Left Wing or Right Wing? Take Pop Quiz in OP!

[Danoff]

But a Corporation is not political. Why cant it exist without the protection of human rights?

Alright, well we're gonna have to get technical with what we mean by "corporation" then. In general use of the term this refers to business entities in the marketplace comprised of multiple individuals acting as a team to more efficiently buy and sell goods and services. If you're cool with that definition then we could go on.

You cannot buy and sell goods and services to people who can steal them from you. Because they get stolen from you. This is why illegal drug dealers bring guns to drug trades - because they can't count on the exchange to go without an attempt at robbery. What this means is that in the absence of police (protection of human rights) corporations become armies, and ultimately governments.

 

[Rallywagon]

I'm picking up what you're putting down, though, I think even with the presence of government, they ultimately are still trying to install themselves as such. Less army, and more covertly, but I think they are pretty successfully overthrowing a governement "of the people, by the people, for the people."

 

[ryzno]

I look at companies like Comcast, GA Power/Natural Gas as monopolies. They had smaller companies come in and build the system then buy them out ie: GCTV(Georgia Cable TV) was the only cable provider in the 80's and 90's, they built the system. Then Comcast came through and bought them out and began the whole fiber optic transition, mind you they used contractors to install the FO, unlike GCTV who actually did all the original lines. Guess who owns Comcast now? NBC... Let that sink in. But at least in GA(metro Atlanta specifically) we have other options now: Spectrum, Charter, AT&T/Dish...
Same for the gas/electric. We have other options now, Shell, Scana Energy... While Comcast and GA Power/Natural Gas are still considered the "monopoly" we do have options thanks to our(GA) government. If they wouldn't have stepped in, we'd have no options except for the big 2.
IMO, government can create and destroy monopolies.

Or as usual, I'm an idiot cause I'm going off what I've observed and not using actual facts/links. I'm not even going to try and find proof of GCTV but I helped/bothered the crew during my summer vacation as a kid and I can tell you they DON'T exist anymore.

 

[Dotini]

Federal attempt to usurp/monopolize water rights has been dealt a setback.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/08...pa-waters-of-the-united-states-rule-unlawful/

 

[Duke]

OK, I oversimplified in saying Sanders wanted to nationalize those industries. He strongly wants a single-payer healthcare system and in his heart of hearts he really wants national health care. He has stated on multiple occasions that he thinks that energy production should be government run ‘to protect the environment’. He has also proposed stricter regulations of the press in order to ‘prevent fake news’. Who gets to define fake news is of course an open question.

His default answer to everything is more regulation or more government provision. So my point still stands - there is no way to plot him on the graph except way up toward the authoritarian top edge.

 

[Dotini]

OK, I oversimplified in saying Sanders wanted to nationalize those industries. He strongly wants a single-payer healthcare system and in his heart of hearts he really wants national health care. He has stated on multiple occasions that he thinks that energy production should be government run ‘to protect the environment’. He has also proposed stricter regulations of the press in order to ‘prevent fake news’. Who gets to define fake news is of course an open question.

His default answer to everything is more regulation or more government provision. So my point still stands - there is no way to plot him on the graph except way up toward the authoritarian top edge.

Yes, but isn't he more to the left than the right insofar as Americans are concerned?

 

[Duke]

Yes, but isn't he more to the left than the right insofar as Americans are concerned?

Yes, he is. I’m not arguing with his placement on the horizontal axis. I’m arguing that he would be well above the centerline of the vertical axis. Every one of his policies is authoritarian through and through.

 

[PocketZeven]

OK, I oversimplified in saying Sanders wanted to nationalize those industries. He strongly wants a single-payer healthcare system and in his heart of hearts he really wants national health care. He has stated on multiple occasions that he thinks that energy production should be government run ‘to protect the environment’. He has also proposed stricter regulations of the press in order to ‘prevent fake news’. Who gets to define fake news is of course an open question.

His default answer to everything is more regulation or more government provision. So my point still stands - there is no way to plot him on the graph except way up toward the authoritarian top edge.

That is kind of what is wrong with how candidates are presented. "Oversimplifying" is what rightwing media does and puts many democrats into the hard left box in an effort to connect them to the likes of communism, antifa etc. However it is far from the truth.

Single payer healthcare works all over europe, there is no reason it shouldnt in the USA.

Energy Production should not neccessarily be run by government, but should definately have oversight and restriction to protect the environment and unfair pricing to consumers.

I am not aware of what you are referring to about "stricter regulations", but misinformation is what I consider fake news. That is not hard to define by factchecking. Do you have a source of him adressing this? I am assuming you are "oversimplifying" his stance again.

I believe you have a misconception about the definition of authoritarianism. It is a government that is unaccountable, reduces freedoms, power concentrated on 1 person that surrounds himself with loyalists, wants to control the media, executive powers that are left unchecked. And mainly led by someone who puts himself above anyone else and perhaps likes to refer himself as "special one". Sound familiar? Just have a look where Trump is in the graph.

Wanting healthcare as a right, affordable clean energy are not authoritarian policies.

edit: cleaned up post

 

[Duke]

Authoritarian means "favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom".
When individual freedom is limited and free trade is restricted, with major portions of the economy being directed or provided by the government, that is authoritarian. Whether it is a single dictator or a legislature making the laws and regulations is irrelevant.

 

[mustafur]

Authoritarian means "favoring or enforcing strict obedience to authority, especially that of the government, at the expense of personal freedom".
When individual freedom is limited and free trade is restricted, with major portions of the economy being directed or provided by the government, that is authoritarian. Whether it is a single dictator or a legislature making the laws and regulations is irrelevant.

Economic ''Freedom'' and Social ''freedom'' are seperate, that is why.

 

[Duke]

Economic ''Freedom'' and Social ''freedom'' are seperate, that is why.

Being authoritarian on EITHER of those fronts invalidates any claim to be libertarian.

Being economically authoritarian and socially libertarian is like trying to say you are bi-vegetarian. It's not a meaningful statement.

Either you are in favor of strong government authority, or you are not. The particular subject(s) of your authoritarianism is irrelevant.

 

[Danoff]

Economic ''Freedom'' and Social ''freedom'' are seperate, that is why.

To add to what @Duke said above, it's all just human behavior and expression.

 

[Famine]

Economic ''Freedom'' and Social ''freedom'' are seperate, that is why.

And that is what the Compass is measuring. Freedom from government interference goes from least to most left-to-right on the horizontal axis, and from least to most top-to-bottom on the vertical axis.

The more things you want government to make rules about, the more authoritarian you are. It's fundamentally inconsistent to be in favour of government controlling more of one thing and less of the other - which is why I refer to the red and purple quadrants as being consistent positions.

Sanders likely ranks where he does for social values because he's probably in favour of government butting out on social "issues" like abortion, homosexuality, freedom of religion, and recreational drug use - opposing the death penalty is also a liberal-indicating trait, although that's not a view that's consistently held among libertarians I know (including me - it's the hardest question for me on the compass test).

While that marks him out as having liberal social attitudes, the concept that he's in any way a libertarian is laughable given how deep he wants governmental fingers in all sorts of economic pies. I don't think that where he is on the chart is particularly in error (although it's not unlikely he has unexpressed views even further away from centre that would make him deeply unpopular; for example, although always generally pro-LGBT, his stance on gay marriage at the state level moved with the tide), just that a big label bottom dead-centre saying "Libertarian" makes it a bit too easy to misconstrue that he is one.

You can't have a big government taking stuff from people without the force to do it, and the use or threat of force to create an outcome is authoritarianism.

 

[mustafur]

The day that a Government can exist without bribery being a risk to it's integrity is the moment I will accept Libertarianism as a possible reality in policy.

Untill then it's a pipe dream in fantasy land that will be horrific for everyone involved especially in a modern society.

 

[Danoff]

The day that a Government can exist without bribery being a risk to it's integrity is the moment I will accept Libertarianism as a possible reality in policy.

Untill then it's a pipe dream in fantasy land that will be horrific for everyone involved especially in a modern society.

Uh... Libertarianism is the answer to government bribery. It's the only thing that actually addresses it.

 

[mustafur]

Uh... Libertarianism is the answer to government bribery. It's the only thing that actually addresses it.

I have yet to hear a convincing argument that would work in the real world.

 

[Danoff]

I have yet to hear a convincing argument that would work in the real world.

I have no idea what you're talking about. The reason government officials get bribed is because they have power. Take the power away, and the incentive to bribe them goes away as well. For example, the reason Matel writes anti-competitive laws to regulate the toy industry and hands them to congress for implementation is because we regulate the crap out of the toy industry. So Matel sees an opportunity. Big government = crony capitalism. Small government = less (or no) crony capitalism.

As another example, the moment you start to bloat the tax code by creating carve-outs, you create incentives for companies (sometimes to the tune of millions) to get favored treatment from those carve-outs.

 

[Famine]

Untill then it's a pipe dream in fantasy land

Of course it is. Politics and government is a gravy train. It'll never see Libertarianism happen, because there's absolutely no way enough of them will vote their own opulent lifestyles away.

 

[mustafur]

I have no idea what you're talking about. The reason government officials get bribed is because they have power. Take the power away, and the incentive to bribe them goes away as well. For example, the reason Matel writes anti-competitive laws to regulate the toy industry and hands them to congress for implementation is because we regulate the crap out of the toy industry. So Matel sees an opportunity. Big government = crony capitalism. Small government = less (or no) crony capitalism.

As another example, the moment you start to bloat the tax code by creating carve-outs, you create incentives for companies (sometimes to the tune of millions) to get favored treatment from those carve-outs.

There is another dimension to compete against though, the public.

I just don't see a world where you can convince the public the way they see government is basically the opposite it should be and then implement it in a way that is small enough for it not to be corrupted.

America started at a pretty Libertarian position and developed to where it is now from that, to alot of people they see that as the natural evolution of a Libertarian Capitalist society because the rules that started the society are still in place there has been no overthrown Government.

 

[Danoff]

There is another dimension to compete against though, the public.

I just don't see a world where you can convince the public the way they see government is basically the opposite it should be and then implement it in a way that is small enough for it not to be corrupted.

America started at a pretty Libertarian position and developed to where it is now from that, to alot of people they see that as the natural evolution of a Libertarian Capitalist society because the rules that started the society are still in place there has been no overthrown Government.

I'll readily concede that point. However, I know of no better alternative that to try to strengthen the limitations on government.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Replied in this thread rather than America as it was getting off-topic.

I vote right in my country. So that would make me right or am I wrong?

It depends how much you agree with with the manifesto of the party you vote for. You certainly came out left of centre on this compass. I'm guessing you vote VVD?

I am not so sure if that questionaire accurately depicts global politics though.

It does.

For example pro-choice/life, gunregulation can hardly be called rightwing politics.

Do the questions make you think that the questioners consider those right-wing topics?

Most rightwing politics in europe do support pro-choice and gun regulations.

The issues are separate but you're definitely wrong about the first, and wrong-ish about the second.

That said, even if you consider me leftwing, that does not automatically make me a supporter of everything democrats do.

Democrats (the US Democrats, that is) are right wing on the global spectrum. Social Democrats are usually centrist and leftwards.

 

[PocketZeven]

Replied in this thread rather than America as it was getting off-topic.



It depends how much you agree with with the manifesto of the party you vote for. You certainly came out left of centre on this compass. I'm guessing you vote VVD?



It does.



Do the questions make you think that the questioners consider those right-wing topics?



The issues are separate but you're definitely wrong about the first, and wrong-ish about the second.



Democrats (the US Democrats, that is) are right wing on the global spectrum. Social Democrats are usually centrist and leftwards.

VVD is correct, I mentioned it earlier. I think the Netherlands is way more left then you think.

The point is, I am sickened by Trump and even more that so many republicans support him.

 

[GranTurNismo]

Just took it now for the first time in at least two years. More libertarian than I expected. And more left too. Supposedly, this means I'm in between anarcho-syndicalism and anarcho-collectivism. I've always thought of myself as a democratic socialist but my score doesn't match up with that.

 

[FerrariF1GT]

I took it again. Since the last time I took it, I became an atheist, became more critical of what governments (of all stripes) are doing rather than taking them for granted, and graduated high school.

 

[UKMikey]

I took it again. Since the last time I took it, I became an atheist, became more critical of what governments (of all stripes) are doing rather than taking them for granted, and graduated high school.

Your picture doesn't show up for me.

 

[FerrariF1GT]

Your picture doesn't show up for me.

I had troubles with copy/paste. Edited.

 

[UKMikey]

Thanks. I normally download pictures and upload them using the menu.

I thought my views would've changed since last time but it looks like there are some things I just won't budge on hence the depressingly predictable left libertarian score. I'm about a half square to the right of last year's score.

Those religion questions came easy this time (strongly disagree with all five).

-4.38, -7.59

 

[Spacegoat]

Shame the link is broken. Can't remember what I got last time. Would been interesting to compare as I feel I'm a lot more left leaning this days.

 

[polysmut]

This was me in spring 2016:

And today:

I'm becoming fiscally right wing and I entirely blame @Danoff for his influence.

 

[Ze Elephant]

How I stood in 2016:

And how I stand today:

I moved pretty much exactly how I thought I would: more libertarian right, but not far out. Getting out of high school and working in the real world, combined with a much greater emphasis on church in my life brings me where I am.