General discussion


Political Compass

By ProtiusX ·

This is an interesting site. I visited it about a year ago and again today. The questions have changed but my result is still the same. I scored a 5.52 to the right and 1.18 up so I am in the Conservative Authoritarian quadrant. Go figure. I hope you will take the test and post your results. We did this at our office last year and plotted everyones results. What's interesting is that you think you know someone and all of a sudden they come out something totally different than what you expected.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

54 total posts (Page 3 of 6)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next
Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Surprise I 'm a Lefty Libertarian

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Political Compass

Economic Left/Right: -6.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.38

So probably not unexpected, but quite interesting.

Collapse -

Not New Labour, then?

by neilb@uk In reply to Surprise I 'm a Lefty Li ...
Collapse -

They are starting to get right up my nose.

by Tony Hopkinson In reply to Not New Labour, then?

Gone down the racist pandering route according to this am's news. Course the tories are worse, not to mention driveling idiots.
Still the only choice unfortunately.

Collapse -

Moral issues

by jardinier In reply to Political Compass

I personally cannot see how attitudes to moral issues relate to political preferences.

Here is a list of some of these questions from the test:

Sex outside marriage is usually immoral.

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

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

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

No one can feel naturally homosexual.

And as to how the following have anything to do with political persuasions is quite beyond my comprehension:

Astrology accurately explains many things.

Some people are naturally unlucky.

I realise that abortion and homosexual unions are political issues in the USA, but this has never been the case in Australia.

In ALL moral issues, MPs are invited to make a conscience vote, and not necessarily follow party lines.

Here is a current news item which sets this issue out pretty clearly:

February 6, 2005
The Prime Minister, John Howard, said today he would permit Parliament to debate a private member's bill on abortion but had no expectation it would pass.

Mr Howard said he personally did not like abortion and he expected the Opposition Leader, Kim Beazley, held similar views.

Pro-life Labor backbencher, John Murphy, has proposed putting forward a private member's bill to force doctors to provide more information about abortions. Other members have flagged bills limiting Medicare funding of abortions.

Mr Howard said a debate on such a bill if introduced would certainly cause divisions within the Government but also within the Labor Party.

"If somebody put forward a private member's bill and there seemed to be a strong desire to have a debate about it, then I think the sensible thing would be to allow it to be debated. It would be silly not to," he said on the Nine Network.

Asked if he thought such a bill would have any chance of success, he replied: "No, I don't."

"My view is that there is not a majority in the Parliament to limit existing funding arrangements."

Mr Howard said there seemed to be a view from some that because the abortion issue had been already debated, it could not be debated again.

He said people could not be stopped talking about something they felt strongly about.

"This is Australia. It's a democracy and people can raise anything they like but the Government's position has not changed," he said.

"We are not going to be sponsoring any change to the existing funding arrangements. That is our role. The law is governed by the states.

"I don't expect there to be a private member's bill to limit funding arrangements. If there were to be one, then everybody would be allowed a free vote."

Mr Howard said practical and sensible comments had come from Catholic Archbishop of Sydney Cardinal George Pell and Anglican Archbishop of Sydney Peter Jensen.

He said Cardinal Pell said the Catholic church was going to establish a facility to encourage women to look at alternatives to abortion.

"That is a practical way of approaching it. It enhances choice and that is to be commended," he said.

"Archbishop Jensen spoke a great deal of sense when he said that people in the churches and elsewhere should not expect members of Parliament on an issue like this to legislate in defiance of public opinion."

Earlier, Mr Beazley reaffirmed the right of Labor MPs to take their own stand on abortion, but urged them to be cautious.

Mr Beazley said everyone in the Labor Party was entitled to their own view on abortion.

"People in the Labor Party are allowed an individual attitude on abortion," he told the Ten Network.

"Having said that, I do regard the privacy issues concerned with women who have the process of a termination, I do regard them as important and I would not want to see that violated in any way."

Senior Nationals senator Ron Boswell has also raised the prospect of introducing his own private member's bill to change Medicare funding for abortion.

He reignited the abortion debate by requesting detailed statistical information about women who had terminations and what the procedures cost.

Mr Beazley said he believed Senator Boswell had another agenda behind his request for more statistics on abortions.

"Yes, I think he has another agenda, you can ask him about his particular agenda," Mr Beazley said.

"But what I have to say about that is this, this country, this community has decided via courts, via legislation in some states, and it is a state issue primarily in terms of the legislation, that women do have a right to choose."

Mr Beazley praised the work of a Catholic church in Sydney which last year set up services to help make it easier for women to have a baby instead of having an abortion.


Collapse -

Moral issues

by ProtiusX In reply to Moral issues

We all concern ourselves with moral issues that equate to political ideology. We either believe that welfare for the poor and oppressed is a good thing or we do not. Either way we make a choice as to how this ideology manifests itself in our chosen forms of government. Laws are extensions of our morality and are therefor part of the political system. For instance: I believe that it is wrong and immoral for the state to allow homosexuals to adopt children. I will vote for the political candidate who agrees with me so that he or she will enact laws prohibiting homosexual adoption. You might disagree with me on this issue so you will vote for a candidate who thinks and feels like you do so that your candidate if elected would enact laws protecting the homosexual's "right" to adoption.

Collapse -

As it turns out...

by Jessie In reply to Political Compass

I'm Economic Left/Right: -5.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.74
which makes me an Economically left Libertarian. I'm in good company though, with Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama. No wonder I like me. :)

Collapse -

Nelson Mandela

by maxwell edison In reply to As it turns out... a Communist.

Collapse -


by Jessie In reply to Nelson Mandela

Now you're just name-calling...

So I guess, now, being a communist gets you the Nobel Peace Prize (awarded in 1993), the Sakharov Prize for freedom of thought (1988), the Order of St. John from Queen Elizabeth II and the Presidential Medal of Freedom from George W. Bush.

Yeah... definitely a communist in the WORST sense of the word.

Collapse -

It's not name calling

by maxwell edison In reply to Hmmmm...

Being a communist means that one believes in a particular political ideology based on a particular desired social structure. I would call myself a Libertarian; George Bush is a Republican; John Kerry is a Democrat; and Nelson Mandela is a Communist. Now I will admit, that in the case of Bush, Kerry and I, ours is a label that we proudly carry, while in the case of Mandela (and many other "communist-type" thinkers), he (and they) might deny it. But simply apply the duck test, and it's obvious. If it looks like a duck, if it walks like a duck, and if it quacks like a duck, it means that Nelson Mandela is a Communist.

Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm.

Nelson Mandela has a close friendship with both Fidel Castro and Moammar Al Qadhafi, and he is on the record as calling them both "comrades in arms".

"Long live the Cuban Revolution. Long live comrade Fidel Castro..."
- Nelson Mandela

Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm.

And is Nelson Mandela sympathetic to the TERRORIST cause? Both Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan considered him a terrorist. And we know that he was the leader of a South African terrorist organization before he was sent to prison, one that carried out a sabotage campaign against military, government and civilian targets, actions that killed hundreds of innocent civilians.

"We consider ourselves to be comrades in arms to the Palestinian Arabs in their struggle for the liberation of Palestine.....There is not a single citizen in South Africa who is not ready to stand by his Palestinian brothers in their legitimate fight against the Zionist racists.?" (That would be the Jews.)
- Nelson Mandela

And what does Nelson Mandela think of the United States, 9-11 and Osama bin Laden? He claims that labeling Osama bin Laden as the terrorist responsible for 9-11 was a mistake and that it violates the rule of law.

Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm.

Now we know what he's said, but what else has he done?

While the leader of South Africa, Mandela sent South African troops to help overturn the results of a democratically held election in Lesotho, elections that would have transformed that country's quasi-dictatorship to a parliamentary form of government. So much for free and open elections. While they were at it, there were reports of arson, violence and looting carried out by the South African soldiers.

Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm.

And what about his wife of 38 years, Winnie Mandela? Well, she was found guilty on 43 counts of fraud and 25 counts of theft because of a scheme in which she set up a phony insurance service and then pilfered money from participants' accounts.

Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm. Hmmmmmmm.

Personally, I'd be ashamed to be associated with Nelson Mandela in any way at all. Why many people of the world hold him in such high esteem is something that, I must admit, is baffling to me. (I think that he's probably a few cards shy of playing with a full deck.)

However, I should stand corrected. Nelson Mandela is a communist who not only hates the United States, but he loves our money, but also believes in employing terrorist tactics.

Thanks for the giving me the opportunity to clear that up.

Collapse -

Freedom fighter.

by Jessie In reply to It's not name calling

The label of terrorist depends on which side of the oppressive white South African regime, you favor. The side I'm{/I] on calls him a freedom fighter and an activist for equality. That "terrorist organization" he was a part of was the ANC (African National Congress) on whose behalf he accepted the Nobel Prize in 1993.

You might find particularly interesting, though I'm sure you'll pick out the parts that suit you best and leave the rest, Mandela's testimony at his treason trial.

Back to Community Forum
54 total posts (Page 3 of 6)   Prev   01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums