism is? Well, unless I'm severely mistaken, it doesn't relate to the "principles" of Communism. Link to post Share on other sites
GuzziHero Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Stalin wasnt a Communist - he was a tyrant. Even the most hardline Communists have distanced themselves from his legacy...or should I say least hardcore, as Stalin upheld none of the principles of Communism. The only real good thing he did was The Great Purge - removing many corrupt and inept politicians during 1935-1938, a decision that served all of us well when WW2 came. Besides, how do we know your knowledge of what really happened during Stalin's presidency is any better than your skills in economic sciences? In both cases, you are relying on what you have been taught which in both cases seems to be rather limited. Not that Im saying Stalin wasnt a *beep*...he was...but you dont really know why... Youve just taken a soundbite of history and formed an opinion based on that. Thats ok, as long as you research and find out more about what really happened. Until you do...sorry, but I just dont feel you are truly qualified to debate those issues. Link to post Share on other sites
Lord Blackgoat Posted January 22, 2008 Report Share Posted January 22, 2008 Yep. If instead of explaining "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" by "it's the basis of communism" you'd have explained "it's the idea of redistributing the resources created by those that can, to help those that need in an idea of equality", he might even have agreed. Hell, even I agree it "is a fundamentally good idea", even though I hate communism for the fact that it is based on the utopia that men will actually one day be able to live in harmony without one crushing the other. Proof: Stalin and Castro really believed in the "proletarian dicatorship", but couldn't let the power go from their hands, thus rendering the "initial revolutionary dictatorship" a permanent power. The communist system having been proved impossible to implement by its very own most fervent promoters, socialism offering nothing really different, and incapable of applying its ideal where put in charge, liberalism seems to me the least less dangerous option. Liberalism promotes the production of wealth, right? So, use part of that wealth to keep the system going and the rest to help those that need it (social security, international peace-keeping and humanitarian help). That's the way the body works, the heart pumping itself enough blood to keep going, distributing the rest to all the other organs. Some might argue that a body doesn't have organs that don't serve a purpose in its functionning (eating, breathing, blood circulation, providing food, protecting the body, and reproducing) but if you had an arm or leg broken without danger of gangrena, would you cut it off on the spot because it is useless at that particular moment? Or wait until the rest of your body heals it? Well, that's only my view of the matter, but who am I to give out ideas like that? Sekiryu, I admit, I had to read the sentence twice before fully grasping the meaning of the question... it's not as if english was your mothertongue! OK, now we have really gone totally off topic... Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.