I'm working on a political quiz, and I want it to be the best political quiz on the internet

I'm working on a political quiz, and I want it to be the best political quiz on the internet.

I'm looking for feedback from you political scholars and autistes, specifically:

Do you consider your results to be accurate? If not, why not?
Questions you would add/change.
Answers you would add/change.
Political labels/categories you would add. (Currently the only labels are: Fascist, Conservative, Neoconservative, Classical Liberal/Libertarian, Moderate, Progressive, and Socialist)

Thanks for the help Sup Forums

rightrealist.com/QuizIntro.html
rightrealist.com/QuizIntro.html
rightrealist.com/QuizIntro.html

Other urls found in this thread:

rightrealist.com/QuizIntro.html
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

fuck off

awww hey buddy lets be friends :D

A conservative isn't bad.

I normally get called a communists in every test I take.

Someday I will get called a national socialist, it's my dream.

>data mining

>rightrealist.com/QuizIntro.html
interesting quiz.

...

Nice test OP

Nice. Add some questions in though. It needs to be more complex desu

Thanks

What questions would you add?

Best and most accurate I've taken so far. Hopefully you're not a dataminer.

Put more domestic policies in such as "Is gun control necessary?" or "Should the government spy on us?" Stuff like that

Thanks!

seems accurate tbqh

I'd add a religious vs. secular axis.

How's this Sup Forums?

should have a bit more question
interesting overall

looks like a traitor to me.

Communist, Anarcho-capitalist, monarchist, and theocrat (or clerical fascist).

Also you should distinguish between civic nationalism fascism and ethnic-nationalism fascism.

Add questions regarding taxes and government spending on infrastructure and other sectors (police etc).. i.e. big vs small government

Good idea

Needs about 100 more questions about really tricky ethical and goal related issues.

Rate me you fags.

Pretty accurate.

I'm guessing at least 20 should be trolley problems?

...

I think this question could use some work.

I personally believe that race is irrelevant and that a multicultural society free of governmental restrictions will function as well as a similar society with one ethnicity. This questions forces me to say that multiculturalism is good or bad.

Agree

You believe multiculturalism is good. So pick 4.
Now get the fuck out of this website.

You should ask questions regarding social and economic issues, like stands on abortion, gay adoption, racism, globalism, if the state should intervene in business, if Healthcare should be free and universal or private, mandatory military service, women in the military, open borders, etc.

A lot of your questions don't have any answers I agree with. I stopped after the illegal aliens one. I don't think that having a job and not being a criminal makes it OK for them to stay, but I also don't think they should be all deported with no exceptions, but I also don't think that you reward someone who breaks your laws by giving them citizenship. If you want to be a part of the nation, you have to be on the books, so if you're being a good boy, the nation should penalize you for overstaying and give you a choice between leaving and going through the citizenship process in the order that you would have gone through anyway, without any privileges. Nations accept immigrants, so apply to be one. If you get rejected, leave. If you overstay your alloted time, you're a dick and you should get punished.

El Salvador is right.

I don't understand your argument, OP's question was literally what you want. You say illegals should not be admitted in the country, and the question was should illegals be deported? In your post you said yes.

Then you went on a retarded tangent about how the immigration process actually works in real life for any country on earth. That's a given and OP has no need to ask for that. Even ISIS controlled shitholes work like that.

The question in the OP implies the person will get deported and if he wants to come back he will have to take the immigration process that already exists without any privileges like any other person on earth. Nowhere in the questions it said he won't be able to return, or it did?

...

not the person you were responding to, but I was hoping there'd be some differentiation between people who had entered the country illegally and people who had come in illegally but overstayed their visa and are now in limbo

I consider those two situations completely different after a close friend of mine went through a very similar situation.

>and people who had come in illegally but overstayed their visa and are now in limbo
come in legally**

I see your point, Share the story of why is it different. Legally they are both illegals. But I want to hear your friend's story.

If you want this quiz to be used by anyone other than Sup Forums, remove the direct links to stormfront shit my man.

