geronimo "Phyically" should have been "Psychically" I believe my evil spellchecker is both authoritarian and right wing.

How did you answer the question about willingness to participate in massacres?

Jan 8, 2017 at 3:13 PM | Supertroll

There is a question about willingness to participate in Climate Science propaganda and misinformation?

Oxymoron question gC!!!

"How did you answer the question about willingness to participate in massacres?"

Strongly agree naturally.

geronimo. Well we must be twins then. No question about it.

Economic Left/Right: 3.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.38
Puts me near Friedman on the the chart. Some of the score will be down to having to agree/disagree when some neutral answer would have been more appropriate.

Thanks EM.

rhoda
You're modern my first thought about horsepower is always 1 HP = 33,000 ft-lb/min

Just as water comes halfway up a duck, so does power come from halfway up a horse.
==============

Still don't get that, Paul. Don't see how you can have collectivism without coercion, when using actual imperfect humans. It requires too much willing suspension of disbelief.

The sub-title for this should be, "Allows middle class people to pretend to be left wing, whilst still living fruitfully off the benefits of a capitalist society". As me Ma would have said, "f*cking armchair socialists".

More rationally, the system boundary is badly defined. It has an idea about what it believes left and right are... it constrains you to be within that boundary, but that static definition is no longer relevant. It is by definition of its language, written by and geared towards (mostly left wing) intellectuals and their idea of left and right.

Just having political discussions with my (mature and bright) 18 year old son, shows the world those questions reflect does not exist.

This is the Age of Communication. And aspirations for people relate to becoming a node in that communication network.

The questions should reflect modern society and those aspirations. Even the poorest Africa peasant wants access to a smartphone. Wants his village on the internet.

Labeling people left and right within the old boundary is no longer an adequate measure of society.

For good or for bad capitalism allows everyone to a contributor and consumer in the "Age of Communication". The questions should relate to allowing/denying that for members of society.

rec=1.38 soc=-3.85

Which puts me bottom right. Where no political parties are. Quelle surprise.

MH, I have pointed out on some other thread that the division has transformed into:

Political classes absorbed with issues divorced from the lives of the majority/climate change act/MSM+BBC =fake news, polarised bias /immigration is good/pro EU/politicos become extremely rich/criminalise using the wrong bin

vs:

Populism/demagogue/climate change=scam,politicised pseudo science/build the wall/Brexit

For the changes, they're for a time, in.
============

Martin, I understand your list, and I accept you tried to give it some validity with actual values. I myself am trying not to create something "hard" in my own thinking. Trying to remain fluid, because it avoids being pigeon holed.

One major change in the Age of Information is that the idea of social and public consensus has been turned on its head. And the last few years, the kickback against consensus can have an effect.

I am having more discussions with people who are finding a voice against consensus. This maybe an individual voice, or as part of a loose group. I talk to people who actually now as soon as they see a consensus they immediately look more deeply and challenge, my son being one of them.

To jump on and support a consensus is now so easy. I see people design and wear a consensus overcoat, and act like it is a natural part of their skin. They fool themselves. Just follow the relevant twitter feeds and "Hey presto" you have your moral and hierarchical place in society without any effort.

Media outlets, even if they have the inclination, do not have the resources or time to challenge anything anymore. They take the social media feeds, the news wires, and just filter them based on their own prejudices. People either pay with their time or with subscriptions and readers seeking added value are moving more and more away from the outlets like the Guardian (reading it which is like sitting in the middle of a sixth form common room.) What established media outlets add value any more? The last year has shown they are just part of a person's "overcoat of values".

To balance that however, to challenge the consensus, to have a voice, or to feel that your experience and values have some validity, is also now easier. More and more people are realising that the conformity that is being forced on them is not some "natural social and moral justice", but just the latest overcoat of the establishment. If you have talked to a Soviet Apparatchik in the 1980's he would literally have thought you crazy if you had challenged his "overcoat of socialism" or outlined what would happen in the following 10 years.

These are just some ideas about society, not viewed on the lazy intellectual basis of right and left. Quickly off the top of my head.

Media hoar

My 18-month old granddaughter can say "No".

True, and her wondrous and special journey in life is just beginning whereby she has the maturity, self confidence and inherent individualism, and of course not forgetting the erudition to say..."That's bollocks"... :)