Liberal or Conservative

[vraiblonde]

Dems, that was a MUCH better test. And I got a different perspective, too.

Economic Left/Right: 2.25
Authoritarian/Libertarian: 1.44

I am almost EXACTLY in line with Gerhard Schroder. My recommended reading included Margaret Thatcher.

If you REALLY want an eye-opener, check out the Iconochasm page .

 

[Ken King]

Agreed, much better test.

Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -1.03

 

[vraiblonde]

I'll tell you what I find interesting:

Democrats are rapidly becoming the party of racial divisiveness and limiting freedoms, while Republicans are becoming the party of diversity and Constitutional rights. The Democrats' spin has it the other way around, but I don't know how you can argue with the facts.

JLab, bring it - I'm ready for you.

 

[Larry Gude]

OK, OK...

First off, I am Eco L/R .12
an Auth/Lib .97

Looking at the scale I'm good with this but I'm interested in how I got there.

Are we and our good friends the English still a people seperated by a common launguage?

I want some opinions:

#1

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

I strongly agreed but my answer is based on believing that this is so in that the interests of a trans-national corporation MUST be beholden to the people through a representative democracy and bill of rights that protect the individual as our US system does.

Extreme examples aside, the corporation can ONLY exist if it serves humanity.

So, I wonder if I got Nader-esque points for this or Reagan esque?

Also, wording, I guess:

Our race has many superior qualities

My reaction is HUMAN race. We have some superior qualities. We also have/had Adolph Hitler and Idi Amin. If they are scoring based on white/black/yellow then the writers of this thing are idiots.

Thoughts??? Did YOU think color?

More wording:

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

By definition land cannot be a commodity in a commercial sense. You can make more bacon and/make it better/cheaper. I suppose you could back fill a harbour.

Another:

Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society.

I voted "strongly disagree" because it is impossible for someone to make money in our market system without contributing to society. Maybe England does not tax investment income?

Anyway, interesting test but with, I think, some logic holes or at least questions on my part. Again, I'm cool with where it put me. Just not sure how I got there. That and it doesn't come close to where I vote.

Thoughts???

 

[vraiblonde]

Originally posted by Larry Gude
Thoughts???

Ummm...yeah - when did you become more liberal than me?

As far as our race having superior qualities, I thought, "Duh! Strongly Agree". The human race has superior qualities and all ethnicities have superior qualities so that was a no-brainer.

For the globalization question, I said "Strongly Disagree" since corporations ultimately serve humanity, not the other way around.

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

I said, "Um, duh! Strongly Disagree." Land has value since there's a finite amount of it. This goes hand-in-hand with my opinion of eminent domain.

Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society.

I strongly agreed because my first thought was daytraders and stock market junkies.

 

[Ken King]

Re: OK, OK...

Originally posted by Larry Gude
First off, I am Eco L/R .12
an Auth/Lib .97

Never thought I would be right of Larry. But we are in spitting distance of each other hovering around the middle.

Are we and our good friends the English still a people seperated by a common launguage?

I want some opinions:

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

I strongly agreed but my answer is based on believing that this is so in that the interests of a trans-national corporation MUST be beholden to the people through a representative democracy and bill of rights that protect the individual as our US system does.

Extreme examples aside, the corporation can ONLY exist if it serves humanity.

So, I wonder if I got Nader-esque points for this or Reagan esque?

I answered “AGREE”, if given a choice I would have to say that as an inevitability it should “serve” neither. An outcome of globalization can be improvements to humanity.

Also, wording, I guess: Our race has many superior qualities.

My reaction is HUMAN race. We have some superior qualities. We also have/had Adolph Hitler and Idi Amin. If they are scoring based on white/black/yellow then the writers of this thing are idiots.

Thoughts??? Did YOU think color?

I disagreed, our race isn’t much superior to many other life forms.

More wording: Land shouldn't be a commodity to be bought and sold.




By definition land cannot be a commodity in a commercial sense. You can make more bacon and/make it better/cheaper. I suppose you could back fill a harbour.

I agreed with this one as land (like many other non-replenishable items) has been given a value that changes with demand. We deed ownership to the individual and the individual should be able to determine the price for the land.

Another: Many personal fortunes are made by people who simply manipulate money and contribute nothing to their society.

I voted "strongly disagree" because it is impossible for someone to make money in our market system without contributing to society. Maybe England does not tax investment income?

Thoughts???

I agreed with this statement as I too thought about many like the day-traders and others that use others money to make theirs.

 

[vraiblonde]

Astrology accurately explains many things.

Actually, Ken, Larry thought they meant "astronomy" and said he strongly agreed. So there's hope for him yet.

 

[vraiblonde]

I'm not Vraiblonde..

...I'm just laughing at my dumb ###!!!!!!!!!!!! (or, she's laughing at me!)

LOL!!!!

This changes EVERYTHING!!!!! LOLOLOLOL

 

[vraiblonde]

We took the test again, this time together. When we got to the astrology question and Larry said he strongly agreed, I was like, "When the hell did THIS happen?"

 

[Ken King]

Originally posted by vraiblonde
Actually, Ken, Larry thought they meant "astronomy" and said he strongly agreed. So there's hope for him yet.

But the question is, is there hope for you?

 

[Kain99]

Score 38

 

[ThayerP]

My Score: R/L - 1.62 Auth/Liber : 1.33

It pegged me as Authoritarian Right with Maggie Thatcher.

Pretty good test. Better than the last one and I liked the idea of a two dimensional scoring system.

 

[Steve]

I got 28 on the first, putting me more liberal than Christy, but still comfortably Conservative.

I was Centrist on the second, leaning on the right but just barely, scoring EcoRight 1.75 and AuthLib -.51.

I took a similar test when I was 18 or 19 and scored towards the extreme Libertarian with higher Conservative tendencies. The scaling labels were different in that version, and I was labeled as desiring less Social interference by government with more Corporate freedom.

One last note, I detest the term Neo-Liberalism on the right-side X-axis. "Right" and "Liberal" should never be co-located.