Your Political Ideology: Redux

[Ringrose]

Here's what it says.

[Vilageidiotx]

Also I guess I'm objectively superior to everyone else, politically.

@j8cob

[j8cob]

@Vilageidiotx Hey man, centrism is where the fun begins. I get to make fun of everyone else, for example.

[Mardox]

https://www.politicalcompass.org/yourpoliticalcompass?ec=0.63&soc=2.97
Though I personally believe that the political compass test isn't the best as it only has two axises.
Edit 1: So I'll be adding the results of other tests. Here's the first other test I took:
gotoquiz.com/what_is_your_political_id..

The Result

This quiz has defined you as a Fascist. You believe in the centralisation of the state in order to take a more militaristic approach to society. You believe authority is the core value of any society and that intellectualism and freedom of debate does more harm than good. Social solidarity is a key element of your ideology. You may or may not be supportive of capitalism, religion, or extreme nationalism, depending on the type of fascism you identify with

Edit 2: The 5 Dimensional Compass which I prefer to the standard 2D Compass.
http://www.abtirsi.com/quiz2.php

The Result

You are a: Left-Leaning Totalitarian Non-Interventionist Traditionalist
Collectivism score: 17%
Authoritarianism score: 100%
Internationalism score: -17%
Tribalism score: 0%
Liberalism score: -17%

Explanation key:

Collectivism refers economic intervention, whether the society or state should intervene in the economy to redistribute wealth from the more to the less successful. The negative percentages indicate opposition to such intervention.

Authoritarianism refers to state power to control the actions of individuals to prevent them from harming others or themselves, and also to establish the will of the majority over society. Negative percentages indicate opposition to state power.

Internationalism refers to political involvement in other nations or global affairs, either via war, treaty or international organizations. Negative percentages indicate isolationist beliefs, and the belief in national sovereignty.

Tribalism refers to identity or nationalism, favoring your own nation over foreigners. Negative percentages indicate opposition to national or ethnic identity and oriented towards pan-humanism.

Liberalism refers to acceptance of historically illegal or immoral social practices or customs. Negative percentages indicate opposition to such acceptance.

[Vilageidiotx]

gotoquiz.com/what_is_your_political_id..

@Mardox

I started on that one and then got to this answer for the tax question...

Raise tax levels to the 100% range and redistribute property even among the citizens

wot.

Realizing it amounts to a joke test, I decided to shoot for the high score.

Also

In your opinion, war is....

The only way

holy shit. that's fucking awesome.

Anyway, I tried be darnedest but only got an A- (93) Communism score. I suspect deciding that "War is the only way" might have hurt me there. If somebody can out-communism me in this test, they'll be crowned Chairman of the Thread and the people will sing of their exploits until the end of time. Maybe @Keyguyperson can knock this mutha out of the park?

[Mardox]

<Snipped quote by Mardox>

I started on that one and then got to this answer for the tax question...

<Snipped quote>

wot.

Realizing it amounts to a joke test, I decided to shoot for the high score.

Also

<Snipped quote>

<Snipped quote>

holy shit. that's fucking awesome.

Anyway, I tried be darnedest but only got an A- (93) Communism score. I suspect deciding that "War is the only way" might have hurt me there. If somebody can out-communism me in this test, they'll be crowned Chairman of the Thread and the people will sing of their exploits until the end of time. Maybe @Keyguyperson can knock this mutha out of the park?

@Vilageidiotx

It is a pretty silly test, though I got a 92 for Fascism.

[Keyguyperson]

<Snipped quote by Mardox>

I started on that one and then got to this answer for the tax question...

<Snipped quote>

wot.

Realizing it amounts to a joke test, I decided to shoot for the high score.

Also

<Snipped quote>

<Snipped quote>

holy shit. that's fucking awesome.

Anyway, I tried be darnedest but only got an A- (93) Communism score. I suspect deciding that "War is the only way" might have hurt me there. If somebody can out-communism me in this test, they'll be crowned Chairman of the Thread and the people will sing of their exploits until the end of time. Maybe @Keyguyperson can knock this mutha out of the park?

@Vilageidiotx

94 for communism. I will literally make Stalin look like a fucking anarchist.

[Mardox]

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

94 for communism. I will literally make Stalin look like a fucking anarchist.

@Keyguyperson

Fight me, you dirty commies.

[Vilageidiotx]

<Snipped quote by Keyguyperson>

Fight me, you dirty commies.

@Mardox

Last time the Fascists said that to the Commies, it ended in a bunker in Berlin.

[Keyguyperson]

<Snipped quote by Keyguyperson>

Fight me, you dirty commies.

@Mardox

>It's another "fascists forgot they lost" episode
Kek.

[Mardox]

<Snipped quote by Mardox>

Last time the Fascists said that to the Commies, it ended in a bunker in Berlin.

@Vilageidiotx

You had the democratic countries on your side to screw with our equipment and Hitler was a terrible military leader.

<Snipped quote by Mardox>

>It's another "fascists forgot they lost" episode
Kek.