You need to be subtle with redpills, liberals will chimp out if they see that shit.

he was dating this girl who had originally had a worker's visa from russia and had a lawyer in america who was dealing with all of her papers

Her J1 visa was going to expire in a month and had applied for an extension or a tourist visa or something via her lawyer who had taken care of everything in the past (this was her third summer coming here)

when the deadline had passed, she got a call from her lawyer who more or less said more or less "i fucked up your papers and you are now overstayed in the country, the best I can do is give you some tickets home but you'll probably not be allowed to come back here for a couple years."

since they had been dating for 6 months or so, my friend was absolutely crushed as you could imagine; so she basically had to stay here for over a year illegally and they got married so they could stay together; they've been together for over 6 years now and are still very happy thankfully; but man the stress that girl went through for over a year was mind boggling, it was almost impossible for her to find any work or get health insurance without fear of getting deported

this is why i think there should be a differentiation between "illegal immigrants" and "overstayed immigrants" since the latter actually took the effort of getting here legally to begin with, there are lots of circumstances that could cause that sort of thing to happen.

sorry, i wrote this out in parts and re-reading it now made me realize i made some stupid mistakes here and there

the small text box does not help proofing

Overall, it is a very well designed quiz with good variation in the questions. Thanks for the insight

>tfw to intelligent to be anything but neutral

forgot pic

Nice Digits m8. And I tend to agree with you. What would your solution to that problem be? That the state gives her a chance to become a citizen before getting deported?

That lawyer made some shitty job man, what did he do in one month and the following year?

Huh, ok then.

not bad survey op

she was lucky enough that my friend had a stable job and that his apartment had 2 cool roommates who didn't care if she stayed there, she did find babysitting gigs here and there but it was pretty barren in terms of money for her

i'm not sure what sort of solution i'd give, but giving some sort of leniency towards those who had overstayed or even giving them a potential extension would be fine by me, rather than just clear cutting them off right away.

obviously there would need to be some sort of appeal system for this, which would be a pain in the ass in terms of defining who gets said leniency and who does not, but it's better than nothing.

"too intelligent to be anything but neutral" doesn't make any sense at all when you consider the fact that "neutral" is constantly moving, mostly shifting to the Left. What was considered "neutral" in the past would be considered far-Right today, which means "neutrality" has nothing to do with intelligence or objective facts, and everything to do with how pliable and conformist you are as a citizen.

>checkmate bitch

One of the most accurates I had.

i just think people should never be proud of thier political standpoint, everyone has different opinions and experiences; fuck that guy

Meaning no one should take politics and its implications seriously, where there is basically nothing more serious.

Again, don't confuse apathy/indifference with intelligence.

Which of these people did nothing wrong?
Robspierre
Stalin
Hitler
Leopold II
Cao Cao
Napoleon
They all did something wrong
None of them did anything wrong

>but giving some sort of leniency towards those who had overstayed or even giving them a potential extension would be fine by me, rather than just clear cutting them off right away.
Like a period of "probation" except in this case is a period of waiting if the extension will be rejected or not? I think I understand you.

Yeah, it would be really complicated, and perhaps bound to corruption too. I think it has the potential for a lot of trouble. What rights would the people that are awating a resolution of their visa have? Really made me think, thanks user.

Yeah, Hitler should have actually done the holocaust instead of just deporting people.

being open to both sides of the argument is the exact antithesis of your argument idiot

no idea in the real world truly works if you go all in

if hitler wouldn't have dropped the red pill to 6 gorillion jews he would have had reverence for decades, centuries even

99% of people don't know half the names on that list

How do you do, fellow whites?

>no idea in the real world truly works if you go all in

And Trump lost the presidential election

trump is more outspoken and willful than any politician ever seen but you could tell he would side-step and play himself carefully to avoid unnecessary news prints

also le one exambleeee :)))

no it means no one should take politics personally, i never said anything anything about being apathetic

Was labeled as a normie even on politics

>Economic Inequality:

>1) Is simply the result of bad economic policy
>2) Is the natural result of differences among individuals
>3) Is intentionally created to benefit the rich
>4) Is necessary for a well-functioning society

The answers to this one are a little obtuse, OP. But I think you could solve that by asking two different questions.

Like:

>What is the cause of great inequality in wealth?

And ALSO:

>Should economic equality be enforced by the government?

>The idea that humanity can be categorized according to race or ethnicity is:

The us of "categorized" is VERY vague here. At least when you read the answers to the question.

use*

>What is most responsible for inequality in the world?

Could use some more answers here. Also "in the world"; do you mean within countries around the world or do you mean the disparity between the United States and Kenya for example?

Also this is my score. I feel I'm actually more left leaning than this would imply, but I'm not terribly surprised considering the questions asked. Hope I helped.