A theoretical discussion on political positions.

Interesting.

What I posted earlier was what I predicted I would get.

In fact, I got a social democratic Cosmopolitan.

58% Cosmopolitian (i.e. moderate).

38% Secular (moderate)

28% Visionary (slight)

25% Anarchist (slight) - Surprising!

58% Communist (moderate) - Also surprising!

54% Pacifist (moderate)

41% Anthrocentric (moderate)

I'm not certain what cosmopolitan means in this context. If it means what I think it means, I'm surprised I didn't score higher.

My results. (Social Democratic Cosmopolitan)

Cosmopolitan 56%

Secular 59% (this would probably be higher if I cared enough about religion to answer the questions with more emphasis, but I don't)

Visionary 44%

Anarchistic 35% (Huh, a lot lower than I expected)

Communistic 53%

Pacifist 8%

Anthropocentric 54%

Pretty standard social democrat here, thought likely a bit more anthropocentric than most.

52% Cosmopolitan (For the people, by the people, baby. All of the people, not just the rich, or whites, or whomever happens to be on top. Also, isn't wealth "redistribution" a bit loaded? When I hear "redistribution," I think of violent soviet style, rather than trying to maintain a balance between people's standard of living. Which I'm totally in favor of.)

51% Secular (Likely because I wasn't sure on the "religion should be taught in schools bit. I think it's phrased badly. Of course religion should be taught in schools. Just like any other major belief/values system that influences society. All religion should be taught <b> about </b>)

38% Visionary (Did anyone understand the infrastructure question? I didn't quite get the point.)

52% Communist.

45% Anarchist. (Which is strange, because although I consider anarchy wonderful as an ideal, I'm fully aware than it's utterly, completely unworkable. However, I think that Governments need to answer to the people/only govern by the consent of the governed.)

7% Pacifist (I believe in careful application of military might can solve problems, but also has a good chance of creating them.)

37% Anthropocentric. (I believe in maintaining the planet because we, as humans, need to survive. However, I think as a species, I think our needs come before those of non "advanced" animals. However, I don't believe in pointless cruelty to animals.)

edited 22nd Sep '12 5:46:55 PM by DrTentacles

Hopey you're my hero for bumping this thread!

---

I want to bring up a discussion on right-wing.

Kostya's post in 2012 American Elections thread said "The GOP seems to realize this though which is why they're trying like hell to demonize the left and skew things as far right as possible." Now I know the majority of us in the OTC are Democrats-favoring and think the right-wing GOP is flawed. But I notice that perhaps we're demonizing the right a bit too often. When did we become so antagonistic to right-wing?

A commonly enjoyed value in America is market economics and this is inherently right-wing to a good extent. And I believe capitalistic market is still popular in the US; Americans commonly take the consumerist culture for granted, and enjoy the right to own property. Those who prefer a more socialistic economics theory would need a very good argument to show why it's better than the default capitalist idea, which is "people earn what they get". Though liberals can say that governmental intervention into the market helps keep things realistic and fair, it's just a necessary subversion. It still doesn't make it left-wing like communism is.

When I was younger I saw right-wing as a good thing, because it upholds free markets, right to property ownership, traditional social order and guidance, and international role in peacekeeping. This positive portrayal is quite more idealistic than how it actually works, but these values what many Americans dream of, and indeed it has some historical roots the United States. Come to think of it, I think it's important to keep in mind that this is what people envision when they look up to US.

edited 22nd Sep '12 5:40:02 PM by Trivialis

@Tomu-uguu: It's supposed to mean a focus on the global community, rather than your specific country, given that it's contrasted to nationalistic.

Honestly, while I agree with the categories, I feel like the names for them could be changed.

Interesting that we're all so anthropocentric so far. Guess we don't have any die-hard ecologists thus far.

NOTE: I don't hate republican voters, I just think the leadership of the GOP is actively working to destroy America. Nothing offensive or anything.

Although I care about ecological issues, it's mostly in terms of how they affect humanity more than anything else. Fighting global warming, keeping our air/water clean etc. is more important than conserving wildlife because it has more clear benefits for us. Not that animals are unimportant, but they're very distinctly secondary by comparison.

On the other hand, I care about the environment and animals and stuff, but I want to find a way to be able to save the environment without affecting anyone's way of life, or even while enhancing people's way of life.

I concur with environmentalism, which seeks to advance humanity while being sustainable. Ecologists are whackjobs who are ecocentric, and have no regard for humanity's progress.

No worries, fair citizen!

