The Political Compass (again)

This forum is the place to have more serious discussions about politics and religion, and your opinions thereof. Be courteous!

Moderator:Forum Administrators

Forum rules
When a registered user insults another person (user or not), nation, political group or religious group, s/he will be deprived of her/his permission to post in the forum. That user has the right to re-register one week after s/he has lost the permission. Further violations will result in longer prohibitions.

By default, you are automatically registered to post in this forum. However, users cannot post in the politics forum during the first week after registration. Users can also not make their very first post in the politics forum.
User avatar
Saaropean
Posts:8808
Joined:2002-06-21, 10:24
Real Name:Rolf S.
Gender:male
Location:Montréal
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Saaropean » 2005-07-08, 12:27

Pips wrote:
JunMing wrote:There are some questions that many Europeans will not even consider, like:
"Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races."
"Abortion, when the woman's life is not threatened, should always be illegal."
"The death penalty should be an option for the most serious crimes."
"You cannot be moral without being religious."
(Did I dream, or did I really answer a question concerning "sex before marriage"? :shock: I can't find it now)


Could you please explain why these questions are so difficult for Europeans to answer? What makes them American-specific questions?
´
There simply is no discussion about that among democratic Europeans:
1) Only racists consider their race superior, and racists are extremists no reasonable person votes for.
2) Abortion might be a taboo among highly religious people, but Europeans in general.... Ask me about that in another thread. ;-)
3) The death penalty is considered barbarian. Only cruel dictatorships and the USA still have it.
4) We have left the Dark Age behind. Of course morality does not require religion.
5) Sex before marriage? Which sane person would try to forbid that? :shock:

senatortombstone

Postby senatortombstone » 2005-07-08, 12:33

Saaropean wrote:
Pips wrote:
JunMing wrote:There are some questions that many Europeans will not even consider, like:
"Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races."
"Abortion, when the woman's life is not threatened, should always be illegal."
"The death penalty should be an option for the most serious crimes."
"You cannot be moral without being religious."
(Did I dream, or did I really answer a question concerning "sex before marriage"? :shock: I can't find it now)


Could you please explain why these questions are so difficult for Europeans to answer? What makes them American-specific questions?
´
There simply is no discussion about that among democratic Europeans:
1) Only racists consider their race superior, and racists are extremists no reasonable person votes for.
2) Abortion might be a taboo among highly religious people, but Europeans in general.... Ask me about that in another thread. ;-)
3) The death penalty is considered barbarian. Only cruel dictatorships and the USA still have it.
4) We have left the Dark Age behind. Of course morality does not require religion.
5) Sex before marriage? Which sane person would try to forbid that? :shock:


Most of these questions were a no-brainer for me as well, I just answered them differently.

User avatar
Kubi
Posts:3235
Joined:2003-09-16, 15:17
Gender:male
Country:DEGermany (Deutschland)

Postby Kubi » 2005-07-08, 12:48

Pips wrote:Answers aren't black or white here either... that's why they give you four answers to choose from.

Not really. Basically they were yes or no. Only both in two degrees. That's not "different" for me. And with some questions I'd have liked answers like "irrelevant", "don't really care", "depends on the circumstances", "question wrongly worded", and others.
Je défendrai mes opinions jusqu'à ma mort, mais je donnerai ma vie pour que vous puissiez défendre les vôtres. - Voltaire

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Postby Varislintu » 2005-07-08, 13:10

Pips wrote:
Varislintu wrote:In Europe, at least one difference is that it's not as easy to divide people into two ideological camps.


The whole point of this test is that it measures along two different axes, so it goes a step beyond simple division into two camps.


Yes, I got that :) . What I meant is that how do they measure the answerer's position on the Left/Right-line? If an American is asked a question that clearly reveals their belonging either to Dem or Rep, theoretically their stand on other issues can be assumed from this one question, as well. I just hope that the makers of this test do not make that assumption based on a few questions, that in America may be very obvious camp-dividers (I'm supposing that's why they had some of those odd questions in the test meantioned in this thread earlier). But I'm sure they've at least tried to take it into account. This test seems to be quite popular, after all. One would assume they've put some work into it.

