|
Post by Sneltrekker on Apr 26, 2006 21:25:22 GMT
There's this test called, Political Compass ( www.politicalcompass.org) which through 6 pages of questions can kind of tell you where you stand compared to most people on a political scale. The thing I love about the test is that it's not one of those tests that just uses a left/right scale ... since that's fundamentally flawed anyway ... Gandhi and Stalin for example are both very leftist, yet you can't compare them at all. The Political Compass theory adds a second axis to the whole, of authority, or said differently, a social scale. While left-right is more of an economical scale. Now, your result is for example, this is mine:Economic Left/Right: -7.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.64 It goes both from -10 to +10 So that means I score quite extreme libertarian and leftist. Since this is the forum for serious discussion I'm going to make the topic a bit deeper than just posting two numbers. After all, I know many people with about the same scores as I have, yet with completely different believes. So my second question is, why would you have gotten your score?I oppose governments and nations. A simple look into history shows us nations serve no goal except to be a moneyfarm for the elite. All throughout history the rich have grown richer, only through abusing the poor. The only time I can see in history where the people had power, was ancient Greece, with it's citystates governed by direct democracies. That's the problem these days. Democracy has become indirect, why, because populations are too big for direct democracy. Indirect democracy however, is just a small step away from dictatorships, and is an utter illusion. People are only free one day every four years, election day. And even then they are manipulated cruelly by the media. As such, I can actually find myself in the ideals of Communism and Anarchy (note: Communism, not stalinism. Stalinism is a warped, totalitarian offspring of communism.) Of course, to get back on the Greek citystates, that still needs to be perfected towards modern society. Back there only old, Greek men who paid taxes could vote. But a direct democracy combined with the RIGHT to vote for everyone (not the duty as it stands in Belgium, the duty to vote is another bastardisation of democracy and goes completely against freedom), well, a direct democracy like that would be the most free society I can imagine, that is practically possible. Even better would of course be of course a society without any social ranks at all, but that's nothing but utopia and I'm realist enough to know that goes completely against human nature. So, basically this topic is here for you to make your political statement. You don't even need to do the test if you only want to tell your political ideology in general.
I don't think this should really be a discussion topic, maybe it's best to keep actual discussions to more defined topics. Feel free to start a thread on any hot topic that should be discussed.
|
|
|
Post by Ashildr on May 3, 2006 15:01:31 GMT
Politics sucks! I'm happy I don't have to vote yet... I have no idea who I could choose... they're all idiots *nod*
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on May 3, 2006 16:28:16 GMT
Don't agree that politics suck. Politicians do suck yeah.
I have no party in Belgium I can vote for either.
Liberals, Catholics and Socialists are too grey for me. A bunch of people who rather bury their head in the sand and care more about the power and the money than about helping people.
Nationalists and racists I despise. I would not mind an independent Flanders, but not out of nationalist principles. More out of libertarian principles.
The green party, spirit, and a few other small left parties I agree with a lot on their principles, but have a dislike for most of the people leading those parties, and don't trust them in charge of the country.
The communists in Belgium are too unionistic and too focused on the Russian form of communism: instead of fighting for both equality AND freedom, they want to -force- equality on everyone, which only leads to totalitarian stalinism.
Soooo, past 3 elections I voted blank, next one is community though. Local government I will vote for, on a local (city or town) level is the only politics I can agree with. Some people there still take their jobs to help. And they make an immediate difference on the life of the people living in their town.
|
|
|
Post by CoralSkywalker on May 4, 2006 9:01:46 GMT
I got all mixed up feelings when it comes to politics.. On the one hand I don't give a fuck.. On the other hand yeah.. I just care about the society I live in.. Cause it's the society I have to live in, right?
I despise everything on the Right.. Voting Left just seems more natural for me This year in the first year I'll have to vote.. only local; but I really don't know who to vote yet.. It won't be a Liberal, quite sure of that.. The place where I live has already enough snobs voting Liberal..
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on May 4, 2006 15:08:27 GMT
When it comes to town hall elections I never vote for a party and don't even care what party the person is in. I vote for the person who I know will do what is best for my town.
Sure, I live in a small to medium sized town. I guess in a city like Antwerp things are different still. But of the 4 people who are most likely to become mayor, I know 3 personally over here. That's what I meant to say in my last post. Local politics are still about people, not just about numbers.
Society would be so wonderful if all centralised governments were disbanded. A prime minister of a 10 million people country can look at statistics and say: If I take that measure, 5.000 people nationwide will be fucked because of it.
While a mayor of a 10.000 people town like where I live, if he would do that, he'd be the one fucked. He has to stand among the people if he wants to keep their support. Everyone knows where he lives and if they don't like what he does they DO know where to find him.
|
|
|
Post by CoralSkywalker on May 4, 2006 19:32:58 GMT
Fun way to put it.. well yeah fun.. ^^ Just all little towns next to each other you mean? No countries with governments.. Or countries with a sort of government or 'senate' with one person representing one town? Dunno what that would give..
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on May 4, 2006 20:35:00 GMT
I mean, after a greek model. Citystates. I guess in a modern society there would still be larger contracts/treaties between alliances of towns, but every town would have complete authonomy.
Anyway, would it really work? I don't think so. Society is simply too advanced for that. It's just one more utopia to me. :-)
|
|
neonblack
New Member
Room V in blue...
Posts: 36
|
Post by neonblack on May 13, 2006 22:16:28 GMT
um...since this link above doesn't seem to work for me let me just put it like this: So far I've always voted rather left wind than anything else...recently even only green party though this never had any effect as most voters here seem to be conservative old people... as for the future: I always refer to the Shadowrun universe (that's a near-future sci-fi RPG system for those who don't know) it is quite evident that big company gain (or already have) more and more influence in politics and that this will increase in the future....so it might be very likely that some day entire towns or regions might be governed by some kind of "megacon" as they're called in Shadowrun...in face we do already have those...look at DaimlerChrysler, Toyota or some of those big chemical/pharma conclomerates which are even getting bigger and bigger...and also big banks als Citigroup for example... I somehow agree that the current system of more or less democratic governments is rather outdated...at least institutions as many smaller or bigger "nations" are not that effectice anymore...maybe therefore the EU is a good idea (and I am really for an european constitution, those who disagree are just narrow-minded or just have material interests...I could explain that in more detail but this would go even more off-topic) unless their members would really get to the point to see the bigger picture...but that's really getting into another direction maybe we might also need some special thread for this discussion...
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on Jul 18, 2006 23:40:50 GMT
I've been studying government models some more, because well, as much as I would love to see an anarcho-communistic, or a sociocratic government, I realise both are ideals, and cannot function in society with real human beings. Add on top of that that every day I get more and more pissed off at the society we live in. I mean, EVERYTHING is constantly being dumbed down, made easier, made more fit to be used by idiots. For example, a while ago my granddad bought a chainsaw. It had a big warning in big fucking yellow letters on it. While the blades are rotating, do not attempt to stop them with your hands. I mean... WTF... what kind of utterly retarded idiot would even think of doing that? And IF someone would be so stupid, doesn't he/she DESERVE the punishment of losing their hand for their stupidity?? It's the same with everything. Education also. When the government arranges what needs to be taught, they look at the AVERAGE person. But to get to the average you need to include both the idiots, and the geniuses. Now, since we live in "liberal" and "social" Europe, we cannot allow multiple scholar circuits, because that would go against the ideal of giving everyone equal opportunities. Hell, I propose there would be multiple scholarly systems. So geniuses don't have to study together with retards. That way the retards aren't punished for not being able to be as smart as the average, and the geniuses aren't wasting their time studying stuff at 16, which they already knew in kindergarten. Does it mean social inequity? Hell yeah. But it beats FORCING equity on people who are not equal. Equity is all fine, as long as it comes from the people themself, and is not forced by the government. Anyway, what I found to fix this cancerous government that oppresses us, I ran into something called technocracy. Sure, it is completely northern american based, but it could just as easily be used for Europe. IF those retarded nations would realise what they could win by working together. It is time the European Union gets a real shape. Technocracy by WikipediaTechnocracy Inc. Some organisation who seeks to turn Northern America into a big technocracy. The two links don't tell the exact same story, but both have their flaws and their strong points. Another interesting form of government that seems applaudable is the geniocracy. It uses the basics of the government we live in now, but one big difference: In order to be able to vote, you need to be 10% more intelligent than the average person. In order to be able to be elected, you need to be 50% more intelligent than the average person. It would clear out the idiocy in our society for a big part. Either way, political mandate is something far too important to simply leave to popularity. This system would be pretty easy to implement using IQ tests. As far as discriminating, the current system of universal suffrage ALSO discriminates. Mental patients, incarcerated felons, minors, all cannot vote becayse society deems them unfit to vote. And isn't excess stupidity some form of mental problem also? If not, it should be.
|
|
w00zer
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by w00zer on Jul 21, 2006 21:54:14 GMT
National votings, I would vote blanc, next one will be my first...I dunno, might vote blanc too.
|
|
|
Post by CoralSkywalker on Jul 22, 2006 8:53:04 GMT
National votings, I would vote blanc, next one will be my first...I dunno, might vote blanc too. I'll probably vote left.. to put something against the mass of right votes we'll probably have..
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on Jul 22, 2006 12:07:12 GMT
Next elections, I am still doubting.
I won't vote blanc again. I realise now it's the most useless thing to do.
I'll either vote left, or not show up at all and pay the fine for refusing to vote. True, technically not voting at all counts as the same as voting blanc, but symbolically it holds a lot more power. There's not a single politician at this moment that I can name in Belgium who deserves my vote. And if I'm lucky they force me to go to court to explain my actions instead of just giving a regular fine (my aunt had to appear in court when she didn't go to vote at least). Still wondering what a judge would say if I'd explain them my reasons for not voting. Meh, I figure they'd just act annoyed and still fine me because they're idiots who are tied to the laws of rotten Belgium, but whatever.
|
|
w00zer
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by w00zer on Jul 22, 2006 12:23:42 GMT
Ur right.But I'll defo not vote right!
|
|
shojo1985
New Member
^^* Gregoria von der Machenschaft *^^
Posts: 17
|
Post by shojo1985 on Jul 26, 2006 21:38:04 GMT
My results: Economic Left/Right: -4.88 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.67
Well, I think that there is no party which satisfies my requirements. I feel repressed. Next fall, some politicians will come to our school, and we are allowed to ask some questions. However, I will vote! I think that I will vote green in my last vote. I think the misery in my country (Germany) is, that more than 60 % of the people allowed to vote will vote for a party that they are used to vote. I don't think that this was the idea of democracy. I am disappointed by the politicians. They always invent new forms and authorities for making life as hard as possible for the people.
I wonder if there is a party for the rights of children. If there was one, I'm pretty sure that I would vote them!
|
|
|
Post by Angellore on Jul 30, 2006 4:35:30 GMT
Economic Left/Right: -3.25 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 0.46 I don't understand anything, so I don't know how to explain my results .
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on Jul 30, 2006 10:56:59 GMT
It means you're normal. Well, mostly normal. At least no extreme scores. What kind of parties do you support? Socialist democrats ... something like that?
|
|
xelic
New Member
...forever unredeemed...
Posts: 9
|
Post by xelic on Feb 22, 2007 23:22:58 GMT
Economic Left/Right: -3.38 Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08 I agree in part with the result, but IMO a lot of the questions were biased. They should at least add the option "no opinion".
|
|
|
Post by Sneltrekker on Feb 28, 2007 22:29:35 GMT
True. I agree there with you.
|
|