@Keyguyperson

You misunderstand. I haven't forgotten the outcome of last time, I'm asking for Round Two.

In all seriousness though, I'd be happy to have a calm and reasonable debate with you guys.

[Keyguyperson]

In all seriousness though, I'd be happy to have a calm and reasonable debate with you guys.

@Mardox

I honestly don't think its possible to have a calm and reasonable debate between fascists and communists. I'd be willing to try though, since if I can argue IN DEFENSE OF anarcho-capitalism (which pretty much everyone but anarcho-capitalists and minarchists hate) I can probably refrain from spilling my spaghetti about gulags and walls and firing squads.

_{Also I'm totally up for fascists vs. commies round 2. Give us til 2070 to prepare, ok?}

[Mardox]

<Snipped quote by Mardox>

I honestly don't think its possible to have a calm and reasonable debate between fascists and communists. I'd be willing to try though, since if I can argue IN DEFENSE OF anarcho-capitalism (which pretty much everyone but anarcho-capitalists and minarchists hate) I can probably refrain from spilling my spaghetti about gulags and walls and firing squads.

@Keyguyperson

You don't believe it's possible to have a calm and reasonable debate?

Where should we start?

[Vilageidiotx]

<Snipped quote by Mardox>

I honestly don't think its possible to have a calm and reasonable debate between fascists and communists. I'd be willing to try though, since if I can argue IN DEFENSE OF anarcho-capitalism (which pretty much everyone but anarcho-capitalists and minarchists hate) I can probably refrain from spilling my spaghetti about gulags and walls and firing squads.

_{Also I'm totally up for fascists vs. commies round 2. Give us til 2070 to prepare, ok?}

@Keyguyperson

I can totally have a reasonable debate, because to me we are all peasants so it's pretty fucking irrelevant what we have to say.

I've never been too offended by self-declared fascists because A: At least they aren't playing games, they are telling you right there, and B: They always kinda come off like Scrappy Doo, just waving fists and yelling and trying to sound bad-ass, but just sorta looking silly. It's more enduring than infuriating.

The only group that usually annoys me is An-Caps, and only because they are always so fucking nasty for some reason. When it comes to internet debates Fascists make dumb jokes, An-Caps threaten your family with a knife.

[Keyguyperson]

The only group that usually annoys me is An-Caps, and only because they are always so fucking nasty for some reason. When it comes to internet debates Fascists make dumb jokes, An-Caps threaten your family with a knife.

@Vilageidiotx

My main problem with ancaps is that they act even more haughty than fascists. Like, fascists might often consider themselves to be a genetically superior example of the human species upon which all life must be based, but ancaps are condescending as fuck. More condescending than I can be, which is impressive. Probably because they tend to either be REALLY stereotypical neckbeards or rich kids who are overly successful in life, both of which are possibly the most condescending demographics.

[Mardox]

<Snipped quote by Keyguyperson>

I can totally have a reasonable debate, because to me we are all peasants so it's pretty fucking irrelevant what we have to say.

I've never been too offended by self-declared fascists because A: At least they aren't playing games, they are telling you right there, and B: They always kinda come off like Scrappy Doo, just waving fists and yelling and trying to sound bad-ass, but just sorta looking silly. It's more enduring than infuriating.

The only group that usually annoys me is An-Caps, and only because they are always so fucking nasty for some reason. When it comes to internet debates Fascists make dumb jokes, An-Caps threaten your family with a knife.

@Vilageidiotx

I find the peasant mentality to be rather limiting. Yes, we lack power now but why not have ambition?

I'm not sure what kind of Fascists you've come across before so let's start by actually defining the ideology I subscribe to. Here's a quick video that outlines the basics of what I believe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICPKcng9_SU

I've never had that experience with An-Caps, possibly because the only one I've met was IRL and he didn't have internet anonymity to threaten my family with a knife without my reporting him to law enforcement.

[Mardox]

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

My main problem with ancaps is that they act even more haughty than fascists. Like, fascists might often consider themselves to be a genetically superior example of the human species upon which all life must be based, but ancaps are condescending as fuck. More condescending than I can be, which is impressive. Probably because they tend to either be REALLY stereotypical neckbeards or rich kids who are overly successful in life, both of which are possibly the most condescending demographics.

@Keyguyperson

Genetically superior example of the human species upon which all life must be based? Oh wait, I just saw the qualifying "often", nevermind.

[Vilageidiotx]

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

I find the peasant mentality to be rather limiting. Yes, we lack power now but why not have ambition?

I'm not sure what kind of Fascists you've come across before so let's start by actually defining the ideology I subscribe to. Here's a quick video that outlines the basics of what I believe: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ICPKcng9_SU

I've never had that experience with An-Caps, possibly because the only one I've met was IRL and he didn't have internet anonymity to threaten my family with a knife without my reporting him to law enforcement.

@Mardox

Okay, just a quick point about how I operate: I don't do videos. It just annoys me, because people will throw videos instead of explaining themselves like I am supposed to debunk an entire field single handedly while they just toss links at me. We gonna debate it gotta be analog.

I will say too that I realize fascism isn't just Jew-killing. My understanding is it's a centralizing of power, the power's legitimacy based on nationalism, with a system of enforced centralization in the specific fields of society to cull negative foreign influences and stabilize things that are left hanging in liberal societies?

I think the problem with any system of power centralization is that everyone imagines it going to people who embody everything perfect about their ideology, where only those who deserve power enter power. But history shows us that you get a Carlos II or a Nero for every Trajan or Charlemagne, and that most monarchs are the so-so type, the ones you forget because they were neither good at their job nor bad, they were just there. I think this was the real problem with European fascism, it was doomed to fail because it propelled incompetent ideologues to total power. The evil would have been forgotten if they won because every society has evil under its belt, but there was no getting there because their entire theory of power is unrealistic. Marxist-Leninists have the same problem. Nobody has ever invented a system of power that insures it has the right people at the right time. ML's not only built a system that guaranteed a Stalin, they also guaranteed a Kruschev and a Gorbachev. Fascists likewise didn't get unlucky and stuck with Hitler: Hitler was the type of person their system was just going to produce one way or the other.

The problem with totalitarianism is that, when they end up with a mediocre leader their entire society goes mediocre, and when they end up with an idiot, their entire society suffers from temporary national idiocy. Hitler wouldn't have trashed Fascist Germany if Fascist Germany had given more power to the generals who, you know, weren't ham-strung by the stupidity of the Fascist power structure.

<Snipped quote by Vilageidiotx>

My main problem with ancaps is that they act even more haughty than fascists. Like, fascists might often consider themselves to be a genetically superior example of the human species upon which all life must be based, but ancaps are condescending as fuck. More condescending than I can be, which is impressive. Probably because they tend to either be REALLY stereotypical neckbeards or rich kids who are overly successful in life, both of which are possibly the most condescending demographics.

@Keyguyperson

That too. In general they always seem to be bad people. It's funny how I've never had that problem with Marxist-Leninist type communists, and never with Fascists, thought being left libertarian I am somebody both wouldn't be able to tolerate in their perfect societies; I'd end up dead in a creek somewhere. Yet fucking An-Caps are supposed to be anarchic and against the use of force, but are always dicks to basically everyone else.

[Dinh AaronMk]

On the centralization of power: you also end up in a situation in society where with so much power invested in so small a group it can become easy to throw it all down on the ground. You end up with hilariously few supporting pillars of government and at any moment or staunch disagreement with policy one of those pillars can move to the side and send the whole system crashing down so that it may step up and assume the position of power out of alliance with the other few pillars and agree the last guy was a shit-head, or a general apathy or fear.

This feeds in a way into banana republics and presidential dictatorships where so much of the power is invested in the strong man with a parliament running a thinly veiled attempt to look democratic. The president has to carefully balance the interests of his few supports to keep in power so one or all don't over-throw him. This is how coups work, one - namely the military - gets fed up and lets new leadership take over in a military coup.

Failing that, you put morons in power in the offices below you and lead by looking like the smartest guy, and you just made so many careers in the right places they'll lick the bottom of your boots forever. The people meanwhile; disenfranchised, otherwise poor, without a voice, and presumably without a vote can't do anything to stop you.

Once you decentralize government or make more offices to help keep the then-ruling party in place the less likely it's all to come undone when someone gets mad at you. If one office throws a shit-fit so what, at the end of the day the nation continues to plod along as a mild annoyance fumes and sputters into the background until it gives up or is fired and replaced by someone more skillful and or thankful.

And in the environments that these highly centralized, dictatorial governments arise in are environments where the economy may not have much in the way of diversity. There's going to be that one major resource the powers that be hang over heads or use to get the capital to hold power while everyone else meeks out a substance living farming.

Based on my understanding of the German economy at the time of Hitler's rise there wasn't much left of an economy for the common people to use. Hitler came around promising to make things great, did that, but then the government held all the resources they acquired or reacquired for Germany among themselves thereby monopolizing power while the German people got none or little so they would keep in line and not revolt against the State. Or if they did the much better financed and supplied SS would go in and kill them all.

You could probably argue something similar with Stalin, or that his staying in power relied on the centralization of Russian heavy industry in the state and the entire centralization of the Soviet economy so that the government ruled it all, and not collectivist communes across the country capable of practicing their own socialist economy to better make their community something to seriously consider by the government. Trotsky couldn't survive when Stalin wrapped everything up under his great coat.

[Gowi]

I love how this began as a discussion thread was hijacked into nonsense memes and then diverted back to being on track. Anyway, I’ve personally gone through different ideologies throughout my life but I’ve generally been what is classified as “liberal” to some extent. I have voted independently in the last few presidential elections here in the states, and I find myself as a “moral moderate” more than an idealistic liberal or any other buzzword description. But see for yourself for my compass ranking as per this year: