Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

But how can the goverment work with so strong supervision of all minus economy without a strong tax system? Like, controlled borders for inmigration but not importations and exportations?
(Again, honest questions)

That is a legitimate issue I overlooked... I'd probably work out regulations for imports/exports and give incentives to selling/buying from within the country itself. Keep the money local and don't rely on the outsiders.

In all seriousness, I'm aware this wouldn't work in a large country like the US. Too much area to cover on the funds available.

So, I'm pretty much exactly where I expected to be.

On the 8values, I fell in the 'Moderate Conservative' bucket.

As all tests like these, there's a bunch of questions that you really can't answer without further information. Take the statement "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy" for instance. It's a factual statement with an objective answer: excessive intervention is, by definition, excessive. The real question is what counts as excessive. Similarly, what counts as "religious values" is a can of worms of its own. If I answer that I want my religious values to spread as much as possible and my religious values are "to each his own, as long as it doesn't harm someone" I count as more conservative/traditional, which is bonkers.

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
As all tests like these, there's a bunch of questions that you really can't answer without further information. Take the statement "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy" for instance. It's a factual statement with an objective answer: excessive intervention is, by definition, excessive. The real question is what counts as excessive. Similarly, what counts as "religious values" is a can of worms of its own. If I answer that I want my religious values to spread as much as possible and my religious values are "to each his own, as long as it doesn't harm someone" I count as more conservative/traditional, which is bonkers.

Exactly why I score dead center on such tests, because the only available answer I can give within assumed context of such questions is "neutral/unsure", because there is no option "that depends/non-binary/that-is-a-dumb-way-to-ask-such-question". And I'm by no means centrist...

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
As all tests like these, there's a bunch of questions that you really can't answer without further information. Take the statement "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy" for instance. It's a factual statement with an objective answer: excessive intervention is, by definition, excessive. The real question is what counts as excessive. Similarly, what counts as "religious values" is a can of worms of its own. If I answer that I want my religious values to spread as much as possible and my religious values are "to each his own, as long as it doesn't harm someone" I count as more conservative/traditional, which is bonkers.

Tests like these are only slightly more sophisticated versions of those "which Marvel character are you?" tests that plague social media.



Edit: I just checked the OP's poll. Given that this is a gaming site, and should attract people from across the political spectrum, it does seem to prove the "Reality has a liberal bias" trope

I'm pretty sure that you guys are the most funny ones in a party!

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
As all tests like these, there's a bunch of questions that you really can't answer without further information. Take the statement "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy" for instance. It's a factual statement with an objective answer: excessive intervention is, by definition, excessive. The real question is what counts as excessive. Similarly, what counts as "religious values" is a can of worms of its own. If I answer that I want my religious values to spread as much as possible and my religious values are "to each his own, as long as it doesn't harm someone" I count as more conservative/traditional, which is bonkers.

Key word to consider is "spread." If you want to spread your ideas, you'll come across as more conservative. Its less to do with the religious value itself and more with how you want them to continue, if you do.

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
As all tests like these, there's a bunch of questions that you really can't answer without further information. Take the statement "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy" for instance. It's a factual statement with an objective answer: excessive intervention is, by definition, excessive. The real question is what counts as excessive. Similarly, what counts as "religious values" is a can of worms of its own. If I answer that I want my religious values to spread as much as possible and my religious values are "to each his own, as long as it doesn't harm someone" I count as more conservative/traditional, which is bonkers.

Key word to consider is "spread." If you want to spread your ideas, you'll come across as more conservative. Its less to do with the religious value itself and more with how you want them to continue, if you do.

Then if you gather all kinds of "aggressive vegan, feminist, cross-fit, eco, social etc warriors" under "religious beliefs" then they all end up being far right... And you'll have to make further labels such as "progressive left" and "regressive left" we had a thread about a while ago to deal with such conundrums.

As Crazy_Carnifex wrote earlier, the only way to adequately analyse politics is to treat it as n-dimensional phase space, without simplified labeling.

I better watch out for those Vegangelists. They might cram their anti-milk bigotry down my throat.

nou wrote:

 Tactical_Spam wrote:

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
As all tests like these, there's a bunch of questions that you really can't answer without further information. Take the statement "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy" for instance. It's a factual statement with an objective answer: excessive intervention is, by definition, excessive. The real question is what counts as excessive. Similarly, what counts as "religious values" is a can of worms of its own. If I answer that I want my religious values to spread as much as possible and my religious values are "to each his own, as long as it doesn't harm someone" I count as more conservative/traditional, which is bonkers.

Key word to consider is "spread." If you want to spread your ideas, you'll come across as more conservative. Its less to do with the religious value itself and more with how you want them to continue, if you do.

Then if you gather all kinds of "aggressive vegan, feminist, cross-fit, eco, social etc warriors" under "religious beliefs" then they all end up being far right... And you'll have to make further labels such as "progressive left" and "regressive left" we had a thread about a while ago to deal with such conundrums.

But.. we already have that...

Galas wrote:How did Capitalism Fascism works? You have a very strong state with hard control about everything but not economy? (And this is a Honest question. I tought that normally Fascism states use a more state-controled economy type)

This link explains it quite well:

An inherent aspect of fascist economies was economic dirigisme, meaning an economy where the government exerts strong directive influence over investment while often subsidizing favorable companies, as opposed to having a merely regulatory role. In general, apart from the nationalizations of many industries, fascist economies were based on private individuals being allowed property and private initiative, but these were contingent upon service to the state.

Simplified: You are free to do as you like as long as it's allowed, a bit like Ford's quote about the Model-T: “Any customer can have a car painted any colour that he wants so long as it is black.”

Galas wrote:But how can the goverment work with so strong supervision of all minus economy without a strong tax system? Like, controlled borders for inmigration but not importations and exportations?
(Again, honest questions)

That's why you accidentally stumble into Poland, and then in the next country, and so on. Fascism doesn't work in isolation and would just collapse. You need someone to exploit for it to "work".

 Galas wrote:
I expected this result

Spoiler:

Almost exactly what I got other than leaning more towards Peaceful on diplomatic

well I am horrified, I generally consider myself center right, generally dislike Europe, prefer Asia, and somehow I ended up on that link as a neo-liberal. Just the word liberal makes me sick to the stomach. By dakka and European standards, I figured I would be somewhere between far right and really far right.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=30.5&d=28.7&g=42.7&s=39.4

 thekingofkings wrote:
well I am horrified, I generally consider myself center right, generally dislike Europe, prefer Asia, and somehow I ended up on that link as a neo-liberal. Just the word liberal makes me sick to the stomach. By dakka and European standards, I figured I would be somewhere between far right and really far right.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=30.5&d=28.7&g=42.7&s=39.4

I also consider myself center right and got : Fascist!

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=37.8&d=14.9&g=19.2&s=25.4

Probably pretty accurate too, although some of my answers need an asterisk and a short chat box to explain. Was good for a laugh.

 nels1031 wrote:

 thekingofkings wrote:
well I am horrified, I generally consider myself center right, generally dislike Europe, prefer Asia, and somehow I ended up on that link as a neo-liberal. Just the word liberal makes me sick to the stomach. By dakka and European standards, I figured I would be somewhere between far right and really far right.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=30.5&d=28.7&g=42.7&s=39.4

I also consider myself center right and got : Fascist!

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=37.8&d=14.9&g=19.2&s=25.4

Probably pretty accurate too, although some of my answers need an asterisk and a short chat box to explain. Was good for a laugh.

I am thinking they consider patriotism a bad thing?

 thekingofkings wrote:
well I am horrified, I generally consider myself center right, generally dislike Europe, prefer Asia, and somehow I ended up on that link as a neo-liberal. Just the word liberal makes me sick to the stomach. By dakka and European standards, I figured I would be somewhere between far right and really far right.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=30.5&d=28.7&g=42.7&s=39.4

That's because you don't understand what "neo-liberal" means and are doing the common reflexive "RAR LIBERALS BAD" reaction that many US conservatives are guilty of. I mean, you're talking about how it makes you "sick to the stomach", but did you first look up what the term actually refers to? It's a reference to laissez-faire economic policies of the sort that Reagan (beloved saint of US conservatives) loved, and based on your survey results it sure seems appropriate for you. Your strongest stated value percentage-wise is favoring the market over equality, so it's reasonable that the label you're assigned would be the one representing that position.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 thekingofkings wrote:
I am thinking they consider patriotism a bad thing?

There is no good or bad in this survey, only a statement of what political labels have a matching definition. Patriotism is not bad, but fascism is defined as right-wing nationalism and authoritarianism. And yep, look at that result. Overwhelming nationalism, overwhelming authoritarianism, and very strong social conservative beliefs. If you take away feelings like "I can't be a fascist, fascism is bad and I"m not a bad person" then the label seems to be a pretty good fit.

 thekingofkings wrote:
well I am horrified, I generally consider myself center right, generally dislike Europe, prefer Asia, and somehow I ended up on that link as a neo-liberal. Just the word liberal makes me sick to the stomach. By dakka and European standards, I figured I would be somewhere between far right and really far right.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=30.5&d=28.7&g=42.7&s=39.4

Liberal carries very different meanings on both sides of the pond. In the US it's shorthand for leftist or wannabe-commie so it's liberal in the original fight the establishment sense. Over here in Europe liberal refers to economic liberalism, basically non-intervention of the state.

Reagan, Thatcher are all famous neo-liberals (both very far from common US usage of the word)

I myself got, like several other posters on this side of the pond, Social Liberalism which is closer to the US definition.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=61.0&d=66.0&g=66.9&s=83.1

Social Liberal-Fair enough, although some of my answers had * behind them.

The one thing that's been bugging me about the graphs is that the far left economic image is labeled "Equality"'. Now, I'm biased because from my results I'm a Centrist (only one I've seen posted on here yet lol) who sees benefit on both sides, but all the other axes are labeled more neutrally.

If you were to go to the far edge of any axis, the label is appropriate, Except for that one. Far, far left policy (i.e. beyond anyone posting on this board) really cannot be described as Equality at the extreme edge. At least, that's my view as a Centrist

So for myself, I'd rather see that top economic axis labeled something like "Government Balancing" vs "Market Balancing", but I'm not sure that encompasses everything they're going for, either. Without getting too heated about which side you prefer on that axis, what do people think regarding the labeling of it? Any other suggestions for it?

It seems to illustrate the divergent views and goals of market equality and market freedom. So it seems fine. I mean, you could just as easily point out that market freedom is unattainable without government intervention to prevent monopolies and whatnot (Adam Smith wrote a lot on this that is commonly overlooked), so government v. market isn't any better.

As to the kneejerk reaction to political labels and modern Americans not understanding what liberal means, that is intentional. In the 90s, the Republicans made a concerted effort to take control of the language and demonize terms like liberal. Newt Gingrich laid out a training plan in 1990 to portray Democrats and liberals as political extremists and tie them to corruption and value decay while using positive terms with Republican positions and heavily invoking patriotism and traditional values. This was built on the aggressive language he had used since his election in 78 and refined under a series of polls and impact group studies. By adhering to a common language, and supported by new media tools, the Republicans saw a big shift in perception and political success. Several campaign workers have since expressed regret at the longer term costs of greater political balkanization and hyperbole replacing facts, but the pattern shows no sign of slowing.

ing Gingrich. That bastard is singlehandedly responsible for the degeneration of political discourse in the USA.

 RiTides wrote:
The one thing that's been bugging me about the graphs is that the far left economic image is labeled "Equality"'. Now, I'm biased because from my results I'm a Centrist (only one I've seen posted on here yet lol) who sees benefit on both sides, but all the other axes are labeled more neutrally.

If you were to go to the far edge of any axis, the label is appropriate, Except for that one. Far, far left policy (i.e. beyond anyone posting on this board) really cannot be described as Equality at the extreme edge. At least, that's my view as a Centrist

So for myself, I'd rather see that top economic axis labeled something like "Government Balancing" vs "Market Balancing", but I'm not sure that encompasses everything they're going for, either. Without getting too heated about which side you prefer on that axis, what do people think regarding the labeling of it? Any other suggestions for it?

"State", "Central", or "Planned" vs. "Market", perhaps? "Equality" does work, but it seems a bit biased indeed.

Thanks to this thread for letting me know about the "8 Values". I'd not heard of it before.

I got Democratic Socialism which sounds about right.
https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=73.2&d=59.6&g=58.5&s=60.7

My wife was very similar. 3 were within 2 points and one was 7 points different. Just enough to push her to Social Liberalism

Like most of personality and value tests the value seems to be more in understanding how you compare to others but it has some value in self reflection too.

 thekingofkings wrote:
well I am horrified, I generally consider myself center right, generally dislike Europe, prefer Asia, and somehow I ended up on that link as a neo-liberal. Just the word liberal makes me sick to the stomach. By dakka and European standards, I figured I would be somewhere between far right and really far right.

https://8values.github.io/results.html?e=30.5&d=28.7&g=42.7&s=39.4

Neo-Liberal is a different kind of liberal.

"neo-liberal
adjective
1.
relating to or denoting a modified form of liberalism tending to favour free-market capitalism.
noun
1.
a person with neo-liberal views."

Ah, yes, I love telling people that hate those "damn dirty libruls" that they ARE liberals. Liberalism, after all, is just the belief in private property ownership and an economy that is seperate from the government.

It turns out I'm a Centerist. I'm quite surprised by that.

Yeah, "Liberals" in Europe is used with people of right wint economical views (So, free market before everything, from clasical Liberals to Anarco-capitalists). Neo-Liberalism doesn't exist. Is just classical liberalism, like Neo-nazism is just clasical nazism(Sorry for the comparison, I don't remember any other neo-X now ). It has no real differentiation with the "old" Liberalism.

I always find funny how in USA you use it to describe the social left.

Libertarian Socialist. I think I respect authority and the government more than the survey shows, but everything else is pretty close to the mark. I generally find myself pretty left, even by Canadian standards.