Monday, August 22, 2022

Taking the political compass in 2022

 So, I had a post when I first started this blog in which i took the political compass, but my blog was originally on another site, and I decided not to copy that one over, so it is lost forever. 

But, generally speaking, I went through, answered all the questions, and got around a -6, -6, meaning I'm libertarian left. 

I wanted to retake it this time and see whether and how much I've changed since 2016. Without further ado:

If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations. 

 Strongly agree, the economy exists to serve people, not the other way around.

I’d always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.

Eh, disagree. Not huge on patriotism but I'm not an America hater either.  

No one chooses their country of birth, so it’s foolish to be proud of it. 

Agree, not huge on patriotism. At the same time, again, not exactly an America hater either.

Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races. 

 Disagree, people are people, skin color doesn't mean anything. 

 The enemy of my enemy is my friend. 

 Disagree. The enemy of my enemy can be yet another enemy too. 

 Military action that defies international law is sometimes justified. 

 On a purely conceptual level, agree. International law can be unjust and represent the will of certain groups imposed on other groups who don't agree with it. While in the past I would probably go hard disagree on this given how when the political compass came out the question seemed highly relevant to George W. Bush and his unjustified invasion of Iraq, these days, I would just understand that it's nuanced. Obviously the key word is "sometimes", and as long as I can conceive of a situation in which a justified decision exists, no matter how hypothetical and outlandish, I have to agree with the premise of the question, even if I would argue in reality most wars that defy international law AREN'T justified.

 There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment. 

 In the past I would say I didn't understand this question, but at this point, I would say, agree when I think about it. The fact is, there's a lot of propaganda out there, and a lot of it is so subtle most people aren't aware of it. And it can subtly change people's views over time. While I wouldn't take action against this mostly because I support free speech, and I ultimately see the solution as "more education", I can't deny that there is a lot of political and ideological subtext in practically all information we consume, including entertainment. 

Again, I would not particularly do anything to crack down on this as i see it as impossible to do so without suspending fundamental rights that should exist in a free society, but I have to agree with the premise of the question.

 People are ultimately divided more by class than by nationality. 

 In the past I'd just say yes, but I really have to wonder since 2016...is this true? Again, I inherently believe race is a nonfactor biologically speaking, but if you look at the modern political divides, race and nationality is literally the biggest dividing point between the parties, whether we like it or not, with the republicans trending toward white nationalism under Trump, and the left running toward postmodernism with large majorities of POC supporting the democratic party.

As much as I consider class issues to be the real issues that we should be facing in society, I have to wonder if, at this point, given current political divides, if race ISN'T the big dividing line. I mean, it most definitely is.

HOWEVER, I would say that I personally find this divide in politics to be extremely harmful for our national discourse and that it's driving insane levels of polarization over goals that don't mean anything.

Seriously, nothing good comes from the country being divided over race. No issues are solved in a positive way, and any gains by either side feel almost like losses for the other side in a zero sum way. Society is not greatly improved by the country being divided by race and nationality.

In terms of actual, political issues,  you know, stuff that matters, class all the way. If we could solve a lot of the economic concerns, I believe a lot of the racial issues would matter a lot less, and a lot of aspects of privilege would start being alleviated by proxy. So for me, I really believe the true dividing lines in society are class, and that this current dividing line between different racial groups is a form of false consciousness that is intended to distract us from the real issues in society, and that the real issues are class based, with these culture war issues being a sideshow. 

So I would say agree.

Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment. 

 Disagree. We've discussed the phillips curve on here before, and the relationship between the two, and I would say it's a balance. For most of the last 40 years, we've been way too inflation conscious at the expense of unemployment. And that has played a role in stagnating living standards for the working and middle classes over the past 40 years, and the concentration of income and wealth inequality for the rich. Because it turns out when unemployment is high, working conditions are crap, and definitely need more power to the workers.

I hold this view even facing 10% inflation now. Because this is an extremely abnormal situation caused by covid and the economic shocks associated with it. The inflation isn't even largely driven by labor. It's driven by supply chain issues and corporate price gauging. 

Because corporations cannot be trusted to voluntarily protect the environment, they require regulation. 

 Strongly agree, seems like a no brainer. Remember when our rivers caught on fire? Peppridge farm remembers. 

 “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need” is a fundamentally good idea. 

 Disagree. While we should provide for everyone, the "from each according to his ability" comes off as enslaving the populace and forcing them to work for the sake of others. I don't agree with THAT. 

 The freer the market, the freer the people. 

 Disagree. Tightly regulated markets arguably give people more freedom in a positive left libertarian sense.

It’s a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking water is now a bottled, branded consumer product. 

 Eh, i feel mixed on this. I mean, I believe water should primarily be a public utility. But I do think there are situations where bottled water is useful. Like hurricanes. I mean, people buy that crap up when a storm is coming. So...I guess not? 

I mean, a lot of drinking water isnt really straight from the source. It needs to be treated for human consumption first.

 I disagree.

 Land shouldn’t be a commodity to be bought and sold. 

 Disagree. Although land monopolization is bad, and despite my hating on the georgists, they sometimes have a point. 

 It is regrettable that many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society. 

 I mean, I don't wanna force everyone to work in society. I have no real issues with shareholders existing. Heck, UBI should be a dividend for everyone. Make everyone a shareholder. 

Marxists tend to wanna force people to work and that's where a lot of this sentiment comes from. So...disagree.

 Protectionism is sometimes necessary in trade. 

 Agree in principle at least. I dont think we should have "free trade" with third world countries that exploit workers and have lax environmental standards. 

 The only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders. 

 Disagree. Should pay taxes, follow regulations, and treat workers fairly. 

 The rich are too highly taxed. 

 Strongly disagree. Tax them at laffer curve peak rates (~70%). 

 Those with the ability to pay should have access to higher standards of medical care. 

 Disagree as a general rule, healthcare should be a human right. Although I'm not conceptually opposed to maybe marginally better treatment for people who can afford expensive treatments the government funded system cant sustainably provide (say it's new tech that's extremely expensive to utilize but some billionaire wants to fund it with their own money). 

 Governments should penalise businesses that mislead the public. 

 Strongly agree. Seems self evident.

A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies. 

 Strongly agree. Nothing free about a market where you only have one option that exploits the crap out of you.

 Abortion, when the woman’s life is not threatened, should always be illegal. 

 "I hate my life...and I hate you..." (Lindemann reference for those who don't get it).

Strongly disagree.

I like how the far right these days is so extreme that they're more extreme than the statement provided here. It's crazy. These guys are psychos.

All authority should be questioned. 

 Among adults, yes. Strongly agree. But I would say children should probably listen to their parents and are too young to question authority, so...just agree.

 An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.

 Disagree, we should be better than that.

 Taxpayers should not be expected to prop up any theatres or museums that cannot survive on a commercial basis. 

 Disagree. Some of those things might be important from a national heritage type perspective. Like the government funding museums in DC or something. 

Schools should not make classroom attendance compulsory. 

Disagree. We should at least give kids baseline education. Give them freedom as adults but as kids, they kind of need some level of instruction.

 All people have their rights, but it is better for all of us that different sorts of people should keep to their own kind. 

 Disagree. I mean, if you wanna date interracially or whatever, go for it. Not gonna be hardcore forced diversity or whatever, it's your choice, but I'm not gonna discourage it either. 

 Good parents sometimes have to spank their children. 

 Disagree, most science says spanking actually has negative outcomes for the children.

 It’s natural for children to keep some secrets from their parents. 

 Agree. Kids are kids and aren't gonna tell their parents everything.

 Possessing marijuana for personal use should not be a criminal offence. 

 Strongly agree, the war on drugs has been a failure.

 The prime function of schooling should be to equip the future generation to find jobs. 

 Disagree. That's A function, but education is also an inherent good in and of itself.

If people were educated, Donald Trump would have like no actual appeal. And maybe we'd have two functioning parties instead of one.

 People with serious inheritable disabilities should not be allowed to reproduce. 

 I'm gonna be honest, on a personal level, I would not encourage people who have serious disabilities to reproduce. And I would say you're a jerk for passing that stuff on to a potential kid if you do. 

BUT, I kind of think that forcing people NOT to borders on eugenics and is an extremely dangerous and authoritarian idea. So disagree.

The most important thing for children to learn is to accept discipline. 

 Strongly disagree. This is like peak authoritarianism.

There are no savage and civilised peoples; there are only different cultures. 

 Eh, disagree. This is a weird question for me. While I don't believe in an inherent concept of objective morality, and the concept of savage and civilized is kind of an outdated and racist way of looking at things, I also don't believe in some weird postmodernist concept of all cultures being equal. Some enhance human well being more than others, and some cultures are, quite frankly, stuck in the bronze age and are very theocratic and regressive. Take, for example, much of the middle east, and the islamic theocracies there that do things like subjugate women and throw gay people off of a roof. That's barbarism as far as I'm concerned. So I'm not a fan of a lot of the socially conservative attitudes prevalent in a lot of the third world, for example. I do have that western secular arrogance of thinking that progressive western democratic states are superior to more traditionalist cultures and the like.

And, for the record, I dont think my own culture is actually the pinnacle of all success either. I think America is rather regressive and barbaric for a first world country. Compared to our peers in Europe and the like, we are still savages. And I call out this behavior regularly. 

 Those who are able to work, and refuse the opportunity, should not expect society’s support. 

 Strongly disagree. I believe in the power to say no, and to piggyback off of the last question, I literally view our culture surrounding work to be regressive and savage. A civilized country would have a UBI and universal healthcare.

When you are troubled, it’s better not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things. 

 Disagree. Ignoring problems isn't a good thing.

 First-generation immigrants can never be fully integrated within their new country. 

 Arnold Schwarzenegger exists and is based. Disagree.

 What’s good for the most successful corporations is always, ultimately, good for all of us. 

 Disagree. Corporations often put their profits ahead of people.

 No broadcasting institution, however independent its content, should receive public funding. 

 I don't really have a strong stance on this, but I kind of believe this question is absolutist and I disagree by default. 

 Our civil liberties are being excessively curbed in the name of counter-terrorism. 

 Strongly agree. The patriot act crap went way too far.

 A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system. 

 This is one of those questions where I have to agree with it, even if I don't think we should have a one party state. Agree.

 Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, only wrongdoers need to be worried. 

 Strongly disagree. I don't like big brother.

 The death penalty should be an option for the most serious crimes.

 Strongly disagree. It's expensive, doesn't deter crime, is barbaric, and we've probably executed innocent people before.

 In a civilised society, one must always have people above to be obeyed and people below to be commanded. 

 Disagree. I mean, it's hard because someone has to make the laws, but they should ultimately be responsible to the people. I do believe in democracy after all. I also have very libertarian leanings and dislike the idea of authorities just ruling over others without justified reasons to do so. So disagree.

 Abstract art that doesn’t represent anything shouldn’t be considered art at all. 

 Disagree, who the frick are these guys to say what art is and isn't?

 In criminal justice, punishment should be more important than rehabilitation. 

 Disagree. Intentionally punitive attitudes are barbaric. They also don't work and ignore the root causes of crime.

 It is a waste of time to try to rehabilitate some criminals. 

 Agree. Some people are too far gone. As for how I square this from the previous question, those who cant be rehabilitated should just be isolated from society.

 The businessperson and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and the artist.

 I mean, I actually have to agree with this. You cant live without making the things we need. 

Writers and artists provide great contributions to society, but you wouldn't die without them. You'd just be bored. It's maslow's hierarchy of needs. Manufacturers cover the basic essentials, artists and the like cover the things that make life worth living. Both are important, but one is more immediately important.

 Mothers may have careers, but their first duty is to be homemakers. 

 Disagree, do what you want. I ain't judging.

 Multinational companies are unethically exploiting the plant genetic resources of developing countries. 

 I mean, I guess? I feel like GMO risks are grossly overstated by the weirdo faction of the left, but there likely is some exploitation there. Agree but don't feel strongly either way. 

 Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity. 

 HAHAHAHAHAHA. No (strongly disagree).

 *has flashbacks from the 2016 election and the establishment trying to bully us into falling in line or else.*

 Astrology accurately explains many things. 

 Disagree. I may be new agey these days, but astrology is generally BS. 

 You cannot be moral without being religious. 

 Strongly disagree. And religious morality is barbaric morality to go back to the savage vs civilized question.

Charity is better than social security as a means of helping the genuinely disadvantaged. 

 Strongly disagree. And we should go further and have a basic income.

 Some people are naturally unlucky. 

 It's kind of hard to know what this means. If it means some people naturally end up in unlucky situations? Well, if you have a deterministic cosmology, sure.

If you mean some sort of supernatural woo, no, disagree.

 It is important that my child’s school instills religious values.

 No, education should not be indoctrination.

 Sex outside marriage is usually immoral. 

 Disagree, this is religious BS again.

 A same sex couple in a stable, loving relationship should not be excluded from the possibility of child adoption. 

 Strongly disagree. Let gay people adopt.

 Pornography, depicting consenting adults, should be legal for the adult population. 

 Agree, although I think it should be regulated to prevent exploitation. And people should have as UBI so they aren't financially coerced into doing it in the first place if they otherwise wouldn't.

 What goes on in a private bedroom between consenting adults is no business of the state. 

 Agree. Do what you want as long as you don't go all "mein teil" on your partner. 

 No one can feel naturally homosexual. 

 Strongly disagree, isn't the scientific consensus that homosexuality IS natural at this point?

These days openness about sex has gone too far. 

 Disagree. Society is repressed if anything.

 Now for the results:

Your Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -4.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92 

 Yeah, I did come out a bit more moderate. Probably because I decided to hit agree rather than strongly agree and the like with a lot of questions because I tried to have nuanced answers. I remember in 2016  I was far more likely to take extreme stances and hit strongly agree/disagree. As I said, in 2016 I was like -6/-6, now I'm like -4/-5. I moderated a little but my beliefs are still largely the same.

 

No comments:

Post a Comment