I think it's wrong that we really do need to change the scale for overwieght. Sometimes being the weight they want is not healthy for people at all. I remeber my surgery I wieghed 117 and i could barely walk I was so weak but now I'm back to my origional weight 155 and I feel healthy and I can actually walk. These scales are really screwed up some people cant live thier entire lives being nothing but bone.

 I think the confederate flag is rasicts because technically it was the flag that flew in war to support slavery. It has nothing to do with being a traitor. Just rascism :) .

Based on your responses, YOU are a… Disaffected

Along with 11% of the public

 the first test

 

  

 

About The Political Compass™

In the introduction, we explained the inadequacies of the traditional left-right line.

If we recognise that this is essentially an economic line it's fine, as far as it goes. We can show, for example, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot, with their commitment to a totally controlled economy, on the hard left. Socialists like Mahatma Gandhi and Robert Mugabe would occupy a less extreme leftist position. Margaret Thatcher would be well over to the right, but further right still would be someone like that ultimate free marketeer, General Pinochet.

That deals with economics, but the social dimension is also important in politics. That's the one that the mere left-right scale doesn't adequately address. So we've added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian.

Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis. By adding the social dimension you can show that Stalin was an authoritarian leftist (ie the state is more important than the individual) and that Gandhi, believing in the supreme value of each individual, is a liberal leftist. While the former involves state-imposed arbitrary collectivism in the extreme top left, on the extreme bottom left is voluntary collectivism at regional level, with no state involved. Hundreds of such anarchist communities exisited in Spain during the civil war period

You can also put Pinochet, who was prepared to sanction mass killing for the sake of the free market, on the far right as well as in a hardcore authoritarian position. On the non-socialist side you can distinguish someone like Milton Friedman, who is anti-state for fiscal rather than social reasons, from Hitler, who wanted to make the state stronger, even if he wiped out half of humanity in the process.

The chart also makes clear that, despite popular perceptions, the opposite of fascism is not communism but anarchism (ie liberal socialism), and that the opposite of communism ( i.e. an entirely state-planned economy) is neo-liberalism (i.e. extreme deregulated economy)

The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal "anarchism" championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America's Libertarian Party, which couples social Darwinian right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues. Often their libertarian impulses stop short of opposition to strong law and order positions, and are more economic in substance (ie no taxes) so they are not as extremely libertarian as they are extremely right wing. On the other hand, the classical libertarian collectivism of anarcho-syndicalism ( libertarian socialism) belongs in the bottom left hand corner.

In our home page we demolished the myth that authoritarianism is necessarily "right wing", with the examples of Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot and Stalin. Similarly Hitler, on an economic scale, was not an extreme right-winger. His economic policies were broadly Keynesian, and to the left of some of today's Labour parties. If you could get Hitler and Stalin to sit down together and avoid economics, the two diehard authoritarians would find plenty of common ground.

Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.36

 

Based on your responses, YOU are a… Disaffected

Along with 11% of the public

No it doesnt make scince at all about the lawsuit its actually kind of dumb in my opion.

I think they should be charged. It is partially thier fault. Scuicide is an effect of bullying. If you don't want charged then don't push someone to the limit of where they feel so worthless they no longer want to live.

The people have the right to be angry. We have the right to protest and visit public places it says it in teh consitution. I don't think it's right because that is ment for veterans. They put thier lives on the line and that was made to be a thank you to them. Thats like shaking someones hand then slapping them in the face. Way to go government for adding insult to injury. I hope your happy.

No i don't find it fair really. It's the national governments reesponsibility to manage the money they get from tourists to keep everything open. Someone got a little selfish with thier paycheck obviously and noww the whole country has to pay for it. They are just thinking about thierselves and not the many out there. So it's thier fault they should find a way out of it thiersleves and not punish anyone else for the fact that they didn't do the handling of the money right.

 well the article pretty much goes over about the legislative branch. Legislative is really my favorite. So yeah i have no opion really.

They should change their name is actually quite racists. I mean its a shame all these things are coming to attention now. When hey have been pointed out for years. Changing the logo also could help out in some regions.

the bomb that hit Oklahoma really doesn't phase me much. It is no where near the disaster that happened during 911. It can be easily cleaned up and the criminals can probably much easier to find. Still it is wrong to kill innocent people for selfish purposes.