Discussion in 'Random Chat' started by Eutychius, Nov 18, 2016.
Really makes you think
I actively engage in politics fairly recently (around four years ago), but mostly it is because of my living environment is authoritarian that hampers any political view opposing them.
Nezekan's saying is flawed to begin with. Any "solid ideology" is full of contradictions that any pragmatic and logical person (which I believe I'm at least qualified for the former) will not align themselves to. It is a typical centrist view that will not lean on any ideology. An ideology is not an ideology if it doesn't associate itself with an utopia (which never practically exists).
Out of curiosity; why are you typing in italics?
Have you ever asked why Captain Planet types in color text? I haven't.
First time I'm hearing about that dude.
And yeah, imo that's a valid question too. Why does he type in color?
Attention-whoring, which is also the reason for avatars, signatures, et al.
I'm like the only red here
Though i find the questionaire to be severely lacking and limiting. I'm not to suprised i ended up in the green spot. Though i tend to think far more rightwing than this represents but that also mainly due to what's achievable and what's desired not ligning up most of the time.
Nono Lycan... you're just Gandhi
This gives me some ideas...
Oh God no
I was just about to make the same joke about nuking the fuck out of your western civilizations though i haven't nuked anyone in civ 6 yet I guess i just suck at it. Though the new artstyle really takes after settlers
To be fair, nukes are only worth it if you can't win before 500 turns and you have someone with a higher score or if you are against Gandhi in the late game. Every other occasion the nukes take too much production as a whole and people insta-denounce you if you use it.
it ruins their defenses and pop thus production so it's quite effective i find. Being denounced is not uncommon for warmongering anywway
I talked about it more later if you noticed.
You flip flopped between your answers and allowed emotion to answer them for you. This is what I told Petique as well. You cannot cherry pick from any ideology you like and form your own. Take the test again and this time answer more firmly, using more completely agree or disagree options.
Uh... why should I stick to an ideology if I know it is flawed? And why should I reject an ideology totally if I know there are some parts that are actually good? Everything isn't just black and white. An ideology is just a cult and I refuse to adhere myself to a particular one.
The wordings are bad. The questions are bad. The answers are also bad. Many people here have the same thought as me. It is hard to completely agree with something if I don't agree with a part of it.
If there is anything that I can certainly disagree, it is that you said I allowed my emotion to answer for me.
So, based on your answers, what country do you think has closest to your ideology?
You can't just partly agree with something like immigration, you either firmly allow it or you don't. And as long as you don't find a political party of a country that you agree with, then it means you are ruling with emotion.
Its pointless to try to defend yourself as long as you do not give an example of a political party you agree with. Any country or party.
Why do you think that people has to agree to a political party or something? I see politicians are the problems. Anyway I think I'll be closest to Liberal Democrat party but still disagrees with them on many stuffs.
The scoring is bad anyway, and that's what I've been saying since the start. Bad wording, bad question, bad answer. Many questions aren't really clear, thus it is impossible to have a clear answer like strongly agree or strongly disagree. However, my position, I think, should be near central, and slightly leaning more to the right. Surprisingly, my scores after two attempts were very close to Adam Smith's.
For your example of immigration, it depends on what you define as immigration. Legal immigration (people work their way in, take a job, pay their taxes, live honestly, and ask for a naturalization) is ok in my book. Giving any leeway for illegal immigrants to get naturalized or even to enter the nation's soil is not okay at all. Same to receiving refugees: Strong screening process, and only take those who wish to integrate.
Very funny, when I answered only strongly agree or strongly disagree, I'm still at the center:
So why do you think I was wrong about that? You are politically neutral, at least a little bit. Because you do not agree with any party enough to be aligned with them. Its fine and all, but your position cannot run any country therefore what I said about being in the center is true.
Well, I don't know tho. Maybe in a few decades I will become what I hate, being a politician
Last time somebody challenged another to run a presidential race, and we have Donald Trump
Both Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders aren't actually aligned to their political party, but they still ran as these parties' candidates.
Separate names with a comma.