I have to agree there. It's perfectly logical to protect the long-term sustainability of the planet. When it comes to putting some amorphous idea of "the Earth" ahead of the species, that doesn't work logically to me.

I know we've moved on from that test, but I found two questions on it particularly interesting.

Now, does it mean what most people think of when they hear "religious education"? (As in, indoctrination.) Or does it mean what the words are literally saying, education on religions? Since I feel that everyone should be educated at least to some degree on various religions, forms of religion, religious practices of different cultures, etc., but I also don't know if it's talking about the former rather than this, I wasn't sure how to answer it.

What do we define as "the most elementary human rights"? Would we define it as John Locke did, "life, liberty, and property"? Are we simply referring to the right to live without intrusion from others, to have shelter and safety? Again, confusing and can be looked at from too many angles to count.

edited 22nd Sep '12 6:23:39 PM by 0dd1

Insert witty and clever quip here. My page, as the database hates my handle.

Same problems I have. I think primates have a "right not to be mistreated," if that makes any sense.

Hate to burst your bubble, but I scored bupkis worth reporting on anthropocentric. Along with fundamentalism. But, only 4% on being a green fiend. Weird. I happen to believe looking after other animals (and extend the rights of the particularly sapient ones, as well, if not quite to the same level as human rights) is also in our own best interests. <shrugs> Having said that, I also believe that we were evolved to actually eat meat, even if we could all afford to eat less of it, as a whole, to help with resources.

edited 22nd Sep '12 6:30:26 PM by Euodiachloris

@0dd1

Forget specifying it to religious education; philosophy should be a compulsory subject, if we follow that reasoning. I feel that many people are just "living their own lives" and just looking for short-term needs, without really examining greater meaning and thinking about personal purpose. Socrates said, "An unexamined life is not worth living", and I remember Martin Luther King Jr. saying something similar.

I should take that test...

edited 22nd Sep '12 6:31:43 PM by Trivialis

Personally, I feel like we can focus both on the environment and on humanity, and that we should work to enhance both.

I'd agree with that, 100%. Religious Studies is all well and good when you are studying your own and other cultures... but, to study it to the detriment of good old Philosophy? Bad move.

edited 22nd Sep '12 6:31:57 PM by Euodiachloris

Well no, I don't mean religious studies to be a detriment to philosophy. Religious studies can be a subset of philosophy though I would emphasize natural theology.

What I'm saying is that there's no need to single out religion, like how people on both sides of religious debate in politics are doing. It needs to be understood in a more fundamental level.

By "detriment" I didn't mean "religion bad, philosophy good", but was mainly meaning "time devoted to the topic outstripping the one in favour of the other".

edited 22nd Sep '12 6:39:46 PM by Euodiachloris

@Trivialis

When I was younger I thought the Right-Wing was a good thing (in some ways I still do}.

The problem is that America's Right Wing Party (The Republican Party) has gotten far too Conservative (The corruption and Neo-Conservatism isn't helping this) .

The reason why its like this is extremely complicated.

edited 22nd Sep '12 7:28:12 PM by DeviantBraeburn

Everything is Possible. But some things are more Probable than others. JEBAGEDDON 2016

Got cosmopolitan social democrat on the test, yeah, I'm a latecomer.

Cosmo: 42% Laizistic: 52% Visionary: 31% Anarchistic: 42% Communistic: 8% (kind of a surprice... or does it mean communalistic? I made the German version) Militaristic: 29% Anthrophocentric: 55%

I kind of wonder how I can be a anarchistic communist... Lest, it's meant somewhat like this: anarchistic just means fewer rules and communistic means a more equal power distribution. Cosmo is the way I see myself - we must strive to empower and better all menkind, not only the ones who are lucky enough to be born at some place. Laizistic... yeah, right. Visionary... how can anyone in their right minds be reactionary? Militaristic; I'm just no hippie. Anthropocentric: ditto.

I think the problem with the spectrum is that basicly all the directions have a certain conotation, which most of the times is not what they are, or the definitions are just not very specivic. For example, the guy above me... what do you mean with right winged? There could be several meanings of this, at least where I come from: (right being mentioned first) Elistism vs. Egalitism; Closed society vs. Open society; Capitalism vs. State-controlled... and so on.

Haha, not more than me.

I vowed, and so did you: Beyond this wall- we would make it through.

Well lookee lookee, looks here like we got us a liberal off! Yeee haw!

edited 27th Sep '12 4:14:02 PM by TheyCallMeTomu

Oh really? Well, what are your thoughts on inheretence? The military? Marriage?