By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - What's your political typology? (Quiz)

Makes sense, I am a synthesis anarchist which is on the revolutionary far-left. I am also a Democratic-leaning Independent. Gave the Democratic Party a 30% satisfaction and the GOP a 0% satisfaction on this survey. 



Around the Network
Jaicee said:
Ryuu96 said:

Damn. I'm offended! (Jk!) Idk...Maybe cause all I talk about is Xbox/Microsoft?

I like SNP too, Nicola is always easily the best in debates, I'd be fine with Greens too but voting for anyone other than Labour is a wasted vote (sadly). No doubt Corbyn messed up on the Brexit issue (I'm pro-EU but Corbyn should have just said "yeah we're leaving" cause it's what the majority voted for) but I agreed with more of his policies and I find Starmer to be damn boring, fence sits on issues more often than not and I don't feel his passion, I don't even know what he stands for but I would never vote for Tories either, Lol.

Some comfort I can take at least is that I don't consider Tories to be anywhere near as bad as current day Republican Party, there's certain issues that the Tory Party wouldn't dare touch even if they believed in them, at least we have NHS too which is amazing and I consider something that 'saved' that my life (as in gave me a chance at a 'normal' life) so I'm happy to pay towards it to help others.

I find British politics boring in general compared to ours, especially these days. There's no debate over most of the hot-button issues in this country. There's no real debate over Covid policies or abortion or gun policy or the death penalty or whether global warming is real or even over national health care. Hell, the Boris Johnson faction of the Tories specifically has even been known to embrace increased public welfare investment instead of the budget hawking austerity policies of his predecessors. Brexit was the only serious source of excitement and that's a done deal now. The SNP at least has a distinct cause!

Hmm, I think I can see where you're coming from, I do think that American politics is definitely more fiery than British politics, in the UK there is certain topics that no major party would openly support, and for good reason, from cutting NHS funding, to cutting welfare, I think most of the parties are in favour of COVID policies, we're pro-abortion, we don't have a death penalty, folk aren't wondering around openly kitted out like they're in the military so we don't need gun debates

But in this case I would take boring over "oh god he's a psychopath"

These are definitely some issues that I could see major parties openly supporting in USA while if someone in UK wanted to say, kill the NHS and openly stated that in UK they would be absolutely slaughtered by the public, I also find that all of the major parties support action on climate change, some simply wanted quicker action on it, it helps that UK is in a better position to act on it too since we're an island, I would guess that most of the public are in favour of climate action or don't really care (so won't fight action on it) and I gotta stan for the legendry David Attenborough who is adored by UK.

SNP has a distinct cause but I doubt they'll be able to vote on it anytime soon, I also think we will revisit the EU debate in the distant future, a side rant though, I absolutely despise the question that is asked in every single UK debate of "would you launch a nuke" it's such a f*cking stupid question.



Pemalite said:

"Ambivalent Right"

I think that mostly stems from my capitalist ideologies, borders and small Government.. And means I am pretty near the center which is the ideal place to be.

In Australia that would mean I am Center-left as American Politics are a step over to the right from us.

I am a bit confused about your conclusion.

This test is pretty well calibrated to American voters (being based on voter ideology data), and you still get Ambivalent Right.

Since American politics are to the right of Australian politics, wouldn't that mean you are even more likely to be on the right in Australia since on the American-calibrated test you still get "Ambivalent Right" and not something on the American center-left/left?



Machina said:

The other was whether to answer some of the very American-centric questions as if I was (imagining) living in America, or as if the question was asked about my own country. Take the prison sentences question - I think sentences for serious crimes are often far too lenient in my own country. America, on the other hand, seems to hand out very lengthy sentences for what I'd consider minor crimes or things that shouldn't even be crimes at all imo. So... how do I answer that question?

Yeah, I had trouble with this one, as someone who believes that drug users should NOT be in prison at all, I also think UK can be too soft on serious crimes sometimes but America is too jail-happy so eh, I voted they're too harsh.



JackHandy said:
sundin13 said:

Why?

Because in life, the truth is always in the middle. 

Oh, and because only Siths deal in absolutes.

I feel that this perspective is somewhat ridiculous. The middle ground between justice and injustice is still an injustice. There is no inherent good to being in the middle. The middle-ground perspective must be justified just as much as any other perspective. 



Around the Network

Ambivalent Right, just like a lot of people here it seems.

This quiz just felt way too limited, even more than quizzes like the Political Compass. The 16 questions cover only a couple of topics, completely ignoring numerous other important issues. An even bigger issue is the lack of neutral responses for most questions, it forces me to radically take one side when in reality I can understand both sides or just don't have much of an opinion. And of course not being American made it even harder, especially since a lot of the questions are very relative (asking you what does or doesn't need to change compared to the current situation in America).

Also, looking at the results for the individual questions, it seems like I barely have more in common with the 'Ambivalent Right' group than with the general population. My biggest agreement with the ambivalent right (compared to the general population) seems to be that I don't support any politicians or parties.



sundin13 said:
Pemalite said:

And means I am pretty near the center which is the ideal place to be.

Why?

Because you typically remove biases (I.E. Republican or Democrat preferences) as you don't care for either... And instead place an emphasis on better mandates to the benefit all.

You see the big issue with those who are hard democrat or hard republican is that they typically don't like to "haggle", "negotiate" or "reason". - It is their way or the highway so to speak... Even when faced with a more logical, cheaper, safer option.
.. And contrary to popular belief, we do not live in a binary world, there are many shades of grey inbetween the black and the white.

It also means you will typically support a policy based on it's merits rather than the team waving the flag... I.E. Universal healthcare can be a cheaper and more effective system... And there are real-world examples of that working across the planet.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
sundin13 said:

Why?

Because you typically remove biases (I.E. Republican or Democrat preferences) as you don't care for either... And instead place an emphasis on better mandates to the benefit all.

You see the big issue with those who are hard democrat or hard republican is that they typically don't like to "haggle", "negotiate" or "reason". - It is their way or the highway so to speak... Even when faced with a more logical, cheaper, safer option.
.. And contrary to popular belief, we do not live in a binary world, there are many shades of grey inbetween the black and the white.

It also means you will typically support a policy based on it's merits rather than the team waving the flag... I.E. Universal healthcare can be a cheaper and more effective system... And there are real-world examples of that working across the planet.

I believe "Moderation Bias" is a very real thing first of all, and I think you are describing it pretty well. A lot of people see being a moderate or a centrist as a virtue, so they will either over-estimate how well they fit into that category, or assign some non-inherent value to middle of the road positions. As such, I would disagree that you remove biases when you stand in the middle. You just hold onto a different bias than those who stand on either side of you.

Further, I think we've seen in American politics lately that your second point isn't really as true in practice as it may seem in theory. Progressives and people on the left such as Bernie Sanders may not like to compromise, but they have accepted a lot of compromise within the Build Back Better bills (both the infrastructure bill that has passed both chambers and the social infrastructure bill which has only passed the House). On the other hand, those who seem least willing to compromise are those who stand in the middle. They are pretty clearly stating "Do it my way or you get nothing" (assuming "their way" isn't just doing nothing in the first place).

I also disagree with your final point that being a centrist is about merit based policy making. Much of the time, a centrist is just someone who fears change, even if that change would be beneficial. "Radical Moderates/Centrists" really aren't much of a thing, which is what you seem to be implying. Centrists largely favor either keeping things the way they are rather than making large or sudden changes, regardless of whether evidence indicates that those large changes would be beneficial. Like I said before, the centrist position holds no inherent value, the same as any other position. 



Jaicee said:
JackHandy said:

Because in life, the truth is always in the middle. 

Oh, and because only Siths deal in absolutes.

To which end, maybe the absolutism of "always" ain't accurate either. Just my opinion.

I suppose there's a possibility that an extreme viewpoint is the correct one as opposed to a more moderate one, but I have yet to experience that.



sundin13 said:
JackHandy said:

Because in life, the truth is always in the middle. 

Oh, and because only Siths deal in absolutes.

I feel that this perspective is somewhat ridiculous. The middle ground between justice and injustice is still an injustice.

Who said justice was extreme?