Where on the political spectrum are you?

[Subcommander R.]

Shouldn't you be, you know, bothered by this?

Never take a quote out of context, sir. Observe:

Fascism 63%

Not surprising. I like government and tradition, but I don't like racism. That rules out Nazism.

And this is better... how? I cut it short because it didn't matter for the topic at hand. He says he's not a Nazi because he doesn't care for the Master Race shenanigans, but apparently he's perfectly fine with his political position being most compatible with Fascism (which is funny, since Fascism was just slightly less racist than Nazism, just look at what happened in the Abyssinian War). I would consider it a red flag, don't you think?

And, do not call me "sir".

Its not surprising because my views cannot be classified easily. I always get different results on different quizzes. When I saw this one had questions about social order, I knew it would pop up with Fascist or Stalinist. On other quizzes with different focuses I have gotten Republican, Democrat, Socialist, Stalinist, Fascist, and Libertarian.

It all depends on the questions asked. But Yes, I do like government and tradition so there are many things about fascism that I do like.

I also dislike the racism insinuations. Political theory and history are two different animals. And if you want to play that game, is a democratic republic bad because the US had a segregated society at one point?

As far as I'm concerned, race doesn't matter. Class and society play far greater roles than race. They can coincide frequently, but they aren't always the same.

When it boils down to it, Mussolini did have the trains running on time. And in Italy thats really saying something. So give credit where its due and give blame in the same way.

 

[iguana_tonante]

I have a lot of pet peeves about what you do in these debates, mate.

I am overwhelmed by concern.

You don't here me complaining about them.

No, in fact I don't here you.

But anyway...how about Mussolini's Italy? He wasn't racist.

Mussolini might not have been a raging anti-Semite like Hitler and his goons, but he still issued the Manifesto della Razza in 1938, which makes him just as guilty. And on topic... what does it change regarding R.'s statement? He says he's not a Nazi but his positions are more in line with Fascism: I haven't argued against his claim.

yadda yadda yadda

You have something topical to add, or you just like to digress?

When it boils down to it, Mussolini did have the trains running on time. And in Italy thats really saying something.

Actually, no, he didn't. It's just a piece of propaganda of that time. The trains were lousy as ever (it's kind of a tradition in Italy, so you should love it). People would just get their shit beaten out of them by the Blackshirts when they complained about them being late, so people stopped complaining. That is the kind of society you advance.

 

[cultcross]

Fascism 63%

Not surprising.

Shouldn't you be, you know, bothered by this?

Never take a quote out of context, sir. Observe:

Fascism 63%

Not surprising. I like government and tradition, but I don't like racism. That rules out Nazism.

Racism is not the only objectionable feature of fascism.

 

[Orcus]

I'm a Democrat...


Democrat - 92%
Green - 83%
Anarchism - 75%
Communism - 67%
Socialist - 67%
Nazi - 33%
Fascism - 25%
Republican - 8%

 

[LitmusDragon]

%100 Democrat. lol. Yeah, that's me. I'm not very politically active, but I generally think the Democrats have the right take on the issues, and certainly within my lifetime have had the best presidential candidates.

I still can't believe we elected George Bush for a second term over John Kerry.

Also, %83 green, %58 Anarchism.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Actually, no, he didn't. It's just a piece of propaganda of that time. The trains were lousy as ever (it's kind of a tradition in Italy, so you should love it). People would just get their shit beaten out of them by the Blackshirts when they complained about them being late, so people stopped complaining. That is the kind of society you advance.

Don't dictate to me what I do and do not believe. Its clear you didn't pay attention to a single word I said apart from 'fascism.'

Fascist and authoritarian policies are extremely effective. Take a look at Stalin's five year plans, they dramatically boosted Soviet industrial capability. And that helped them win against the Nazis.

And when you look at Germany in the '30s, its another great example. Their depression was a lot worse than that of the US, but they managed to turn it around dramatically and create a prosperous society.

Of course we all know that trusting a madman with absolute power is a recipe for disaster. But some (or many) authoritarian stances are extremely beneficial.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Shouldn't you be, you know, bothered by this?

Never take a quote out of context, sir. Observe:

Fascism 63%

Not surprising. I like government and tradition, but I don't like racism. That rules out Nazism.

Racism is not the only objectionable feature of fascism.

Racism isn't a feature of fascism. Its a feature of people. A system in reality takes on the traits of its members and leaders. A system in the sense of political theory has no members and is not affected by any prejudices.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Fascist and authoritarian policies are extremely effective. Take a look at Stalin's five year plans, they dramatically boosted Soviet industrial capability. And that helped them win against the Nazis.

And when you look at Germany in the '30s, its another great example. Their depression was a lot worse than that of the US, but they managed to turn it around dramatically and create a prosperous society.

Of course we all know that trusting a madman with absolute power is a recipe for disaster. But some (or many) authoritarian stances are extremely beneficial.

I can't believe we are having this discussion.

And to show just how much I can't believe it, I'll quote Attack of the Clones.

ANAKIN: I don't think the system works.

PADMÉ: How would you have it work?

ANAKIN: We need a system where the politicians sit down and discuss the problem, agree what's in the best interests of all the people, and then do it.

PADMÉ: That is exactly what we do. The trouble is that people don't always agree. In fact, they hardly ever do.

ANAKIN: Then they should be made to.

PADMÉ: By whom? Who's going to make them?

ANAKIN: I don't know. Someone.

PADMÉ: You?

ANAKIN: Of course not me.

PADMÉ: But someone.

ANAKIN: Someone wise.

PADMÉ: That sounds an awful lot like a dictatorship to me.

ANAKIN: Well, if it works...

If agreeing with that whiny bitch-boy Anakin Skywalker won't convince you, nothing will.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Apparently I'll have to spoon-feed history to you since your mind is so closed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_dictator

The Roman Republic was the basis of almost all modern republics and you can clearly see the impact it had on fascism.

Get your panties out of a twist and acknowledge the benefits and disadvantages of every political system, no matter how much personal animosity you have to it.

 

[cultcross]

The Roman Republic was the basis of almost all modern republics

Actually, Athens was the stated basis of your republic (and fairly loosely at that). The Roman system, although it used many of the same terms, was very different to yours. It was a monarchy by any other name. As your link says, the dictator could make any legal changes he wanted, and pass laws without the need for ratification by the assemblies (although a token vote was often taken). That's the pre-civil war British system, not a modern republic.

 

[Trekker4747]

Actually, no, he didn't. It's just a piece of propaganda of that time. The trains were lousy as ever (it's kind of a tradition in Italy, so you should love it). People would just get their shit beaten out of them by the Blackshirts when they complained about them being late, so people stopped complaining. That is the kind of society you advance.

Don't dictate to me what I do and do not believe. Its clear you didn't pay attention to a single word I said apart from 'fascism.'

Fascist and authoritarian policies are extremely effective. Take a look at Stalin's five year plans, they dramatically boosted Soviet industrial capability. And that helped them win against the Nazis.

And when you look at Germany in the '30s, its another great example. Their depression was a lot worse than that of the US, but they managed to turn it around dramatically and create a prosperous society.

Of course we all know that trusting a madman with absolute power is a recipe for disaster. But some (or many) authoritarian stances are extremely beneficial.

 

[iguana_tonante]

Apparently I'll have to spoon-feed history to you since your mind is so closed.

Sorry, I have just being called "close-minded" by a self-confirmed Fascist?

I am familiar with the institute of the dictatura. What you are saying is that the Romans, a people who scourged half of the world through war and devastation, a people who had a policy of enslaving rebellious populations, a people who went around merrily crucifying political opponents, sometimes felt their already non-particularly-democratic government was too much democratic, and so they instituted a temporary supreme dictator. Wow. I am thorough convinced now that this is the way to freedom and prosperity. Apparently, the only one with a cursory and sugar-covered knowledge of history here is you, sport.

Get your panties out of a twist and acknowledge the benefits and disadvantages of every political system, no matter how much personal animosity you have to it.

There are no benefits to dictatorship. Through history and common sense, it has been shown again and again that power will be abused, and absolute power would be absolutely abused. The fable of the "benevolent dictator" is just that: a fable.

 

[Jetfire]

The fable of the "benevolent dictator" is just that: a fable.

Until my Reign.

Oops! I mean...

 

[PsychoPere]

The fable of the "benevolent dictator" is just that: a fable.

Fable 3 for Xbox 360 - It's a Revolution!

 

[iguana_tonante]

I mean, adolescent fantasies of power and control are cool to read on page or watch on tv, but to mistake those fantasies for a realistic political philosophy is, well, rather pitiable.

 

[Jetfire]

"Benevolent Dictator" would have to reject human faults...and once doing so they realize that they do not want the power or to be a leader...but to simply serve(humanity) and be an example...thus the fable.

 

[Subcommander R.]

Sorry, I have just being called "close-minded" by a self-confirmed Fascist?

I am familiar with the institute of the dictatura. What you are saying is that the Romans, a people who scourged half of the world through war and devastation, a people who had a policy of enslaving rebellious populations, a people who went around merrily crucifying political opponents, sometimes felt their already non-particularly-democratic government was too much democratic, and so they instituted a temporary supreme dictator. Wow. I am thorough convinced now that this is the way to freedom and prosperity. Apparently, the only one with a cursory and sugar-covered knowledge of history here is you, sport.

Again, you didn't read anything I have been writing. Go back and reread what I wrote. You'll find that I don't identify myself as any one political ideology because I share commonalities with almost all of them.

I'm telling you that there are some good things about fascism amongst the bad, like all political systems. And you can't seem to get beyond the knee-jerk reaction.

All political systems are broken and don't work. Its a question of which parts you want to have.

I also suggest that you stop viewing history through a modern lens. Your own particular modern values are blinding you to the general picture and the facts. I'm not endorsing anything here, I'm explaining it. You can't seem to discern the difference.

But the real aspect of Rome that was so iconic to modern government isn't foreign relations, its the concept of citizenship. If you can't see those contributions then your modern lens bars you from being an effective historian.

 

[Amaris]

I was curious to see where I am on the political compass.
This was the result:

This was the results of last year's political compass that I had taken:

Not too much of a change, really. I've nudged ever so slightly to the right, but I have also nudged a bit more libertarian.
Works for me.

 

[Danoz]

Haha-- well having majored in political science I find the whole quiz more than just a little transparent, but I turned up 85% green and 85% democrat-- tie.

 

[Mr Silver]

I'm not really one for these types of quizzes/surveys as I feel they never give a near accurate answer, sure its generalised for the purposes of statistics, but my Political Preferences are better coming from me

I reside in the UK and over here we have several different political parties that all swing from left to right, right now our Government is headed up by the Conservatives, who I guess you could say are a "Centre Right" position party. Over here it tends to be a "personal matter" in relation to an indiviuals voting habits, which I think is silly, nonetheless heres a quick run down of the major Political parties

Conservatives: Current Government leaders, Centre Right
Labour: Previous Government leaders, Centre Left
Liberal Democrats: Left
Scottish National Party: Centre Left
Plaid Cymru (Welsh Assembly): Centre Left
British National Party: Far Right
Green Party: Far Left

Personally I usually abstain from voting, however i'm inclined to agree more with the ideas from Labour and the Liberal Democrats