What about you /b/?
No, anarcho-capitalism has optional collectivism.
Anarcho-communism and everything is mandatory collectivism, which is retarded for 1 of 2 reasons.
1. You believe anyone and everyone will happily participate to this system and freely engage in it which is akin to believing in fairies and unicorns
2. Some people will obviously not want to engage in this system in collectivism and will need to be systematically coerced into doing so, which of course isn't anarchism.
I stumble slightly left or right of center every time I take this, but I'm always pretty far south.
pretty similar op
What does this say about me?
What the fuck am I? I've never been into communism and that shit. I see myself more as a fascist and a national socialist than this?
Well tbh I'm a little surprised.
Pretty close, eh?
Motherfucking ghandi, that who i am
Nope, I'm Ghandi.
I'm literally closer to his score than you. And by "Ghandis score" I mean "how some people think he would score" because he never took this test.
And by "some people" I mean "probably one person that agreed with the guy that made this chart"
Not a yank. Politics are only aids here. Not super aids.
Don't die on me, you bastard. I'm still testing.
I should really get a better understanding of politics, but its so confusing
How big a faggot am i b?
I don't think it's that bad. I feel like the sex and abortion questions pushed me to the left.
If you are red or green you need to kill yourself immediately.
I'm from the UK. I'd describe myself as a Powellite High Tory, but voted UKIP at the last election.
I think that Thatcher's education policy was destructive to the community and to the health of the nation in the long term, and that some of her economic policy was dubious over the long term.
Post your reading material when it comes to politics, /b/.
"We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice and insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity do ordain and establish this constitution, for the United States of America."
>inb4 google search
Real patriots remember what they hold dear.
4 social authoritarian/economic left (red)
2 social authoritarian/economic right (blue)
22 social libertarian/economic left (green)
8 social libertarian/economic right (purple)
So /b/ is composed of commie anarchists
What am I if I believe in a lot of socialist/demsocialist shit like free health care, cheaper education, gay/female/trans rights, but think a perfect society would be whites only? I don't think we should kill all non-whites or anything, but what would I be classified under if I want a progressive and radically leftist society but only for the whites?
I'm pissed that I didn't rate higher on the libertarian scale :(
You might have stumbled on a way to actually make socialism work (for once): Enslave all non-slaves, and make them provide all the free stuff for the white master class.
> the only way to fix socialism is to be a racist fuck
The political compass uses Left and Right as economic terms, not social ones. If you believe in freedom or liberal crap in general, you end up in the bottom half (not the left half). Left really means state control of all the economy, in this quiz.
>Enslave all non-whites
Nah man they're still human beings. In an ideal world they just wouldn't be in America in the first place, they'd have their own countries that are free to flourish and grow without having to dilute their culture to appeal to white people. It's not even necessarily an issue of equality so much as it is one of cultural homogeneity
I'm not in the UK, but apparently there's nobody I should vote for according to this even if I was.
Liberal these days means more laws, bleh. I believe in less laws, everyone doing what they want and minding your own business. Just don't infringe on others' rights, safety, and freedoms.
"Govt should be small."
I don't see how any reasonable person could disagree, given how obscenely byzantine and intrusive government has become. But we seem to be in the minority today. The vast majority (left or right) seem to treat government as a form of religion, and have this blind faith that it will solve all their problems.
Was in the middle middle two years ago, now I'm slowly moving away.
It's not even an equality thing for me. I don't think someone is inherently worse than me because of their race, that's ridiculous. But I think, as well-intentioned as multiculturalism is, it's been largely a failure. I think we'd (and by we I mean ALL people, not just whites) be a lot better off if we stuck to our own cultures, and I hope all of our independent societies would do well and succeed
I think in that world though, the different groups would always be warring with each other. You'd have to pick one. Based on history and who built what kind of societies, Id go with the whites.
Cause I do want a progressive society with gender/gay rights and such, but lets be real, the Arabs won't do that, or the blacks, or the Asians. So I pick whites.
> I don't think someone is inherently worse than me because of their race
It would be foolish to not account for genetic differences though, look at sickle-cell, propensity for certain cancers etc. There may be differences which effect us at a minuscule manner. Separation of races into in-group v. out-group is natural and respectful to other groups
exactly. I hate government so much for the most part because it is predicated on the fact that the govt knows what to do (especially with with your money) more than you do. Then politicians go and usually make a misguided choice. But the kicker is those people you mentioned that believe that the govt will make it all better. It drives me crazy. Ask these people what the govt has improved recently. And if they can, ask them why a govt body had to take care of it.
I think multiculturalism is a failure, but I don't think it was a racial issue.
Irish and Chinese immigrants in the U.S.? Worked quite well, because they became part of the dominant culture. And changed it a bit, but that's fine too. Cultures evolve.
But without that melting pot, it doesn't work, because democracies really only function when there is at least a loose general consensus, not when there are 50 different groups with radically different desires.
What's led to the fragmentation isn't skin color, but the failure to bring the new immigrants into the fold, combined with identity politics that disdains any overall shared beliefs.
Why the fuck would you do that? That just tells me you don't have strong convictions, man. I fucking hate Hillary but Trump is a catastrophe who stands for everything I despise.
At least Hillary was forced to adopt some of Sander's diet-socdem platform after she and the goon squad shafted him
then you don't want a progressive society
I'm not trying to be condescending when I say this bud, but read a lot more history and anthropology please. Colonialism is a hell of a drug
don't think i'm stupid enough not to see his platform is almost entirely against my own - i looked at things long-term, if hillary had won despite her rigging the primaries (not even mentioning her email server, etc) it would have set a really bad precedent for future elections. i despise trump but at least he's proof that democracy still works if a bunch of redpilled city kids and redneck farmers can elect a conman by their own volition
It's kinda funny that this is around the same place politically as every other vegan I've met.
That's a fair point. I'm still gonna dedicate a lot of my time to working against him.
Bottom line is we need a much better educated population. Honestly if everyone had just baseline decent critical thinking skills we'd be much better off
i can tell that you are an autistic manchild with the pasty basement-induced complexion of vaginal discharge because you actually used the term "sjw"
I can almost smell your whitey-tightey skidmark from here. wash that maga hat before it gets too sweaty boyo
That's a surprisingly rational argument from a sjw
> makes no attempt to form a cogent argument, but at least it uses several different words so it's not just an unmoduled autistic screech
I'm in university rn sitting next to my gf, stfu with your "analysis". Fuck multiculturalism, fuck marxism, and fuck the "tolerant" left. You guys will be defeated and you'll crawl back under a rock. Or in your mother's basement lol
Gays should be sent to a mental clinic along with transgenders, muslims should be sent back to the middle east, niggers to africa. What now commie?
i'm with you on fighting against him, it won't be easy but hopefully 2020 will make things right - i didn't say i ever actually support trump, but during the election there was no winner in my eyes, i simply chose to stick to my morals and not bend over backwards to elect a candidate who personally cheated my preferred candidate out of a nomination (also wikileaks stuff against her was convincing)
a good argument? anything i'd say is subjective - for me, his views and the GOP's don't align with my own, that's all there is to it - i also find it ironic his mantra revolves around appealing to the poor/middle class as a savior against the establishment & rich lobbyists in washington yet he is one of them
Left down essentially indicates you're a moron who just answers based on 'feel good' bullshit and wants the world to work on fairy power and good will. Essentially, it makes you a retard.
Also, it doesn't even exist. To be left wing you MUST, necessarily, be authoritarian, at least a bit. Why? Because in order to redistribute wealth and control factors of production (main left wing ideas) you have to have control of the population. How are you going to redistribute wealth, if not with the threat of imprisonment? Just ask the rich nicely to give up some of their stuff?
Basically, anyone who gets left and down is a fucking retard. It's the retard category, well done OP.
Tbh mate, go take an intro to economics course, then you'll start to understand capitalism, and probably hate it less.
Capitalism is like democracy in that it isn't necessarily the best, but it sure is the least-worst. Look around you at all of the things that are made possible by capitalism, none of this shit happened under communism. I know its easy to complain about the world and stuff, but honestly shit is pretty good for the vast vast majority of the world, and it is only getting better and better thanks to free markets and trade.
How do I get past the first bias question; "If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations." why isn't there a do it yourself option and get the fuck away from globalism?
Exactly, their mentality is basically "I'm breathing, give me free shit". Fucking retards. Obviously they wouldn't say the same if they had actually accomplished anything in their life and owned stuff. I hate those lazy childish leftists.
I'm sure anyone located on the furthest left side is fine with a fully mobilized nation to overthrown the current society and bourgeoise in order to seize then mean of production, private property, and redistribute wealth. Most people who aren't there don't want any major changes.
"A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system." would a one party be better than a show poney 2 choice, chosen by stupid people show... yeah probably... what about a no party system!!!!!
Protectionism is when the government interferes with trade in order to defend something, like raising tariffs to raise the cost of cheap imports thereby allowing higher priced domestic products to compete.
I beg you pardon fellow faggot? Are you meaning to say we have identical political views?
I mean you can still be a Tyrannical government if people all have equal rights and no property. Here's looking at you Russia.
I change all the time, cause the questions mean different things to me... they are not clear and can be interpenetrated in a number of ways... AnCap 4 Life!
Not the guy.
but I do.
The thing is what is "worth"? How do we define it? Only by money then we lose lots of things which makes this world great place.
For example Stephen Hawking. How much money taxpayers spent on him?
Is he worth that expense?
I have a hard time with a lot of the questions because they're based on assumptions I don't agree with. Can't really pick a side if you think the question misses the whole point. And that doesn't make me moderate, because I reject the neutral point of view as much as the two extremes.
Somewhere around here. I'm a Civic Nationalist.
Its called a political Horseshoe my friend. The polar opposites both run fairly similar in the long run. Traditional fascism and communism might as well be the same.
Yeah that proves my point. NatSoc is maximum authoritarianism and dead center in terms of right and left wing. You were slightly left of center. Kill yourself cultural Marxist scum.
Was hoping to be a Alt-right fascist.
maybe because i've got bored on the third question.
And Based Stickman did nothing wrong.
Hmmm, used to qualify as a Libertarian. Now, I'm slightly Authoritarian.
Sounds about right.
B-but I voted for Trump and am registered as Republican. I don't understand.
>B-but I voted for Trump and am registered as Republican
Many people vote against self interest. And that's the people who take time to vote at all.
>I don't understand.
Your values map onto those of Bernie Sanders. Like most Trump cucks, you probably made fun of Bernie people not realizing he represented you and Trump is almost the complete opposite of everything you stand for.
The future belongs to us, the national socialists
ooo, I did a Filteries thing once.
I disagree with some of the wording these questions have.
>People are ultimately more divided by class than by nationality.
Is it asking whether class is more or less of a divider than nationality? Or does it make sense to say you strongly disagree if you feel it's another factor besides class or nationality?
I think that's leading to the results being a little misrepresentative of the people taking it.
I still feel misled by how some of the questions were worded, but ultimately, this was the result.
Makes sense I'd be right in the middle, I've had people tell me that all the time when we talk politics. Plus it's very difficult for me to get angry, so I tend to be the mediator that listens to all sides and comes up with a good solution.
Oh goddammit, there was another one lower down that's my actual mark.