User avatar
NulNuk
Posts:2116
Joined:2002-06-21, 11:12
Real Name:Nicolas
Gender:male
Location:the great NulKie empire on the Moon

Postby NulNuk » 2005-07-08, 13:29

There simply is no discussion about that among democratic Europeans:
1) Only racists consider their race superior, and racists are extremists no reasonable person votes for.
2) Abortion might be a taboo among highly religious people, but Europeans in general.... Ask me about that in another thread. Wink
3) The death penalty is considered barbarian. Only cruel dictatorships and the USA still have it.
4) We have left the Dark Age behind. Of course morality does not require religion.
5) Sex before marriage? Which sane person would try to forbid that? Shocked

1) Europa is the most rasist continent in the world
(that is what the UN reports say ,not just me ).
and rasist are ppl that unfortunable Europeans still vote,
and unfortunable ,just like before ,Europeans still refuse to recognice it ,
and I hope that the outcome from the Europeans doing
the same mistakes they did before will not endup in a new olocaust :'0{
the very fact that you think other nations can unswer to that ,
but its ovious the Europeans don`t need to cos they are better ,unswers the quetion for you! .

2) as far as I know ,in most Europa abortion is ilegal ,
and Europa is democratic ,and by the way ,I know lots
of non religeous Europeans that are against abortion ,
but just from the firsth paragraph I have anough to say
that even if many Europeans accept abortion ,they are not difrent from other continents in their views about it!.
(again ,an unswer that only some one that thinks Europeans are better would unswer ).

3)even though most Europeans are against ,that does not mean all are ,
but in this one I agree ,most of the world (and not just
the Europeans ),are defenetly against dead penalty.

4)again ,dark ages are not so far from Europa ,
and even if not so religeous as Muslems ,many Europeans
are defenetly reliegous anough to agree with sutch unswer ,so yes ,this one allso
allmighty goody Europeans can unswer too .

5) again ,in Europa are lots of religeous who would ,
even in the US most of the religeous are not religeous
anogh to agree with it ,so in this question ,I dont
think I would find many diferences between the US and Europa .

sorry to ruin it for you ,but snep out of you`r dreems
Europeans are not more moral or better then the rest
of the world ,in some things they are even worce .
so there is no question here that no European could say
Europeans are too moral to unswer .
thats just an irritating and condesending rasist atitude
that is so much coomon amoung Europeans ,that you just fale to see how rasist
and condesending against other rases it is .

just to show you how much rasist the Europeans are ,
in the last Lebaniece war ,the French sended trupes
to Lebanon ,and Lebanon asqued France to pleace not to
help ,coz they were afrid from the rasist French and
what would they do in there (they thoght the French would
endup killing everybody ,regardles of sides ),
and they asked from Israel to help them with the war ,
and yes ,I admit ,Israel is quite a rasist country ,
and yet ,even the Arabs prefer that Israel will help
them and not Europeans ,becouse they are scared from them ,
and that didnt happen in the dark ages ,but in the 90`s .

I don`t hate Europeans ,but I really hate it when I
see so many Europeans that consider them self more moral
and better than the rest of the world ,just becouse they are Europeans ! >:0{ .
Every thing I write, wrote, or will write, its in my own opinion, for I have no other.
Release me from the duty of being polite and remind you, "I made use of my own brain".

User avatar
Zoroa
Posts:2025
Joined:2002-12-13, 16:53
Gender:male
Location:NYC
Country:FRFrance (France)

Postby Zoroa » 2005-07-08, 14:00

I agree with you except on two points :

-There is a huge lebanese community in Paris amnd all the Lebanese I know love French culture and say France greeted them warmly. Lebanese do not think French are racist.

-Europe is not more racist. Just as racist as every other countries. But it's more hushed up. You can't openly express you're racist, whereas in some countries it's a sign of courage and bravery !

Zoroa ;)
Deviens qui tu es !
Nietzsche "Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra"

User avatar
CoBB
Posts:5265
Joined:2004-08-26, 8:34
Real Name:PG
Gender:male
Location:An island...
Country:HUHungary (Magyarország)
Contact:

Postby CoBB » 2005-07-08, 14:06

I didn't know there was something like an archetypical European...
Tanulni, tanulni, tanulni!

A pő, ha engemély, kimár / De mindegegy, ha vildagár... / ...mert engemély mindet bagul, / Mint vélgaban a bégahur!...

senatortombstone

Postby senatortombstone » 2005-07-08, 16:42

Just for fun I went through the test 4 times, each selecting only one response, here are the results:

If all answers are:

Strongly Disagree: 0.00, -4.36

Disagree: -0.25, -2.41

Agree: 0.38, 2.41

Strongly Agree: 0.00, 4.36

It I double checked my answers for AGREE and DISAGREE, but if you think I might have done this incorrectly, please go through again and verify that these scores are correct.

User avatar
leppie
Posts:1413
Joined:2003-01-13, 13:22
Real Name:Giorgio Donnini
Gender:male
Location:MIlano
Country:ITItaly (Italia)
Contact:

Postby leppie » 2005-07-08, 19:29

Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -8.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.90
Se il drago rifiuta di combattere,
forse è solo pigro.
Ma se ignora la zanzara,
allora è davvero addormentato.

FNORD
Posts:1354
Joined:2004-08-28, 21:16
Gender:male
Location:São Paulo
Country:BRBrazil (Brasil)

Postby FNORD » 2005-07-08, 20:23

Old results were -2.88 economical / -1.69 social
New results are +0.75 economical / -2.46 social
Average being: -1.065 economical / -2.075 social

And of course, there were those stupid sex-related questions.

Am I the fist unilanger to change sides?

User avatar
CoBB
Posts:5265
Joined:2004-08-26, 8:34
Real Name:PG
Gender:male
Location:An island...
Country:HUHungary (Magyarország)
Contact:

Postby CoBB » 2005-07-08, 20:50

It's within the margin.
Tanulni, tanulni, tanulni!



A pő, ha engemély, kimár / De mindegegy, ha vildagár... / ...mert engemély mindet bagul, / Mint vélgaban a bégahur!...

User avatar
JackFrost
Posts:16240
Joined:2004-11-08, 21:00
Real Name:Jack Frost
Gender:male
Location:Montréal, Québec
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby JackFrost » 2005-07-08, 20:54

Saaropean wrote:3) The death penalty is considered barbarian. Only cruel dictatorships and the USA still have it.

That's a little overgeneralization though. The US is such a big country, and there are states that abolished the death penalty.

Twelve states do not have the death penalty on their books: Alaska, Hawaii, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Vermont, West Virginia and Wisconsin. In addition, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico do not have the death penalty.


And a majority of the states do not use it, though it has the death penalty allowed in their lawbooks.

Most U.S. states either do not have a death penalty at all or almost never use it. Twenty-nine states have carried out three or fewer executions in the past 30 years or have a moratorium on executions. Almost all of these states carried out no more than one execution in 30 years. Only 9 states have averaged at least one execution per year since the death penalty was reinstated in 1976, and only 4 of those states (Texas, Virginia, Oklahoma, and Missouri) have averaged two or more executions per year during that time.


http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/

And for your information, Japan has it too. I read an interesting article how "secretive" is the execution method is carried out in Japan. It forbids media from reporting it. It rarely allows politicans to witness it. Only a few people can witness it, and often it's not the family or friends of the victim. I wish I could show you, but I don't remember which magazine I saw it in.


I don't want to get off-topic about this, but I just wanted to make this clearer for you.
Neferuj paħujkij!

User avatar
Saaropean
Posts:8808
Joined:2002-06-21, 10:24
Real Name:Rolf S.
Gender:male
Location:Montréal
Country:CACanada (Canada)

Postby Saaropean » 2005-07-09, 7:23

JackFrost wrote:
Saaropean wrote:3) The death penalty is considered barbarian. Only cruel dictatorships and the USA still have it.

That's a little overgeneralization though.

That's not the only overgeneralization in that post. ;-)

JackFrost wrote:The US is such a big country, and there are states that abolished the death penalty.
I don't want to get off-topic about this, but I just wanted to make this clearer for you.

I doubt how many Europeans know it, and how many care about it. You can still say the US is barbarian because the death penalty still exists in some of its states.

senatortombstone

Postby senatortombstone » 2005-07-09, 22:41

Saaropean wrote:
JackFrost wrote:The US is such a big country, and there are states that abolished the death penalty.
I don't want to get off-topic about this, but I just wanted to make this clearer for you.

I doubt how many Europeans know it, and how many care about it. You can still say the US is barbarian because the death penalty still exists in some of its states.


How can anyone who supports abortion on-demand, which is the ruthless slaughter of innocent human babies, have the nerve to call barbaric the execution of those convicted of commiting high crimes?

It is so weird that there are some who would protest the executions of Timothy McVeigh or Ted Bundy, two mass murdering barbarians; and yet not bat an eyelash when a baby in the third trimester is stabbed in the head with scissors and then has its brains sucked out by a vacuum cleaner.

I am not saying the US justice sytem use of the death penalty is perfect or even that in every case that it has been applied correctly or fairly , but abortion is always murder, for an unborn child is always innocent of any crime.

To be anti-death penalty and pro-abortion is the utmost in hypocracy.

Death in many cases is justice

Varislintu
Posts:15429
Joined:2004-02-09, 13:32
Country:VUVanuatu (Vanuatu)

Postby Varislintu » 2005-07-10, 11:26

Mägog wrote:
How can anyone who supports abortion on-demand, which is the ruthless slaughter of innocent human babies, have the nerve to call barbaric the execution of those convicted of commiting high crimes?

It is so weird that there are some who would protest the executions of Timothy McVeigh or Ted Bundy, two mass murdering barbarians; and yet not bat an eyelash when a baby in the third trimester is stabbed in the head with scissors and then has its brains sucked out by a vacuum cleaner.

I am not saying the US justice sytem use of the death penalty is perfect or even that in every case that it has been applied correctly or fairly , but abortion is always murder, for an unborn child is always innocent of any crime.

To be anti-death penalty and pro-abortion is the utmost in hypocracy.

Death in many cases is justice


How can anyone who supports excecutions on-demand, which is the ruthless slaughter of quite possibly innocent human beings, have the nerve to call barbaric the termination of a bunch of cells that _with time_ might develope into a person?

None of us humans are so allknowingly smart, that we could judge the true guilt of other human beings with objective clarity and never failing success, and then on top of that be able to objectively choose which crimes are punishable by death and which not. In today's societies, even to attempt this is a joke, that probably wasn't very funny to those people who have apparantly been put to death on false assumptions.

If their own life is not something the grown up individual has ownership of, then why does a fertilized egg cell have an uncontestable right to it, then?

To be pro-death penalty and anti-abortion is the utmost in hypocracy.

User avatar
Ariki
Posts:2410
Joined:2004-10-01, 14:53
Real Name:Tāne
Gender:male
Country:NZNew Zealand (New Zealand / Aotearoa)

Postby Ariki » 2005-07-11, 3:33

Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: -5.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.36


I'm neither authoritarian nor libertarian :)
Linguicide IS genocide. :)

He ingoa ōpaki a Riki; he ingoa ōkawa a Ariki.

Riki is an informal name; Ariki is a formal name.

senatortombstone

Postby senatortombstone » 2005-07-11, 13:19

[quote="Varislintu"][quote="Mägog"]


Is that all you consider an unborn human being? Have you ever seen pictures of aborted human beings? They look pretty human to me.

No offense, but if you think that it is okay to have an abortion for any reason and at in any time during the gestation period, then you really have no respect for human life, period!

People like Bundy and McVeigh were admitted killers who each took, violently, the lives of over 100 people (Bundy admitted to a couple dozen, but he is suspected of possibly killing over 100). What has an unborn child done?

And if you're so worried about executed criminals being innocent, then why should we even have prisons? I think it would be almost as bad to have to serve a life sentence for a crime I didn’t commit, as it would be to instantly die for and avoid decades of boredom, rape and abuse.

And honestly, if an unborn human is "a lump of cells" "who might turn into a human" then what are infants (or we for that matter)? "babies who might turn into an adult?" should we begin to euthanize babies who are unwanted or who have health problems or who are a burden to their parents? After all, they may not become adults ?


