Oh how very innocent. There are consequences for the entire world based on the leaders of the US sadly. An easy example is how Trump hated Iran and loved Modhi which has a net negative effect on Pakistan bit wanted to get out of Afghanistan which has a net positive effect on Pakistan. He also dropped a whole lot of bombs, more than any other which is a net negative for my region but it's not like Obama and Biden didn't drop their share of bombs and drone strikes. The most famous example anyone can point to is how Obama authorized a drone strike on a wedding in Pakistan. No one there was a terrorist. He just killed people on the day that was supposed to be a joyous celebration. And let's not forget "The mother of all bombs" Trump dropped in Afghanistan for some reason. Killing army leaders in Iran isn't good for us either. 

And that's not even talking about trade, antagonism towards our allies or the opposite, relations with China and how they affect us, the secret intelligence stuff that they hide from us like which terrorist group they secretly support or whether they support the rebellion in a nation vs the main government. And then we move onto climate. Through no fault of our own, we are dependent on what big nations like China, US, Australia, etc do with regards to their climate policy. We smaller nations only have a small contribution either way but we suffer just the same. 

So saying who leads the US doesn't affect us outside the US is very very short sighted. A Bernie Sanders presidency or someone like him would be a benefit to humanity as a whole, not just the US. We're talking climate, war policy, trade, diplomacy, workers' rights, human rights around the world, etc, etc, etc. 

With all that said, I didn't post it here but in all the tests, I'm certifiably left leaning and libertarian. Not all the way to the left ala communism but still very much left. And halfway between centre and full on libertarian. 

Again pretty centrist on most issues.

The political compass test also puts me quite far to the left, and a lot of the questions are strange.

Like, apparently I'm a far left commie cos I think it's okay to have sex outside marriage, that universal healthcare is a good thing, that same sex couples should be allowed to marry, and that companies shouldn't be allowed to abuse their employees. XD

In the eyes of 70 million people all of those things are proof that you are a filthy commie and probably sleep with Putin while you suck on Maduro's dick. Those are just facts.

I tried the 9Axes test, but that one is even more problematic when you're not American. Some of the questions are impossible to answer because they're completely relative. For instance, "Police need more power and protection": more than what? More than they currently get in the US, or than they get here in Belgium? The current situation in these two countries is very different.

Also, all the 'federal vs unitary' questions only make sense to the US. I live in a federal country too, but the dynamics are completely different here. For example, "It's a good idea to test a policy in one state rather than implementing it nationwide right away" does not make sense to me, since our federal government and regions work next to eachother (so they would never be concerned with the same issue).

Boo!



Anyway, I agree. There is no nuance to any of these questions. 

Like, illegal immigration for example is a difficult and complex subject. I think many people know that ultimately its not good for a large influx to overwhelm your infrastructure. And you also don't want them to be exploited as a cheap labour force. But you also want to be open to people in need. So, you want to look at the cause of it and see what the root of that problem is and work from that, or you can be a simple mind and hate brown people taking yer jawbs. 

Edit:

Took 9Axis one too



This one made little sense. 

I don't think any test or quiz can actually determine your leanings 1 on 1. It's much more complex than that and if someone sat down and tried to create a test that's much closer than the ones available, the test would be so damn long no one would wanna take it anyways. Imagine spending like a week on a test or something.

There is a difference, but I think that difference is mostly about targeting a specific set of people who aren't wanted. Legal immigration in many countries is reserved for well off people, with a level of education which is also a certain indicator of wealth. I am talking about people who have no means to come in "legally" specifically.

My family came here cause they were going to get killed if they stayed in their home countries based on their ethnicity. They came legally, but if they could not, I'd have supported their illegal immigration, and I support anyone trying to immigrate illegally due to a legitimate threat to their safety.

Suppose it wasn't legal (I'm not an expert on asylum laws). Would you then favor illegal immigration?