Posted by: ReductiMat
Am I a centrist because I'm a Socialist Libertarian?
Trump.
start here if you're curious about the political spectrum and don't want to do the test. my guess is that many people would be surprised about where they actually sit on the political specrum.
I've done that before.
I think the term centre is for people who refuse to have an opinion and want to make everyone happy.
Posted by: ReductiMat
I've done that before.
I think the term centre is for people who refuse to have an opinion and want to make everyone happy.
I disagree. What I like about the political compass is that is takes economic and social values and blends them together to come up with a much clearer picture of where one's political views lay. That's where being centre is a valuable stance imo - as long as people can define just what their centre is. So for me for example I tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal with smatterings of socialism and libertarianism thrown in for good measure. Typically I find people who call themselves centrist tend to be the same. It's not about not having an opinion but the exact opposite, having a wide range of opinions on many topics. I think the biggest danger we face with modern politics is that people are far too focused on the left/right divide and pay little attention to the actual issues. People need to forget about which team they want to be on and starting thinking about human issues and how all of humanity can best be solved. We know communism doesn't work, socialism has issues and capitalism has some promise but fails in key areas. It seems that a blend of a social democracy with some capitalism or free market theory throw in and a dash of libertarianism is what will best serve all people. Shouldn't that be the goal? Like what is the point of a society with amazing levels of affluence when significant portions struggle to survive? And that's just here in the Western world. Look around the globe at the literal billions that are basically living a life of subsistence. The list of to youtubers just came out and the top earner at $26 million is some 8 yr old kids who reviews toys. Does that make any fucking sense at all when there are millions of childrens living in poverty who don't even get to have breakfast? Out social structure is seriously fucked in light of the abundance that we have in this world. And it's not a money problem, it's an attitude problem.
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: ReductiMat
I've done that before.
I think the term centre is for people who refuse to have an opinion and want to make everyone happy.
I disagree. What I like about the political compass is that is takes economic and social values and blends them together to come up with a much clearer picture of where one's political views lay. That's where being centre is a valuable stance imo - as long as people can define just what their centre is. So for me for example I tend to be fiscally conservative and socially liberal with smatterings of socialism and libertarianism thrown in for good measure. Typically I find people who call themselves centrist tend to be the same. It's not about not having an opinion but the exact opposite, having a wide range of opinions on many topics. I think the biggest danger we face with modern politics is that people are far too focused on the left/right divide and pay little attention to the actual issues. People need to forget about which team they want to be on and starting thinking about human issues and how all of humanity can best be solved. We know communism doesn't work, socialism has issues and capitalism has some promise but fails in key areas. It seems that a blend of a social democracy with some capitalism or free market theory throw in and a dash of libertarianism is what will best serve all people. Shouldn't that be the goal? Like what is the point of a society with amazing levels of affluence when significant portions struggle to survive? And that's just here in the Western world. Look around the globe at the literal billions that are basically living a life of subsistence. The list of to youtubers just came out and the top earner at $26 million is some 8 yr old kids who reviews toys. Does that make any fucking sense at all when there are millions of childrens living in poverty who don't even get to have breakfast? Out social structure is seriously fucked in light of the abundance that we have in this world. And it's not a money problem, it's an attitude problem.
How would you define a replicable science experiment to prove that being center is better based off an "unexplained scoring system" by a website that "does not reveal the people behind it, beyond the fact that it seems to be based in the United Kingdom?"
What if someone came up with a more transparent system that placed you right or left of centre? Would you strive to change your views to fit that model?
Ain't about left or right. It's about up and down.
Posted by: syncro
DNC a "private company"? lol wut?
Update: A federal judge dismissed the DNC lawsuit on August 28. The court recognized that the DNC treated voters unfairly, but ruled that the DNC is a private corporation; therefore, voters cannot protect their rights by turning to the courts:
What was that about your sources? You know me, I care more for content than which domain name it comes from.
Posted by: ReductiMat
How would you define a replicable science experiment to prove that being center is better based off an "unexplained scoring system" by a website that "does not reveal the people behind it, beyond the fact that it seems to be based in the United Kingdom?"
What if someone came up with a more transparent system that placed you right or left of centre? Would you strive to change your views to fit that model?
Ohhhh now that is rich dude lol
As for a transparent political leaning system, you speak in oxymorons. How can a system be transparent that misplaces you intentionally? That's not a good system but its a system none the less.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Posted by: syncro
DNC a "private company"? lol wut?
Update: A federal judge dismissed the DNC lawsuit on August 28. The court recognized that the DNC treated voters unfairly, but ruled that the DNC is a private corporation; therefore, voters cannot protect their rights by turning to the courts:
What was that about your sources? You know me, I care more for content than which domain name it comes from.
Really? Of all the things I listed that's what you want to go to bat on, a trite semantic argument about you the using the words "private company" - not corporation btw - to describe a political organization?
Say private company (or corporation even) and typically most people will think of an entity that sells/manufactures some sort of good or service. That's all I was getting at. I wouldn't consider the DNC a "company" in that respect, but I would consider them a political organization as that is their purpose. My sources here are the dictionary and common language.
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
Posted by: syncro
DNC a "private company"? lol wut?
Update: A federal judge dismissed the DNC lawsuit on August 28. The court recognized that the DNC treated voters unfairly, but ruled that the DNC is a private corporation; therefore, voters cannot protect their rights by turning to the courts:
What was that about your sources? You know me, I care more for content than which domain name it comes from.
Really? Of all the things I listed that's what you want to go to bat on, a trite semantic argument about you the using the words "private company" - not corporation btw - to describe a political organization?
Say private company (or corporation even) and typically most people will think of an entity that sells/manufactures some sort of good or service. That's all I was getting at. I wouldn't consider the DNC a "company" in that respect, but I would consider them a political organization as that is their purpose. My sources here are the dictionary and common language.
I thought you'd dissect the company versus corporation instead of focusing on private. Now you'll say you knew it was a private corp over an organization.
Posted by: ReductiMat
How would you define a replicable science experiment to prove that being center is better based off an "unexplained scoring system" by a website that "does not reveal the people behind it, beyond the fact that it seems to be based in the United Kingdom?"
What if someone came up with a more transparent system that placed you right or left of centre? Would you strive to change your views to fit that model?
Oh the irony in that I just gave a somewhat similar answer to shogun...
There's non science experiment here, we're using language and the accepted definitions of various words and terms to help describe someone's political position. As an aside, it's one of the reasons I like Chompsky, he's excellent as using language to describe a situation/issue whether or not you agree with his political leaning. So in terms of the accepted definitions and norms, being centrist essentially means one has balance views between left and right. We don't necessarily need a website to tell us that, just and understanding of the various political themes. If there was a system that placed me more to the left or right (I did score left of centre on the compass btw) then I would be fine with that if it aligned with my political views and accepted definitions for those views. If a site called me strongly right for example then I would immediately have to question is as that would not line up with my understanding of what left/right mean. So I would first check how the site is defining those terms and then check that against the accepted definitions and finally my own. That would be your science experiment I suppose.
Maybe that's what getting the world and the political spectrum so fucked up these days, is that the appreciation for and understanding of language is slowly going into the shitter and people can't communicate anymore beyond basic terms that leave far too much ambiguity in what the speaker/writer is trying to say.
Posted by: aShogunNamedMarcus
I thought you'd dissect the company versus corporation instead of focusing on private. Now you'll say you knew it was a private corp over an organization.
Oh ffs, look up the meaning of a corporation. It's a legal standing for an organization to be recognized as it's own entity which means that it's leaders are set apart or insulated from the business. Part of the reason of benefit to doing it is that is protects the leaders/owners from getting sued. For example let's say I run a business as a sole proprietorship and I do something that causes some sort of harm hardship to someone else. If they decide to sue my company for wrong doing and they win they if the company doesn't have any assets or not enough to cover the award they can take my own personal assets to cover the award. However, if my business is incorporated - a corporation - my personal assets cannot be seized to cover the award. Some people interpret this as a way for greasy companies to escape losing their money/assets if they get sued for shitty behaviour. Some people might also say that it's no surprise that an entity like the DNC would want to be incorporated.
I focused on what you actually said and I explained my reason for doing so. Now you want to shift the goal posts and insinuate I was doing something else or had different motives. This is exactly the type of bullshit behaviour that people can't stand about you. Most of us on here don't lie about shit or purposely misrepresent (troll) the discussion just to piss you off. Take off the everyone is out to get shogun conspiracy hat.
1. You make a related but somewhat ambiguous/unclear statement.
2. Someone calls you on it and gives you a reason why.
3. You respond with something is related but not the same as the original statement or go off on another tangent altogether
4. You then claim that we're the ones getting things wrong
This is what you do over and over and over again and it's why trying to debate stuff with you is fucking painful and why people give you shit so often. The only other conclusion I can come to is you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about or have such a narrow view that you simply cannot see anything beyond what you want to see or believe in. Either way have fun with it.
Posted by: syncro
Posted by: ReductiMat
How would you define a replicable science experiment to prove that being center is better based off an "unexplained scoring system" by a website that "does not reveal the people behind it, beyond the fact that it seems to be based in the United Kingdom?"
What if someone came up with a more transparent system that placed you right or left of centre? Would you strive to change your views to fit that model?
Oh the irony in that I just gave a somewhat similar answer to shogun...
There's non science experiment here, we're using language and the accepted definitions of various words and terms to help describe someone's political position. As an aside, it's one of the reasons I like Chompsky, he's excellent as using language to describe a situation/issue whether or not you agree with his political leaning. So in terms of the accepted definitions and norms, being centrist essentially means one has balance views between left and right. We don't necessarily need a website to tell us that, just and understanding of the various political themes. If there was a system that placed me more to the left or right (I did score left of centre on the compass btw) then I would be fine with that if it aligned with my political views and accepted definitions for those views. If a site called me strongly right for example then I would immediately have to question is as that would not line up with my understanding of what left/right mean. So I would first check how the site is defining those terms and then check that against the accepted definitions and finally my own. That would be your science experiment I suppose.
Maybe that's what getting the world and the political spectrum so fucked up these days, is that the appreciation for and understanding of language is slowly going into the shitter and people can't communicate anymore beyond basic terms that leave far too much ambiguity in what the speaker/writer is trying to say.
* Chomsky
Do you fault him for his decidedly non-centrism in his politics?
Left/Right/Center labels are useful only if you wish to identify as an ambiguous ideal.
Make omnibus bills illegal and force politicians to defend their beliefs. If they commit too many logical fallacies, their shock collar goes off.
Posted by: ReductiMat
* Chomsky
Do you fault him for his decidedly non-centrism in his politics?
Left/Right/Center labels are useful only if you wish to identify as an ambiguous ideal.
Make omnibus bills illegal and force politicians to defend their beliefs. If they commit too many logical fallacies, their shock collar goes off.
Fault him? No, he's an individual and as such gets to choose what he believes in, just like you or me. In turn we get to criticize him if we choose. I was saying I like that he's a good communicator, not that I necessarily agree with his politics.
Disagree - we need to have some sort of labels or identifiers for concepts if we're going to debate them. Left/right/centre is simply the nomenclature we use, it could be centre/right/left for all I care. I don't care about the labels, I care about the polices the labels stand for. Again I think that's what makes Chompsky good, his use of language tends to be exacting.
ps - chompsky is something I often use in debating with a friend of mine for the aforementioned reasons, he's chomping through the vernacular, and it just tends to carry through everywhere else.
Oh and yes, I tend to agree on the omnibus bill thing. the only problem I see is that it has the potential to make passing legislation a horribly drawn out affair and hardly anything gets done.
Last edited by: syncro on Dec. 21, 2019, 5:59 p.m., edited 1 time in total.
Forum jump:
