8values political quiz

What can I say? It doesn't fit above, put it here. Also the location of board rules/info.
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3757
Joined: 20 Nov 2014 02:27

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by qwed117 »

In the end, you yourself are choosing which positions you choose to represent yourself supporting. You're not choosing these positions out of some true representation of your beliefs, but rather an interpretation of the question, and then the pragmatic alignment of what those questions actually equate to in terms of politics. This test doesn't measure your politics, it simply can't. This test measures your self perception of your politics.
Spoiler:
My minicity is Zyphrazia and Novland
What is made of man will crumble away.
User avatar
Reyzadren
greek
greek
Posts: 526
Joined: 14 May 2017 10:39
Contact:

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Reyzadren »

Result: Centrist

While it's nice to be a centrist, I wouldn't use that term to describe myself. Indeed, several questions seem not applicable.
Image Soundcloud Profile | Image griuskant conlang
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by sangi39 »

Oh, for anyone interested, there's the related "Nine Axes" quiz as well, if you have time to go through 216 questions (took about 15 minutes for me, while chatting with a friend).

Unlike the 8values quiz, and Political Compass quiz, it doesn't through a label at you, or place you within some political space in relation to some notable politician (which I guess is somewhat of a downside, but given how complicated politics can be, it would probably be quite difficult to sift through people's stances and position them within this framework), and instead just throws percentages out at you (which is probably a good thing, I guess, since it does avoid the use of broad categorisation).

So, swings and roundabouts. You get a more "accurate" result (although, yeah, there is some vagueness as what the writers of the quiz mean by "disagree", i.e. do they mean "you believe the contrary" or "you believe in the opposite of this statement", but I think that sort of thing turns up a bit less in this quiz that in the 8values one), but you don't get any point of comparison.

I think I roughly agree with the results I got (I have generally more "globalist" leanings, I prefer pacifism over military action, but recognise the benefits of having a military, tend towards personal freedoms without government interference in personal lives, but believe in government intervention in terms of the economy, and I'm more secular and "in favour" of multiculturalism, and have beliefs that sort of agree with traditions holding back "progress". I think democracy vs. authoritarianism seems about right as well. I've got some views there that the quiz doesn't take into account, but overall the roughly half-and-half result is okay).

But, again, it's just an online quiz. It has its limits, as they always do, but this feels like it has a wider scope, which is a plus at least.
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 441
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Pabappa »

Maybe this was the quiz I did a few years ago, not the shorter one. I think I remember it being fairly long.

https://9axes.github.io/results.html?a= ... &h=51&i=73

Looks like I'm pink 😉

Still basically a centrist though. And yes, I did the long version.
I'll take the theses, and you can have the thoses.
User avatar
sangi39
moderator
moderator
Posts: 2718
Joined: 12 Aug 2010 01:53
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by sangi39 »

Pabappa wrote: 25 Apr 2020 02:01 Maybe this was the quiz I did a few years ago, not the shorter one. I think I remember it being fairly long.

https://9axes.github.io/results.html?a= ... &h=51&i=73

Looks like I'm pink 😉

Still basically a centrist though. And yes, I did the long version.
Pink?
You can tell the same lie a thousand times,
But it never gets any more true,
So close your eyes once more and once more believe
That they all still believe in you.
Just one time.
User avatar
qwed117
mongolian
mongolian
Posts: 3757
Joined: 20 Nov 2014 02:27

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by qwed117 »

I think it's a reference to their high assimilationist score
Spoiler:
My minicity is Zyphrazia and Novland
What is made of man will crumble away.
User avatar
Pabappa
sinic
sinic
Posts: 441
Joined: 18 Nov 2017 02:41
Contact:

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Pabappa »

And my high pacifism score. Those are the only two categories I got anything other than just "Neutral" for. Ive always thought of green as the color of pacifism for some reason, but there doesnt seem to be anything to that .... it may have something to do with the slogan "Peace, Love, and Happiness" .... love hearts are typically red or pink, and smiley faces are almost always yellow ... that suggests using a blue or green color for the peace sign, and perhaps green is a happier color than blue over all. (Though Ive heard blue described as the most passive color.)

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4f/46/47 ... 2683da.jpg
I'll take the theses, and you can have the thoses.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2676
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by elemtilas »

sangi39 wrote: 25 Apr 2020 01:13 Oh, for anyone interested, there's the related "Nine Axes" quiz as well, if you have time to go through 216 questions (took about 15 minutes for me, while chatting with a friend).
Some of the questions were the same; but this quiz seems like more of the questions were straight up statements, and thus closer to answerable! Or leastways not nearly so vomit inducing! :P
I think I roughly agree with the results I got (I have generally more "globalist" leanings, I prefer pacifism over military action, but recognise the benefits of having a military, tend towards personal freedoms without government interference in personal lives, but believe in government intervention in terms of the economy, and I'm more secular and "in favour" of multiculturalism, and have beliefs that sort of agree with traditions holding back "progress". I think democracy vs. authoritarianism seems about right as well. I've got some views there that the quiz doesn't take into account, but overall the roughly half-and-half result is okay).
More axes, I think gives a little better picture. More statements also helps clarify positions better.

Pretty much right down the middle. Was happy to see the pacifism/militarism axis in evidence as well as the faith axis, though would much rather have seen morality and ethics axes.
User avatar
Creyeditor
MVP
MVP
Posts: 4012
Joined: 14 Aug 2012 19:32

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Creyeditor »

9axes short quiz puts more extreme labels on me, which I kind of like, it sounds very verwegen.
Creyeditor
"Thoughts are free."
Produce, Analyze, Manipulate
1 :deu: 2 :eng: 3 :idn: 4 :fra: 4 :esp:
:con: Ook & Omlűt & Nautli languages & Sperenjas
[<3] Papuan languages, Morphophonology, Lexical Semantics [<3]
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

elemtilas wrote: 24 Apr 2020 13:08
Personally, I didn't like my "center" result for the economic axis. I'm against weldare and Social Security, but support the Green New Deal and Napster (against intellectual property there), and also strongly disagree with the idea that a proprietor should be allowed to ask a customer to leave (and have her arrested for trespassing if she refuses!) for any reason he wants to. I want to stop Super-PACs from putting Republicans and Democrats who don't do enough to stop global warming in the White House. I am definitely not a moderate on economic issues.
I don't remember any questions about intellectual property or kicking people out of establishments! Though I concur: there ought to be a reasonable reason to kick someone out. I wouldn't much like a situation where nothing at all can be done to remove a load of trouble makers from a place, even if it is a dive.
That wasn't one of the questions on this particular (8values) quiz. It's just an issue that often comes up when people are discussing the corporate axis of the Vosem Chart.
Green New Deal is okay, but divorce it from the non-environmental issues. Deal with those separately.
I agree that we don't need the non-environmental issues in the Green New Deal, but I support the Green New Deal because the little question of whether humanity (and many other species) go extinct is so important to me.
Contra welfare and SS?!? That surprises me, honestly.
Well, I am an anarcho-syndicalist. Agreeing with the liberals on social issues, the conservatives on fiscal issues, and the liberals on corporate issues.

I don't let fiscal issues decide my vote, though, so I supported Bernie Sanders in 2016 and 2020 because of his stances on corporate and social issues. I would've been really happy if Elizabeth Warren or Andrew Yang had won the Democratic nomination as well, though. Now that Joe Biden is it, I'm going to vote for the Green candidate in the general election.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

Salmoneus wrote: 24 Apr 2020 14:37 "Centrist" doesn't mean "moderate" - it just means not consistently to one side or the other.

That means that either you're inconsistent, or the axis being measured is a conflation of multiple factors. Which, of course, it is [every axis is an averaging out of infinite possible dimensions]. But the result is that you seem to be a centrist on economic issues - as you oppose government intervention strongly in some areas (providing food for the starving), while supporting government intervention strongly in others (keeping the weather pleasant). Thus, you are neither consistently to one side nor another.
Huh, so the words "centrist" and "moderate" aren't interchangeable? Learned something new today . . .

Just a thought: All those polls that force the respondent to choose from among "liberal", "moderate", and "conservative" to describe his/her political ideology should be changed to "liberal", "centrist", or "conservative". Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative, but they take some positions moderates wouldn't touch (like legalizing heroin). Same with anarchists. And syncretists.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2676
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by elemtilas »

Khemehekis wrote: 27 Apr 2020 02:53
Salmoneus wrote: 24 Apr 2020 14:37 "Centrist" doesn't mean "moderate" - it just means not consistently to one side or the other.

That means that either you're inconsistent, or the axis being measured is a conflation of multiple factors. Which, of course, it is [every axis is an averaging out of infinite possible dimensions]. But the result is that you seem to be a centrist on economic issues - as you oppose government intervention strongly in some areas (providing food for the starving), while supporting government intervention strongly in others (keeping the weather pleasant). Thus, you are neither consistently to one side nor another.
Huh, so the words "centrist" and "moderate" aren't interchangeable? Learned something new today . . .
Maybe in Rightpondia. Or leastways in his understanding of how politics works. In Leftpondia, in my understanding at least, they're synonymous. I guess Americans are too simplistic in that regard! I've never heard the terms used in political discourse as anything other than roughly equivalent: if you reject the extreme ideals of the left and the right, that doesn't leave you much of an option (leastways on a typically American monolinear L/R spectrum): it leaves you somewhere in the middle (a CENTRIST) and thus a person with MODERATE political views. You could still be rather left (Democrat / liberal in the modern sense / progress for the sake of, but not utterly unfettered) or you could still be rather right (Republican / liberal in the classical sense / moderated progress); but viewing the big picture, you'd be closer to each other than either would be to its extreme fringes.
Just a thought: All those polls that force the respondent to choose from among "liberal", "moderate", and "conservative" to describe his/her political ideology should be changed to "liberal", "centrist", or "conservative". Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative, but they take some positions moderates wouldn't touch (like legalizing heroin). Same with anarchists. And syncretists.
It's my opinion, but these are examples (like other well known hot button moral, ethical, or social issues) of non-political issues that get politicised, if you take my meaning.
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

elemtilas wrote: 27 Apr 2020 22:19
Khemehekis wrote: 27 Apr 2020 02:53 Huh, so the words "centrist" and "moderate" aren't interchangeable? Learned something new today . . .
Maybe in Rightpondia. Or leastways in his understanding of how politics works. In Leftpondia, in my understanding at least, they're synonymous. I guess Americans are too simplistic in that regard! I've never heard the terms used in political discourse as anything other than roughly equivalent: if you reject the extreme ideals of the left and the right, that doesn't leave you much of an option (leastways on a typically American monolinear L/R spectrum): it leaves you somewhere in the middle (a CENTRIST) and thus a person with MODERATE political views. You could still be rather left (Democrat / liberal in the modern sense / progress for the sake of, but not utterly unfettered) or you could still be rather right (Republican / liberal in the classical sense / moderated progress); but viewing the big picture, you'd be closer to each other than either would be to its extreme fringes.
Given the definition of centrism that Salmoneus provided, it seems to be: "All moderates are centrists, but not all centrists are moderates".
Just a thought: All those polls that force the respondent to choose from among "liberal", "moderate", and "conservative" to describe his/her political ideology should be changed to "liberal", "centrist", or "conservative". Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative, but they take some positions moderates wouldn't touch (like legalizing heroin). Same with anarchists. And syncretists.
It's my opinion, but these are examples (like other well known hot button moral, ethical, or social issues) of non-political issues that get politicised, if you take my meaning.
These issues? You mean like legalizing heroin?
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

sangi39 wrote: 25 Apr 2020 02:14
Pabappa wrote: 25 Apr 2020 02:01 Maybe this was the quiz I did a few years ago, not the shorter one. I think I remember it being fairly long.

https://9axes.github.io/results.html?a= ... &h=51&i=73

Looks like I'm pink

Still basically a centrist though. And yes, I did the long version.
Pink?
Frankly, when Pabappa said "pink", I thought he meant either slightly conservative or slightly Communist.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Salmoneus
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2069
Joined: 19 Sep 2011 19:37

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Salmoneus »

Khemehekis wrote: 28 Apr 2020 00:07 Huh, so the words "centrist" and "moderate" aren't interchangeable? Learned something new today . . .
Given the definition of centrism that Salmoneus provided, it seems to be: "All moderates are centrists, but not all centrists are moderates".[/quote]

That's not quite true for usage here - 'moderate' is broader than 'centrist', so someone could describe themselves as a left-wing moderate, or moderately left-wing, but not a 'left-wing centrist', as that would be a contradiction (although they could be 'centre-left' or 'left of centre').

But yes, more fundamentally, a 'moderate' is someone who has no extreme political views; whereas a centrist is someone who is broadly equidistant between left and right (and both terms can be relative either to local politics or to international politics). To be moderate requires you to be broadly in the centre.

However, many people in the centre may not be moderate on issues that don't relate to the primary axis of competition - indeed, that's why the term "radical centre" exists.

In the UK, for example, somebody who was willing to kill to bring about Cornish independence, and who demanded at gunpoint the abolition of the church of england and its replacement by local churches lead by elected local politicians, could still consider themselves to be a "centrist", compared to left and right parties, but would not be considered to have 'moderate' views...
Just a thought: All those polls that force the respondent to choose from among "liberal", "moderate", and "conservative" to describe his/her political ideology should be changed to "liberal", "centrist", or "conservative". Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative, but they take some positions moderates wouldn't touch (like legalizing heroin). Same with anarchists. And syncretists.
Using the terms 'liberal', 'moderate' and 'conservative' is indeed very problematic, as it's only relevant within American media discourse, and doesn't even have a lot of validity comparing between eras. [because which views are 'conservative' and 'liberal' compared to american politics doesn't just slide, it sometimes outright flips... now, for example, a "conservative" can oppose immigration, call for trade tariffs, believe that the President should be able to override the decisions of Governors on state health matters, and welcome increased Russian influence in the world!]

Both 'liberal' and 'conservative' have specific meanings in political science.

Ideologies can be fundamentally divided into two kinds, based on a simple question: should the state promote the public good?

More specifically: states want people to live good lives. But sometimes people, even given the opportunity to improve their situation, appear to live lives that are less good than they could be. One approach is to say that the state must have its own conception of the good life, and help people to live it - this is known as "perfectionism". The other approach is to say that such conceptions should be minimal, if they exist at all, and that the state should only give people as much choice as possible over how to live their lives, even if that means that the outcome is less than ideal. This is known as "liberalism".

[this is not the same as the left/right question of how much the state should interfere in the economy - because intervention and abstention can both be justified either in liberal terms (both governments and corporations can limit individual autonomy) or in perfectionist terms (the status quo might either promote or endanger the best outcome)]

"Perfectionism" can then be divided into two kinds in turn. One kind says that existing and traditional society broadly understands the nature of the good, and that the state should therefore protect traditional values and allow them to shape people's lives. This is called "conservativism". The other kind says that existing and traditional society fundamentally fails to understand (or, at least, respect) the nature of the good, and that the state should therefore actively promote social change.

[again, this isn't the same as left/right. There are many left-wing conservatives - famously, this stance is very common in post-communist countries, where some people accept the economic interventions of communism, but want to preserve and promote traditional social values, such as religion. Contrariwise, a lot of early neoliberals were utilitarians - a kind of radicalism that identifies the public good with maximum happiness - who supported economic non-intervention not as an absolute good in its own right, but as a pragmatic tool to bring about the ideal world.]


----------


This sort of categorisation is very useful for considering what people believe and why they believe it; it's also useful in understanding the history of most major party systems (though not the US - both the democrats and the republicans originated as broadly liberal parties, which is partly why their actual policy positions have been so wildly variable over time).

But it doesn't line up very neatly with the contemporary American political rhetoric in which "liberal" is whatever the Democrats like and "conservative" is whatever the Republicans like...
It's my opinion, but these are examples (like other well known hot button moral, ethical, or social issues) of non-political issues that get politicised, if you take my meaning.
These issues? You mean like legalizing heroin?
That's certainly a political issue - almost a paradigm political issue!

Any debate on what should or shouldn't be legal is inherently political, because it's a decision taken by a small number of people that affects everybody.
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2676
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by elemtilas »

Khemehekis wrote: 28 Apr 2020 00:07 Given the definition of centrism that Salmoneus provided, it seems to be: "All moderates are centrists, but not all centrists are moderates".
Could be!

One thing's for sure: there's just no one clear definition for anything. Especially when viewed from an international perspective.
Just a thought: All those polls that force the respondent to choose from among "liberal", "moderate", and "conservative" to describe his/her political ideology should be changed to "liberal", "centrist", or "conservative". Libertarians are neither liberal nor conservative, but they take some positions moderates wouldn't touch (like legalizing heroin). Same with anarchists. And syncretists.
It's my opinion, but these are examples (like other well known hot button moral, ethical, or social issues) of non-political issues that get politicised, if you take my meaning.
These issues? You mean like legalizing heroin?
That's one of many, yes. Purely social or personal or health (individual or community) issues that have become politicised. What this means is that there is "{insert substance of choice} use" the political issue (let's legalise it to coddle to the Left! ~ it's my body it's my choice! ~ it's a "victimless crime"!) and then there's "{insert substance of choice} abuse" the medical~health issue (don't give me that political nonsense! - this shit fucks with every aspect of your being and no rational person should even be touching it, let alone promoting it)

Doesn't matter what substance we're talking about, whether it's etoh and the (I think disastrous time of Prohibition) or whatever it was they were fighting against during the heart-in-the-right-place-but-reason-not-engaged War On Drugs or the modern crusade against opioids.
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

elemtilas wrote: 28 Apr 2020 02:34 Doesn't matter what substance we're talking about, whether it's etoh and the (I think disastrous time of Prohibition) or whatever it was they were fighting against during the heart-in-the-right-place-but-reason-not-engaged War On Drugs or the modern crusade against opioids.
Are you missing a word?
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
User avatar
elemtilas
runic
runic
Posts: 2676
Joined: 22 Nov 2014 04:48

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by elemtilas »

Khemehekis wrote: 28 Apr 2020 04:25
elemtilas wrote: 28 Apr 2020 02:34 Doesn't matter what substance we're talking about, whether it's etoh and the (I think disastrous time of Prohibition) or whatever it was they were fighting against during the heart-in-the-right-place-but-reason-not-engaged War On Drugs or the modern crusade against opioids.
Are you missing a word?
Maybe...?

Give us a hint!

Rather, I think the punctuation's the culprit. Try this:

Doesn't matter what substance we're talking about, whether it's etoh and the (I think) disastrous time of Prohibition; or whatever it was they were fighting against during the heart-in-the-right-place-but-reason-not-engaged War On Drugs; or the modern crusade against opioids.
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

Salmoneus wrote: 28 Apr 2020 01:21
Khemehekis wrote: 28 Apr 2020 00:07 Given the definition of centrism that Salmoneus provided, it seems to be: "All moderates are centrists, but not all centrists are moderates".
That's not quite true for usage here - 'moderate' is broader than 'centrist', so someone could describe themselves as a left-wing moderate, or moderately left-wing, but not a 'left-wing centrist', as that would be a contradiction (although they could be 'centre-left' or 'left of centre').

But yes, more fundamentally, a 'moderate' is someone who has no extreme political views; whereas a centrist is someone who is broadly equidistant between left and right (and both terms can be relative either to local politics or to international politics). To be moderate requires you to be broadly in the centre.

However, many people in the centre may not be moderate on issues that don't relate to the primary axis of competition - indeed, that's why the term "radical centre" exists.

In the UK, for example, somebody who was willing to kill to bring about Cornish independence, and who demanded at gunpoint the abolition of the church of england and its replacement by local churches lead by elected local politicians, could still consider themselves to be a "centrist", compared to left and right parties, but would not be considered to have 'moderate' views...
Yes.

As an examination of how someone could be a centrist without being a moderate, let's imagine some fellow -- we'll call him Josh. Josh has these views from the left:

*Supports gay marriage
*Supports legalizing all drugs
*Wants to abolish the electoral college
*Wants Medicare for all
*Wants to keep Social Security
*Supports lowering the voting age to 12
*Supports the right to pirate music and DVD's
*Opposed to oil-drilling and the Keystone XL Pipeline
*Supports the Green New Deal
*Opposes racial profiling
*Supports affirmative action
*Believes it should be legal to go naked in public, or even have sex in front of children
*OK with human euthanasia

And Josh also has these views from the right:

*Pro-life
*Wants to abolish welfare
*Prefers a flat tax
*Supports the death penalty
*Supports a eugenics program, including the forced chemical sterilization of people with intellectual disabilities
*Believes police should be allowed to shoot campus protestors on sight
*Believes churches and religious charities should be church-exempt
*Supports teachers leading prayer in school
*Despite his support for gay marriage, believes a Baptist, Mormon, Muslim, etc. cake shop should be allowed to refuse to bake a wedding cake for a gay/lesbian wedding
*Supports carry-conceal
*Opposes bans on any category of weapon
*Wants to nuke North Korea and Iran

And, to mix it up, Josh also has this mixed view:

Supports shooting on sight lumberjacks caught cutting down rain-forests

Now, that's 13 positions from the left and 13 positions to the right, so Josh is exactly halfway between the two ends of a one-dimensional, linear political spectrum. Technically, he'd be in the center on a one-dimensional spectrum. However, he's definitely not a moderate, having both radical-left views (like legalizing heroin) and extreme-right views (like campus cops shooting protestors on sight). Josh is a syncretist.
[because which views are 'conservative' and 'liberal' compared to american politics doesn't just slide, it sometimes outright flips... now, for example, a "conservative" can oppose immigration, call for trade tariffs, believe that the President should be able to override the decisions of Governors on state health matters, and welcome increased Russian influence in the world!]
Definitely! Twenty years ago, I would never have imagined that it would be the RIGHT that's getting chummy with Russia!
Spoiler:
Oh, the Trumpster and the Russians should be friends,
Yes, the Trumpster and the Russians should be friends,
One nation has the Stripes and Stars,
The other overthrew a czar,
But that's no reason why they can't be friends!
More specifically: states want people to live good lives. But sometimes people, even given the opportunity to improve their situation, appear to live lives that are less good than they could be. One approach is to say that the state must have its own conception of the good life, and help people to live it - this is known as "perfectionism". The other approach is to say that such conceptions should be minimal, if they exist at all, and that the state should only give people as much choice as possible over how to live their lives, even if that means that the outcome is less than ideal. This is known as "liberalism".
This is more or less how I believe.
"Perfectionism" can then be divided into two kinds in turn. One kind says that existing and traditional society broadly understands the nature of the good, and that the state should therefore protect traditional values and allow them to shape people's lives. This is called "conservativism". The other kind says that existing and traditional society fundamentally fails to understand (or, at least, respect) the nature of the good, and that the state should therefore actively promote social change.
The latter of these two types of perfectionism is often called "liberalism" in the United States, but a more accurate term, as you no doubt know, would be "progressivism". Of course, many Americans use the words "liberal" and "progressive" interchangeably.
But it doesn't line up very neatly with the contemporary American political rhetoric in which "liberal" is whatever the Democrats like and "conservative" is whatever the Republicans like...
Ooh, you called it!

Just one good example among many: In the United States, Republican politicians generally support trying kids as adults at younger ages, while Democratic politicians generally oppose trying a 13-year-old or even a 15-year-old as an adult.

Here's the thing, though: when you are tried in a juvenile court (in the U.S.), you miss out on many rights that adults get, like the right to a jury of your peers. It makes it too easy to convict an innocent person without respecting the "reasonable doubt" standard. Also, if a 16-year-old is normally or always tried as a juvenile, it makes it harder to enact reforms like lowering the voting age to 16. You'll notice that when Ayanna Pressley introduced her boll to lower the voting age federally to 16, more than half of House Democrats voted in favor of it, while all but one House Republican voted against it.

For these reasons, I'm against trying a 16-year-old or even a 14-year-old as a juvenile. For one, it makes it too easy to convict an innocent person. Better a harsh punishment for someone you were actually cruddy enough to do than a lesser punishment for something whereof you were framed. And frankly, if some rotten kid blows up an arena for fun, I don't have much sympathy for him when he faces a hard-on punishment. And for two, I strongly favor the voting age being lowered to 16, and if 16-year-olds are tried as juveniles, it would make it harder to get people to entertain the idea of having these same 16-year-olds vote. Although, come to think of it, if we were to get rid of the juvenile justice system for everybody, we wouldn't speak of "trying a 16-year-old as an adult" anymore. We'd just be trying the 16-year-old as a human, which is what he is.

I lean left on social issues, and yet I find the Democrats disagreeing with me and the Republicans sharing my position on the trying-under18s-as-adults issue. Many would call my position "conservative" or "rightist", because it's what your typical, run-of-the-mill Republican believes. Do Republicans and Democrats have to believe what they believe on this issue? Is there anything in liberal, progressive, or conservative ideology that logically predicts what the stances will be? Not the way I see it. Considering Republicans and conservatives are so averse to granting suffrage to youth at a younger age, one might predict they'd want to deny the right to a jury of one's peers to a teen-ager.

Just think of this: Some sheet-wearing nutjob in Congress proposes a separate court system for African-Americans. This court system he's proposing would deny Blacks some of the basic rights of trial all American adults are currently afforded, but the penalties, if the accused is indeed convicted, would be more "gentle". Using Dr. Samuel Cartwright's pseudoscientific ideas about "drapetomania" and referencing century-old scientific racism texts, this congressman claims there's scientific evidence for the "fact" that Black people have less-developed brains and are less capable of reasoning and "mature" judgment. This congressman also tries to back it up by using statistics that Black people are far more likely to be convicted of crimes, per capita, than White people, and racistly appeals to "minstrel show" stereotypes and says, "They steal watermelons -- they don't know what's right and wrong!"

In this day and age of Trump, he might get a few Republicans voting aye -- who knows? But the liberals in Congress would no doubt be handing it to him, telling him what a racist pig he is, saying that these "lighter" punishments are like a moustache-comb consolation prize to the tremendous loss these African-Americans would suffer. Not only would there be a lot of false convictions, but this bill would be a slap in the face to the dignity of African-Americans. It may also make it harder for the other rights of Black people -- like freedom from voting suppression, not being shot by cops unarmed, etc. to be respected. All his supporters, I could pretty safely bet, would be on the right.

In the case of age instead of race, though, it's roles reversed. Lots of junk science about adolescent brains and facile, untrue Tide-Pod-eating stereotypes from botj sides of the Congressional aisle. Supporters of the juvenile justice system often even strain their credibility claiming to believe that 15-year-olds or even 17-year-olds are too young to know that murder is wrong! And it's even Republicans and not Democrats who are in lock-step against suffrage for 16-year-olds. But it's usually Democrats who say, "Don't try 17-year-olds as adults!" This has always frustrated me about Democrats.
These issues? You mean like legalizing heroin?
That's certainly a political issue - almost a paradigm political issue!

Any debate on what should or shouldn't be legal is inherently political, because it's a decision taken by a small number of people that affects everybody.
Well, I agree with you on that one. I'm more interested in what choices other people are allowed or forbidden to make on a given matter than what choice I'd make.
Last edited by Khemehekis on 28 Apr 2020 13:02, edited 4 times in total.
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Khemehekis
runic
runic
Posts: 2462
Joined: 14 Aug 2010 09:36
Location: California über alles

Re: 8values political quiz

Post by Khemehekis »

elemtilas wrote: 28 Apr 2020 04:42 Maybe...?

Give us a hint!

Rather, I think the punctuation's the culprit. Try this:

Doesn't matter what substance we're talking about, whether it's etoh and the (I think) disastrous time of Prohibition; or whatever it was they were fighting against during the heart-in-the-right-place-but-reason-not-engaged War On Drugs; or the modern crusade against opioids.
Ah, I see. So you're not missing a word. I just thought there that there was supposed to be some noun immediately after "the" and before the parenthesis, but you had accidentally left it out.

Turns out that's not the case. Thanks for your explanation!
♂♥♂♀

Squirrels chase koi . . . chase squirrels

My Kankonian-English dictionary: 66,000 words and counting

31,416: The number of the conlanging beast!
Post Reply