The Political Compass (again)

[Koko]

Koko is totally out to lunch about education in this country. A bachelor's degree takes 3-4 years (6-8 semesters), a master's usually takes 2 (4 semesters),

Hey! I got these two right eventually Plus, i was saying i had zero idea how long uni takes.

[Atluk]

Every time I take this, I get a different result. I keep bouncing back and forth between left and right and libertarian authoritarian. I just circle around the center, really.

I am sympathetic to Georgism, but Idk how well it would work if a Georgist society was ever truly and fully implemented.

[mōdgethanc]

-1.25, -5.95

Still a centrist liberal.

Also hilarious that Koko is praising the USSR for their economic policy that made the whole country impoverished except the ruling elite, when the capitalist West also go out of the Depression using centrist Keynesian policies and ended up way better off.

[Koko]

How am i praising the USSR? It was disgustingly statist.

[mōdgethanc]

You praised the economic system of the USSR:

Economically it was left, yes, and that actually saved the state from the Depression (and people say communism is bad. Bah! This is a thing that makes me largely in favour of leftism, because communism actually worked instead of the capitalistic "solutions" the Conservatives and US made). But socially the state was too far right that people fail to see the economic advantages of communism, and I would even say that isn't totally unfair (most communist regimes and states are absolutely terrible examples of communism).

This is ridiculous for a number of reasons:

- it's full of No True Scotsman fallacies about "true" communism, which is a mythical unicorn that has never existed
- it ignores that the Western responses to the Great Depression, such as the New Deal (created by a liberal Keynesian) did actually work
- more importantly, it completely ignores that the economy of the USSR was only successful during the period of industrialization and later on, it completely stagnated and was a major reason the Soviet Union imploded. The economy was always full of shortages and mismanagement, workers were not well paid, there was (highly ironically) widespread inequality, and the standard of living never reached that of the Western capitalist countries.

The only advantage communism has is large-scale industrial production. If the state says to build a factory or churn out military hardware, it can easily be done. But meeting the needs of the populace? Virtually impossible. Even a totalitarian state can't run a whole economy without any kind of market mechanism. China figured this out a long time ago and their economy skyrocketed in growth.

[Koko]

Dude, you're bringing stuff from like a year ago. I expected something like within the past couple months (well, may/june/this week) *cry-laugh emoji* Don't you think i'd have educated myself more?

[mōdgethanc]

Don't you think i'd have educated myself more?

Since you were talking enthusiastically about ethnic cleansing a day or two ago, the answer is "no".

[Koko]

(Given my complete abhorrence towards humans in general that you should already be aware of, i don't see how talking about expelling a large population out of the Americas is that surprising and would thus suggest ignorance in a subject i am much more enthused by than exacting revenge on the grandchildren of the people i actually hate)

[mōdgethanc]

I neither know nor care about your misanthropy nor do I care for revanchism. Deal with it.

[Koko]

Uhm ok. No prob. Even though those are exactly the reasons you assumed me to be ill-knowledged, but okay.

Neither do i care for your not caring of those two things. Deal with it.

[Michael]

So I've decided to take the test again, after almost exactly 4 years since I last took it. The results honestly surprise me. I can't quite put my finger on what I could have possibly answered differently then from now, because I used to think that my political views have always pretty much been static and unchanging, but I guess all of my frustration with this current Election has, unbeknownst to me, pushed me even more fiercely to the left.

How have I become even further to the left than Jill Stein?

Sept. 5, 2012:
Economic Left/Right: -6.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.05

Sept. 3, 2016:
Economic Left/Right: -7.63 (1.38 to the left)
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.33 (1.28 to the left)

[Babbsagg]

Economic Left/Right: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.13

[Hent]

Economic Left/Right -1.38
Social Lib/Auth -1.64

Wow this is quite accurate. What party is the closest to this result?

[md0]

Here's another quiz for everyone's collection, this one has quite high production values, but it is only exploring tendencies in anarchism. Also, it's in French, so votre kilométrage peut différer

http://sites.arte.tv/anarchisme/fr/vous ... anarchisme

[DissidentRage]

- it's full of No True Scotsman fallacies about "true" communism, which is a mythical unicorn that has never existed

I just wanna point this out as a non-argument. Saying that something doesn't fit a description with very precise criteria isn't "No True Scotsman."

Leftists generally understand that to be socialist means to have these attributes:

• no currency/market (in the liberal sense)
• no state
• no vertical hierarchies (i.e. class)

Falling short of this means it's not socialism, because any one of those things will lead to the whole thing falling apart.

What liberals get hung up on is the distinction between socialism and transitional phases (such as the USSR, Cuba, Rojava, the Parisian commune) which try to move an existing capitalist society into socialism.

[vijayjohn]

I just wanna point this out as a non-argument. Saying that something doesn't fit a description with very precise criteria isn't "No True Scotsman."

I'm sorry, but how can you claim that a term has "very precise criteria" inherent in its definition when tons of people have used the term throughout history without ever assuming the definition you describe?

Leftists generally understand

[citation needed]

that to be socialist means to have these attributes:

• no currency/market (in the liberal sense)
• no state
• no vertical hierarchies (i.e. class)

How is that not just anarchy

[DissidentRage]

I'm sorry, but how can you claim that a term has "very precise criteria" inherent in its definition when tons of people have used the term throughout history without ever assuming the definition you describe?

A mix of genuine ignorance (these are usually liberals who are discussing what constitutes socialism by making comparisons of shallow external observations) and intentional dilution from years of anti-socialist propaganda, the same way "fascist" is being diluted to "anyone who uses violence." No True Scotsman in this case is an intentional thought-terminating cliché to make it easy to dismiss any honest discourse of the subject.

[citation needed]

Ask anyone on r/socialism101. Even at its minimum definition as laid out by Marx socialism is worker ownership of the means of production. If that minimum is not met it's not truly a socialist society, the other aspects are either prerequisites or byproducts of this core tenet.

How is that not just anarchy

To answer this, one must understand the difference between communists and anarchists. The difference is that anarchists think that goal can be achieved now with sufficient numbers, political power and class consciousness. Communists believe a sort of transitional state apparatus or similar institution is required to guide and protect the revolution from sabotage and help transition existing capitalist systems into socialist ones. This is historically a source of conflict between the two groups.

[vijayjohn]

Communists believe a sort of transitional state apparatus or similar institution is required to guide and protect the revolution from sabotage and help transition existing capitalist systems into socialist ones.

And it's been tried over and over for close to a century now and has never once worked out this way.

[DissidentRage]

Oh wow, nobody's ever said that before. Oh, wait...

[md0]

Communists believe a sort of transitional state apparatus or similar institution is required to guide and protect the revolution from sabotage and help transition existing capitalist systems into socialist ones. This is historically a source of conflict between the two groups.