I respect life, innocent life. Babies are innocent, murderers are not. Some murderers deserve to die, no baby does.

I remember once having this debate with a womanizer who impregnated at least 18 women in his life. He told me that six of those actually went full-term and the rest were either miscarried or abortions. This guy was a serious pig who only desired sex and drugs; he was in his fifties when I met him.

At the time I knew him he was living with some new girlfriend who already had a young child. He told me that he got his girlfriend pregnant once, but that they had an abortion for whatever selfish and convenient reason suited them. He said “she regrets it, but it was for the best.” I asked him “if you and she had had this child, do you think she would have regretted it (being born)?” He didn’t have an answer for that and believe me this loudmouth had an answer for everything.


And as a last point, I am not an unreasonable person.

I would gladly compromise with liberals, if they would with me and abolish both the death penalty and abortion.

I would be willing to sacrifice justice for life. Would they be willing to sacrifice "choice" for life?

User avatar
Zoroa
Posts:2025
Joined:2002-12-13, 16:53
Gender:male
Location:NYC
Country:FRFrance (France)

Postby Zoroa » 2005-07-11, 13:56

Some murderers deserve to die, no baby does.


Read the Bible and you'll find your answer. If you say yourself a Christian, never take a man's life, because it's God's power, not ours.

I do not support death penalty nor abortion, but I believe that if someone's life is endangered, one can consider killing (self defence, etc.). But that solution is of course the last one.

And if you're so worried about executed criminals being innocent, then why should we even have prisons? I think it would be almost as bad to have to serve a life sentence for a crime I didn’t commit, as it would be to instantly die for and avoid decades of boredom, rape and abuse.


Once again, in a logical speech, a bad thing doesn't justify something as bad...

And honestly, if an unborn human is "a lump of cells" "who might turn into a human" then what are infants (or we for that matter)? "babies who might turn into an adult?" should we begin to euthanize babies who are unwanted or who have health problems or who are a burden to their parents? After all, they may not become adults ?


You're talking about two different things (cell-> baby, human features (conscience, etc.) appear. Different from the change from baby to adulthood)

Zoroa ;)
Deviens qui tu es !

Nietzsche "Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra"

User avatar
CoBB
Posts:5265
Joined:2004-08-26, 8:34
Real Name:PG
Gender:male
Location:An island...
Country:HUHungary (Magyarország)
Contact:

Postby CoBB » 2005-07-11, 15:21

It all depends on the circumstances. If a woman is a rape victim, she should be given the chance to decide about the foetus. If her life is threatened by the baby, it's even worse. If it is absolutely certain that the foetus has a serious defect which might not prevent it from being born alive but make its and its family's further life much harder than normal, it should be an option. Even if someone just doesn't have the financial background to bring up a child, abortion—before a certain point—is still much better than having mothers killing their newborn and/or throwing it out with the garbage. That happens just too frequently. (Of course the best way would be proper contraception, but many people seem never to learn the lesson...)

The same applies to death penalty. There are some (probably very few) people who really don't deserve to live any more, let alone 'be reintegrated'. Why should they get another chance if their victims didn't get one? Why should they be allowed to lead a life with more prospect than a homeless or alcoholic that only hurt themselves? Indeed there is a danger of executing innocent people, but such mistakes can be prevented by reserving this kind of punishment for the cases with no doubt whatsoever.

Of course making these decisions is a hard task. Still I think it's better to think hard first than simply discarding them and always deciding for life. It can easily result in an even worse situation.
Tanulni, tanulni, tanulni!



A pő, ha engemély, kimár / De mindegegy, ha vildagár... / ...mert engemély mindet bagul, / Mint vélgaban a bégahur!...

User avatar
kibo
Posts:6942
Joined:2003-12-16, 18:35
Gender:male
Country:RSSerbia (Србија)

Postby kibo » 2005-07-11, 16:31

Congrats for turning another thread into a f***ing religious discussion.
Goals:
[flag=]es[/flag] ➜ C1 (DELE)
[flag=]de[/flag] ➜ B2 (Goethe-Zertifikat) / C1
[flag=]sv[/flag] ➜ B1/B2


Return to “Politics and Religion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests