sundin13 said:
Immersiveunreality said:
Really if you are a moderate in the US there is a possibility you are more likely to think in a logically and more considerate way but i understand why some angerfueled people that go way extreme to both sides might consider you a problem.

I've been talking about something I like to call "Centrism Bias" for a while now. I think a lot of people have this idea of "Moderates" that you expressed here where those in the middle get kind of put on a pedestal of rationality and objectivity, which leads a lot of people who are clearly not moderate to identify as such. Because of this "centrism bias", when I see someone self-identifying as a moderate, I instantly see a little red flag. Often these are people with a clear lean who just want to present as a moderate to give themselves some sort of moral or rational high ground. If you criticize them and their beliefs, they often use it as a crutch and say "I'm not liberal/conservative, I'm a moderate!" to escape criticism. 

Of course this doesn't apply to everyone, but its something I've seen often enough that I think it is worth mentioning.

I see it more as the opposite of how you see it,in my experience the more radical someone gets the more tone deaf and often the higher the horse is they sit on.

It really depends on the person using the words ofcourse and just the culture you come from/in this context Jaicee seems very open about what side she is on but is more open to behaviour that those in an echochamber might block.

I do not really see moderate as centrism no,just a state of personallity that can exist anywhere on the spectrum,that is were our opinion differs?

Ofcourse there are people who are not what they say and use a term/word to be on a high horse,case to case scenario is important to consider and do not put people in groups attached with negativity so easily.Based on personallity and maturity people get on high horses not matter what labels are attached to them.

Jaicee said:
Immersiveunreality said:

Lol i did the political compass thingy,do not know if it is even close to accurate.

For the more extreme i might be considered fairly moderate i guess.

Just reading over some of these questions and even more especially the summation at the end, I'd say this test was designed to land as many people as possible in the bottom-left quadrant and as many politicians as possible in the upper-right quadrant for contrast. The way things are written also seems old, like this test was made 15 years ago or something. I can't help but notice the absence of questions about issues like gender identity or gun policy that have become much more relevant in this country, if not globally, in the last decade, for instance. But I also don't really think there's such a thing as a truly objective political test or quiz out there. Here's what I got on it just now:

I found it easy to land in that quadrant, as you basically had to admit to being a racist and an opponent of multi-party democracy to land anywhere more authoritarian than the bottom half and had to sound totally callous to not wind up left-of-center on economic policy.

Yeah indeed,all in all that test is pretty stupid and a lot of the questions asked are not smart or very ambiguous/generalizing.

Jaicee said:
Immersiveunreality said:
Really if you are a moderate in the US there is a possibility you are more likely to think in a logically and more considerate way but i understand why some angerfueled people that go way extreme to both sides might consider you a problem.

I am a problem, so that's all good.

Hey,based on someone everywhere you are always a problem no matter what you do.

But never let that stop you from doing what you think is best.

Last edited by Immersiveunreality - on 09 July 2020