Political compass thread
Pic related- my result. Am I cancer?
It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me.
I'm actually okay with weed being legal. Even if you don't buy the stoner autism it's no less healthy than tobacco, and legalization would kill off 90% of the libertarian movement in the US.
Smoking is still degenerate.
Degenerate is a meaningless fucking term.
If they're the sort of people who would rather throw out the entire system and start over than work from within cooperating with different points of view in order to forge a more ideal world for everyone, yeah.
Dyscivic. Dysgenic. Prone to inducing or perpetuating moral decay.
>inb4 morals don't real maaaan
Then how do you define what is ideal?
Some morals are clear cut and exist because basically everyone agrees that they're good ideas. Don't lie, don't cheat, don't steal, don't kill each other, but not everything is so black and white and that's why we have these debates.
The problem is not morality itself. Not for me anyway. The problem is that everyone holds different sets of values which makes arguing from a moral standpoint tricky at best and effectively useless at worst. It really is feels over reals. If you want to make an actual change in the world without clawing at people's emotions, you have to appeal to practicality.
I'm all for practicality, but I don't know if you should be. A practical approach to statecraft moves you more and more toward the center-top.
You're not actually a communist unless you identify as a communist and start advocating for actual communism, regardless of what the test tells you.
Same with being a fascist or ancap or what have you.
Nah, anything that close to the origin isn't too bad.
I'm a fascist, though.
Half of the questions don't even make any sense in the context of fascism since it's geared toward liberalism. Spekr is the same way, it's all about anarchist doctrinal points that don't actually matter.
They do when they're coated in pinko tears.
I think you guys are taking these way too seriously.
None of this actually matters unless you're a politician or a political activist.
I'm a political activist and it literally doesn't matter.
Sure there's some debate on the values we promote, but the compass is just a launching point for discussion basically.
You fucking dirtbags.
Love your country not your government
Fuck you. If you're maintaining that 90% of libertarians only identify themselves as such because of marijuana prohibition, you're too much of a dumbass to reference fallacies.
It would kill the movement.
Most "libertarians" don't give a fuck about Rand Paul's or Gary Johnson's policy prescriptions, they care about muh herbal Jew. Of course genuine libertarians would still remain but they'd be as much of a nonentity as Greens and shit.
The underlying assumptions of the questions and the policies that they give you a choice between.
I don't blame them, 90% of the people they get traffic from will be somewhere in the progressive-cuckservative milieu, but it's still there.
Normally I'm much further right; cucks must be getting to me.
left libertarian is chaotic good, right authoritarian is lawful evil
but who is lawful good and chaotic evil?
I have had involvement in the organized party, and I can tell you that the majority of those people do not toke, and are often more concerned with principles than "muh" anything.
Rand hasn't made decriminalization part of his campaigns, so I don't know why you think his fans are focused on that issue. Opposition to the war on drugs is a very small part of the libertarian platform.
more comrades than I thought
Thought I'd sit in the middle. I'm also pretty sure I'm closer to an Authoritarian. Not sure if there's really a decent example of anyone sitting around this point.
Most Libertarians are more interested in ending the pointless and costly drug war than getting high.
The very first question.
>If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.
But it's not, and both options are shit. Sure, I hate the latter and am apathetic toward the former, but the future vision of a fascist is fundamentally different than that of a liberal. Globalization is a thing to be opposed at all costs, not judged based on who it serves.
In the third spread of questions
>First-generation immigrants can never be fully integrated within their new country.
No, and neither can their children if they're not of similar ethnic stock.
In every section you can find shit that doesn't really matter (most of section two) or doesn't make any sense contextually.
And, therefore, legalizing the herbal jew. Regardless of their reasoning, it's a core plank of the American libertarian platform.
Libertarianism in general is people trying to get a nice white country while not consciously understanding that that's what they want.
>State intervention is inherently bad because the current government uses state power to harm my interests!
Just get your foot in the boot.
Fair enough. Here's another from section three.
>No broadcasting institution, however independent its content, should receive public funding.
Why should it be independent? News has an inherent bias, even down to the way the newscaster reads it. If anything the state should be using its resources to fund propaganda efforts that strengthen the nation, not financing (((independent))) news.
>the herbal jew. Regardless of their reasoning, it's a core plank of the American libertarian platform.
Perhaps it is perceived to be more so than it really is since it was used as a marketing/fundraising tactic by Johnson in 2012.
>News has an inherent bias
Bias against what? All news? Are you suggesting that bias is a foundation of the very concept OF news?
>even down to the way the newscaster reads it
That would fall on the shoulders of the newscaster themselves.
Frankly, Anon, if you're so certain about your own beliefs, than whatever the test results say shouldn't bother you. They're unimportant.
>Abortion, when the woman's life is not threatened, should always be illegal.
This is a bad question because eugenics. If your child has brittle bones or the downs or what have you, it should be mandatory to abort. Similarly, I support abortion in the current situation because most aborted babies are black. It functions as a partial check on their (r-selected) population.
The fact that I consider abortion to be disgusting on a personal level doesn't really enter into it.
>if you're so certain about your own beliefs, than whatever the test results say shouldn't bother you. They're unimportant.
Sure, I agree with that. I'm just criticizing the test because it makes for an interesting topic in these threads.
The "compass" doesn't cover the most important things correctly. I shall prove it.
Authoritarian or Libertarian?
1. Taxing stuff that comes from other countries if they tax our stuff
2. Allowing methamphetamine to be sold in schools to highschoolers
3. Banning Islam
4. Making it illegal to burn the US flag
As you can see, the terms are inadequate for a political theory.
As such, libertarians are amusing only for a moment, but are the flyweights of political discourse.
>I support abortion in the current situation because most aborted babies are black
Goddamn, you people really are as fucking crazy as they make you out to be.
I know it's an unpleasant and inhumane thing to say, but given a choice between an increasing black population (and, therefore, more of the things that blacks cause) and a steady one, I'll choose the latter.
In a perfect world it wouldn't even enter into my thought process.
I get his point though. It's a shitty choice to have to make and neither option is really very palatable.
But seriously. Crime, gang violence (tribal warfare, really), urban decay, strain on public services, blah blah blah. You know the drill.
I've lived in a poor white town and in a not-so-nice area of a major city. The former was far nicer.
I have some news that may be shocking to you, anon...
The Sturmabteilung was created to combat communist violence against German citizens.
I guess it's something.
If you're not purple, you're a statist.
statists out ree
I may not like the reds, but we need to purge you faggots first.
Do you faggots even leftism?
Starting to think liberalism is just a way of robbing people of political agency regardless of their position. It says I'm a left-libertarian but I don't see how anything is going to work out if a bunch of globalists run the world. They can't even do it right, anyway, the whole result of this is white males become radicalized because the casual bigotry against them in leftist-held areas is very real and something I and local friends have experienced first hand repeatedly. I don't think the left is liberal anymore, I think they are quickly becoming more authoritarian and the endgame is we end up like China with the families who run the Democratic party in the exact same arrangement the families who run China are in.
I've always wondered how left-wing libertarianism works.
>we want you to take the dildo but it's okay if you don't because NAP
Or is it more
>this trash can represents the state
At least it's funny. The chart is flawed, however.
But do you offer affirmative support for white people? Without such protections you are, yes, a Communist, which is worse than being a Nazi.
I'll get into a pansexual orgy with you anytime, comrade.
Well, in short, Authoritarian Commies believe that you can achieve true communism via the state controlling everything FOR the workers, which Anacrho-Commies such as myself find to be utter bullshit. Anarcho-Communists believe in no state, and a commune system, run by the workers.
Read the bread book.
the test was made with very vague answers on purpose, so the answers you give are truly indicative of not just one singular event, but how you would answer to many similar events and how you think in general. also, i'm >>721712972
and as you can see, im barely fucking libertarian. i only fall that way because of my stance on the economy, considering im studying finance id like more financial liberty. is it so hard to ask?
Been moving towards center as I keep taking these, mostly due to any possible loopholes in how these questions are worded.
you're saying it's a genetic thing and therefore your racism is justified
you're acting toward them in a racist way because of your beliefs, the proof of which may be fictitious