-->
@Greyparrot
Looks like you Trust Authority LOL!
Oddly enough I answered Strongly Agree to all authority must be questioned 🤡
DART 2021 Feb Political Compass standings
Posts
Total:
63
-->
@ILikePie5
Then it's even more telling of your genuine approach if you got authoritarian anyway.
-->
@acglade
Those results seem fake/forced. How did you get them?
I added myself
-->
@acglade
So you clicked strongly agree or strongly disagree to all questions?
-->
@RationalMadman
My score was:
Economic: -4.38
Social: -2.82
-->
@RationalMadman
No? Why is your perception that centrism is some sort of default position? Or that I'm forcing stances that I wouldn't stand behind, like it's an aesthetic? I did answer just agree/disagree to some questions, and I would say I answered everything honestly according to what I do believe. Again, if you think there is something I couldn't reasonably say "Strongly Agree/Disagree" to, ask me.
-->
@acglade
I'd say you can't genuinely stand by your views in practise, yes, but that goes for any extreme at all. As for you being honest and answering genuinely, I'd be happy to debate question by question but not gonna waste effort if others don't, we could just PM.
-->
@RationalMadman
If you mean practice in the sense of real implementation of positions, I'd tend to agree. It's fair to look at the test from perspective of pragmatism – with which I'd agree radical positions have issues with being tenable (in places such as the US at least) – but I have always considered the test to be measuring a view of what the world ought to be/what I believe ideally. If you mean in debate/discussion, I'd disagree.
More than happy to debate question by question if you ever wanted or just PM as well.
More than happy to debate question by question if you ever wanted or just PM as well.
-->
@acglade
I am very sure we both strongly agreed to humans vs corporations as a priority if economic globalisation is inevitable. So, skip question 1 and the ones you're sure a fellow left-lib would not have answered different to you and I'd be happy to discuss the differences. One thing I think may be different is our steength onnthe privacy questions, I probably consistently chose disagree or agree where you chose strongly. Generally, I take a pro-privacy stance that pragmatically admits that with just cause, surveillance should be carried out in minority, niche cases.
-->
@Bringerofrain
Actually auth-left is weirdest, statistically speaking.
-->
@RationalMadman
It is more of a personality test than political one anyway. It doesn't differentiate between things like whether I believe companies unfairly exploit third world countries and whether I think there should be a political solution to that or not.
-->
@Bringerofrain
That does actually come up if you read past the obvious with the 'extraction of resources' question and the 'only responsibility is profit for shareholders' question.
The very first question also incorporated that. I think this test is indeed flawed brcause it tries too HARD to trick you into choosing your 'true alignment' when it should make lore obvious what it's asking and should give you the benefit of the doubt with your honesty by not having cryptic similar-criterion questions that test if you lied to yourself the first time.
i think its an odd result
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Aye we Auth-Right buddies
-->
@ILikePie5
auth right number 1
Though opposed to the idea of the compass [questions are unnecessarily weighted in favor of a type], which makes for very poorly resulted surveys, I took the test, anyway. My results:
Now, you might understand why, as a late teen, I volunteered in Bobby Kennedy's pres. campaign, and was in the Ambassador ballroom in L.A. [my home town] when he was assassinated. The party left him behind, and I left the party. Disillusioned, and after living in France for a few years during and after undergraduate work, I returned to become conservative, and obtain PhDs, not for academia, and its ivory tower, where results are not required, but for private industry and personal investment, where results are everything.
Pretty close to what I've gotten before. Sometimes, I trend up a little more or a little more left, but this is decently accurate.
-->
@RationalMadman
I did click more strongly agree/disagree on questions relating to security v. privacy. I don't even necessarily disagree with your abstract position, but I would describe my stance as much more skeptical of government surveillance/security measures. For instance, I do strongly agree with "Our civil liberties are being excessively curbed in the name of counter-terrorism" whereas you might only agree; I would maintain though that civil liberties being curtailed "excessively" is a correct assessment.
I don't know how lib-left folks feel with regards to, "Schools should not make classroom attendance compulsory" which I would strongly disagree with.
In general, for most of these questions, I felt it could convey a decent amount of context to where I could say "strongly agree/disagree" with relative ease. I'd say the statement, "The most important thing for children to learn is to accept discipline" is a good example of this. I can see where someone would say only disagree as discipline isn't intrinsically bad, but the framing of the question makes it clear that it is a question of learning about discipline vs. other things, with which I'd argue a vast amount of other things (creativity, empathy, etc.) are more important for children to learn (not to mention the phrase is "accept discipline" which can be read two ways, both of which I would strongly disagree as important for a child). I'd say most questions function in the test in this manner.
The questions I'd answer "agree/disagree" on I felt were just largely too ambiguous to really say one way or another. "Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity" is one where I think this ambiguity can be seen. It's not detailing a specific instance/context for making peace; the statement is very, very general. I might argue that people have a right to not be at peace in a country such as Myanmar or even in the US; however, perpetual unrest against every establishment is untenable and nonsensical, and that it is sometimes a mark of maturity to accept the status quo and make peace with it (though not necessarily accept it).
-->
@acglade
You and I 100% agree that this quiz uses a ton of loaded questions where adjectives like 'excessively' and hyperbole like 'most important' make unrealistic context to what it's really asking, regarding politics.
I clicked 'agree' to the excessive curbing (at least I think I did) but in reality I am neutral on it as it's an extremely borderline thing to me where I am literally 50/50 on it. I totally understand why CIA, NSA, Mi5, etc all are wanting to snoop in and stop things before they happen (we have no idea how much has been stopped, it's top secret). I also understand why I want to use a VPN and I don't believe a standard staff member at my ISP has the right to know every detail of what I do online, to just pull up and read on their work screen whenever they please (which, if you didn't know, is 100% possible and while it's not 'allowed' it's very easy to justify suspicion to do this without a warrant whereas to get hold of your actual devices is more complex unless your house is easy to break into while you're out or whatever).
Privacy is a 2-way street, after all the very organisations and intelligence agencies that most fervently wish to spy on us, are themselves extremely secretive and pro-privacy from that hypocritical angle. This entire thing is very strange grey area in ethics, since the nature of intelligence work is inherently based on the absolute hypocrisy of wanting to gather as much information on others while revealing/leaking as little as possible of your own.
29 days later
I got in the red quadrant, same as last time I took this quiz. I was in the blue quadrant for a long time, but slowly moved over to barely being in the left and have mostly stayed there
The worst question in this quiz imo is this one:
"A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system."
That's just a fact...you don't have to support a one-party state (I don't) but that's obviously an advantage of a one-party state
-->
@thett3
Is it though? Is it an advantage or is the delay worth it?
Either way, that's definitely one of the questions that's terribly worded vs what it's trying to get at (so I agree with you but from another angle, I think that question itself is not necessarily a truism).
-->
@thett3
The worst question in this quiz imo is this one:"A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system."That's just a fact...you don't have to support a one-party state (I don't) but that's obviously an advantage of a one-party state
I'm not sure it's a fact. The constitution upholds checks and balances specifically to prevent sweeping action, with the understanding that swift progress toward negative outcomes is not necessarily an advantage.
This quiz doesn't have much depth compared to some others. I'm surprised that my results are the same as when I took this last.