Where do you come on the political compass....

Check out the questionairre 

Here's mine from the last time we did this:

I have some problems posting pics...

I was directly on the horizontal line and far right

.Account_27

I arrived at around the same spot.

And yes, good to see people on the left.  We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought."  In order to land on the right, you either have to strip people of much of their humanity, or believe in some sort of dogmatic superstition.

[QUOTE="Account_27"].FoamingPanda

I arrived at around the same spot.

And yes, good to see people on the left.  We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought."  In order to land on the right, you either have to strip people of much of their humanity, or believe in some sort of domatic superstition.

Or believe in free enterprise and individuality ?

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

FoamingPanda

 Totally agree with that. 

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

dbowman

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Mine:

Last time I tried this, it didn't work because of all the tiny pictures, so...

How do I take this test?bacon_is_sweet

go here > http://www.politicalcompass.org/questionnaire 

[QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

bacon_is_sweet

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

dang i assumed the whole chart was a single image, im going to have to retake :P

[QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought."

FoamingPanda

Totally agree with that.

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really? Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Your political compass

To lazy to copy the picture, but I'm close to Ghandi ^^. 

[QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

FoamingPanda

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Most of this post is BS and I won't even adress it...

but I found that last statement funny...

Liberalism is not on the Left, it's on the Right. The western society has become more and more socialistic over the last 250 years, not liberalistic.....both of the idologies have their roots back in the 18th century, so I don't know why you're saying 500 years.

I've take it before, I'm somewhere along the lines of

-9.00, - 8.00 

LOL, not rigged, answered it the way i saw fit.

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

[QUOTE="Account_27"].jointed

I arrived at around the same spot.

And yes, good to see people on the left. We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." In order to land on the right, you either have to strip people of much of their humanity, or believe in some sort of domatic superstition.

Or believe in free enterprise and individuality ?

Owned.  :P

But seriously, just because someone leans right on their political stance does not mean that they are Bible-humping close minded  pundits nor are they soulless corporate thieves. There is a clear distinction between "political right", "conservatism" and "fundamentalism" is.

Owned. :P

But seriously, just because someone leans right on their political stance does not mean that they are Bible-humping close minded pundits nor are they soulless corporate thieves. There is a clear distinction between "political right", "conservatism" and "fundamentalism" is.

 

The_Ish

Traditionally Conservatism would be linked with religion. But in todays society it is not particularly relevant.  

LOL, not rigged, answered it the way i saw fit.

blooddemon666

[QUOTE="The_Ish"]

Owned. :P

But seriously, just because someone leans right on their political stance does not mean that they are Bible-humping close minded pundits nor are they soulless corporate thieves. There is a clear distinction between "political right", "conservatism" and "fundamentalism" is.

dbowman

Traditionally Conservatism would be linked with religion. But in todays society it is not particularly relevant.

[QUOTE="The_Ish"]

Owned. :P

But seriously, just because someone leans right on their political stance does not mean that they are Bible-humping close minded pundits nor are they soulless corporate thieves. There is a clear distinction between "political right", "conservatism" and "fundamentalism" is.

 

dbowman

Traditionally Conservatism would be linked with religion. But in todays society it is not particularly relevant.

[QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="The_Ish"]

Owned. :P

But seriously, just because someone leans right on their political stance does not mean that they are Bible-humping close minded pundits nor are they soulless corporate thieves. There is a clear distinction between "political right", "conservatism" and "fundamentalism" is.

 

yoshi-lnex

Traditionally Conservatism would be linked with religion. But in todays society it is not particularly relevant.

Guys, conservatism has nothing to do with religion...nothing at all. Traditionally, conservatism wwould be linked with Feudalism but it isnt anymore.

Again, no political ideology has anything to do with religion. A conservative party in a country may very well be religious but that is not why they're conservative.

I have a few beliefs that i hold really close. there are some i have yet to form a concrete opinion on.

I believe that if someone has a good enough argument, they can sway me to their side. but that's difficult because i see flaws in all of the listed political ideals. 

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

jointed

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Most of this post is BS and I won't even adress it...

but I found that last statement funny...

Liberalism is not on the Left, it's on the Right. The western society has become more and more socialistic over the last 250 years, not liberalistic.....both of the idologies have their roots back in the 18th century, so I don't know why you're saying 500 years.

Until we can find some sort way to remove the human problem of scarcity, a liberal society is the only reasonable political position a rational mind can arrive at while ensuring that humans have dignity.  Since the enlightment, Western society has followed a strange curve toward a more liberal society.  I'm not refering to Adam Smith and John Locke economic liberalism -- sorry for not making that distinction.  We've swapped the meaning of the terms over the last century, and like most people these days, I find myself wrapped up in contemporary use of terminology, =P.

Also, here is mine:

Apparantly I am close to Nelson Mandela's political stance.

Or believe in free enterprise and individuality ?

Free Enterprise? Absolutely.  As long as the individual who labors is not being exploited, manipulated, and robbed of the fruits of his labor.  Freedom to oppress others must be sacraficed for the sake of human dignity and exercise of freedom itself.  Absolute freedom is a horror beyond our comprehension (at least while resources are scarce).  Like I said, you must give up the dignity of an individual and their individual spirit, if you support free enterprise.  A person bound to factory labor and a rigid class structure is not free. 

Most people lean toward the economic left more than they realize.  We don't want to return to the days of text-tile mill labor, do we?

As I said before, liberalism is the only valid political ideology an individual can embrace if they wish to ensure the freedom, dignity, and self-worth of the individual.

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

FoamingPanda

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Most of this post is BS and I won't even adress it...

but I found that last statement funny...

Liberalism is not on the Left, it's on the Right. The western society has become more and more socialistic over the last 250 years, not liberalistic.....both of the idologies have their roots back in the 18th century, so I don't know why you're saying 500 years.

Until we can find some sort way to remove the human problem of scarcity, a liberal society is the only reasonable political position a rational mind can arrive at while ensuring that humans have dignity.  Since the enlightment, Western society has followed a strange curve toward a more liberal society.  I'm not refering to Adam Smith and John Locke economic liberalism -- sorry for not making that distinction.  We've swapped the meaning of the terms over the last century, and like most people these days, I find myself wrapped up in contemporary use of terminology, =P.

ok, sorry for my rudeness, I've had a bad day.

I don't think we can agree on this matter though, I'm far right (still rational though) and I can't see any dignity in relying on the government (refering to welfare and such matters).

You yanks may have switched the meaning of what liberalism means, but in Europe we have not. But isnt a liberal the same as a socialist?

-4.05

[spoiler] [/spoiler]

Your political compass

economic left/right: 1.63

libertarian/authoritarian: 1.59

very interesting

[QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

jointed

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Most of this post is BS and I won't even adress it...

but I found that last statement funny...

Liberalism is not on the Left, it's on the Right. The western society has become more and more socialistic over the last 250 years, not liberalistic.....both of the idologies have their roots back in the 18th century, so I don't know why you're saying 500 years.

Until we can find some sort way to remove the human problem of scarcity, a liberal society is the only reasonable political position a rational mind can arrive at while ensuring that humans have dignity.  Since the enlightment, Western society has followed a strange curve toward a more liberal society.  I'm not refering to Adam Smith and John Locke economic liberalism -- sorry for not making that distinction.  We've swapped the meaning of the terms over the last century, and like most people these days, I find myself wrapped up in contemporary use of terminology, =P.

ok, sorry for my rudeness, I've had a bad day.

I don't think we can agree on this matter though, I'm far right (still rational though) and I can't see any dignity in relying on the government (refering to welfare and such matters).

You yanks may have switched the meaning of what liberalism means, but in Europe we have not. But isnt a liberal the same as a socialist?

Economic Left/Right: 5.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.21

Yup.

Economic left/right: -4.25

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.46

[QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

353535355353535

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Most of this post is BS and I won't even adress it...

but I found that last statement funny...

Liberalism is not on the Left, it's on the Right. The western society has become more and more socialistic over the last 250 years, not liberalistic.....both of the idologies have their roots back in the 18th century, so I don't know why you're saying 500 years.

Until we can find some sort way to remove the human problem of scarcity, a liberal society is the only reasonable political position a rational mind can arrive at while ensuring that humans have dignity.  Since the enlightment, Western society has followed a strange curve toward a more liberal society.  I'm not refering to Adam Smith and John Locke economic liberalism -- sorry for not making that distinction.  We've swapped the meaning of the terms over the last century, and like most people these days, I find myself wrapped up in contemporary use of terminology, =P.

ok, sorry for my rudeness, I've had a bad day.

I don't think we can agree on this matter though, I'm far right (still rational though) and I can't see any dignity in relying on the government (refering to welfare and such matters).

You yanks may have switched the meaning of what liberalism means, but in Europe we have not. But isnt a liberal the same as a socialist?

Yea I know.

However, I don't know what a Liberal is. The word has two different meanings, an European and an American one.

[QUOTE="353535355353535"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="jointed"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"][QUOTE="bacon_is_sweet"][QUOTE="dbowman"][QUOTE="FoamingPanda"]

 We really should refer to the left as "Rational Thought." 

jointed

 Totally agree with that. 

Lol, I wouldn't but thats just me

Really?  Care to explain?

Those on the social right find that their beliefs are usually articulated by religious superstition, or are mired in functionless tradition that has no logical warrant or purpose.

If you're on the economic right, you sacrafice much of the humanity and self-worth of the individual before vested private intrests (the extent of which can greatly vary).

Those on the political right sacrafice the rights and humanity of the individual before artifical standards and hollow "patriotism."

Western society has been following a slow curve, with bumps along the way, towards more liberalism for the last 500 years. It's the natural progression of the free rational mind and human dignity.

Most of this post is BS and I won't even adress it...

but I found that last statement funny...

Liberalism is not on the Left, it's on the Right. The western society has become more and more socialistic over the last 250 years, not liberalistic.....both of the idologies have their roots back in the 18th century, so I don't know why you're saying 500 years.

Until we can find some sort way to remove the human problem of scarcity, a liberal society is the only reasonable political position a rational mind can arrive at while ensuring that humans have dignity.  Since the enlightment, Western society has followed a strange curve toward a more liberal society.  I'm not refering to Adam Smith and John Locke economic liberalism -- sorry for not making that distinction.  We've swapped the meaning of the terms over the last century, and like most people these days, I find myself wrapped up in contemporary use of terminology, =P.

ok, sorry for my rudeness, I've had a bad day.

I don't think we can agree on this matter though, I'm far right (still rational though) and I can't see any dignity in relying on the government (refering to welfare and such matters).

You yanks may have switched the meaning of what liberalism means, but in Europe we have not. But isnt a liberal the same as a socialist?

Yea I know.

However, I don't know what a Liberal is. The word has two different meanings, an European and an American one.

I don't think we can agree on this matter though, I'm far right (still rational though) and I can't see any dignity in relying on the government (refering to welfare and such matters).

Some people, for whatever reason, can not function in the artifical enviroment of the capitalistic consumer-state.  Their inadequacy does not rob them of human dignity, nor does it excuse the government -- who places a ton of equally artifical restrictions on such people -- from helping them in times of need. 

We have robbed many of these people of their right to aquire wealth by imposing laws.  As I've argued before, "moral" laws (murder, theft, etc) that ensure human dignity are necessary, but we must be ready to aid those who are disadvanted by the law.  If a factory owner is protected by laws that ensure that his employees will not slit his throat, seize company machines, and split the fruits of their efforts fairly -- society should also impose laws that prevent people from exploiting others, and be ready to assist those who are disadvanted for whatever reason.

could you state your definition, and what your perception of american liberalism is?

In SHORT,  

Euro "Classical" Liberalism -- Government, stay the hell away from the Economy, and the rights of free and good people.  (Similar to US libertarianism).  We don't need you!

American Liberalism -- Government, stay the hell away from the rights of free people, but be powerful and forceful enough to help those in need, control unequal economic intrests, and regulate the economy to a certain extent.

I don't think we can agree on this matter though, I'm far right (still rational though) and I can't see any dignity in relying on the government (refering to welfare and such matters). FoamingPanda

Some people, for whatever reason, can not function in the artifical enviroment of the capitalistic consumer-state.  Their inadequacy does not rob them of human dignity, nor does it excuse the government -- who places a ton of equally artifical restrictions on such people -- from helping them in times of need. 

We have robbed many of these people of their right to aquire wealth by imposing laws.  As I've argued before, "moral" laws (murder, theft, etc) that ensure human dignity are necessary, but we must be ready to aid those who are disadvanted by the law.  If a factory owner is protected by laws that ensure that his employees will not slit his throat, seize company machines, and split the fruits of their efforts fairly -- society should also impose laws that prevent people from exploiting others, and be ready to assist those who are disadvanted for whatever reason.

could you state your definition, and what your perception of american liberalism is?FoamingPanda

In SHORT,  

Euro "Classical" Liberalism -- Government, stay the hell away from the Economy, and the rights of free and good people.  (Similar to US libertarianism).  We don't need you!

American Liberalism -- Government, stay the hell away from the rights of free people, but be powerful and forceful enough to help those in need, control unequal economic intrests, and regulate the economy to a certain extent.

Or believe in free enterprise and individuality ?

Free Enterprise? Absolutely. As long as the individual who labors is not being exploited, manipulated, and robbed of the fruits of his labor.

FoamingPanda

Absolute freedom is a horror beyond our comprehension (at least while resources are scarce).

FoamingPanda

Like I said, you must give up the dignity of an individual and their individual spirit, if you support free enterprise.

FoamingPanda

A person bound to factory labor and a rigid class structure is not free.

FoamingPanda