My journey

Who else knows this feel?

Also, political compass thread

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=yRZZpk_9k8E
youtube.com/watch?v=qw3S35wGgT8
youtube.com/watch?v=dqB-EMqpsUA
youtube.com/watch?v=jZuktUfF0nE
youtube.com/watch?v=vrrky5Jg9D0
youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0
youtube.com/watch?v=B-m9A8mY-U0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Why did you go full retard after 22?

once you learn about genetics and history, that's where you end up

No its when you have no value structure so you cling to the state for meaning.

top left is where you start, believing the bullshit your teachers feed you about multiculturalism and that the world is a wonderful magical place

then you get disillusioned in your adolescence and the lower left ideology perfectly matches your edgy personality and desire to show everyone around you that you wanna stick it to the man!

as you get older, if you're not retarded or lazy, you start to grow up. you realize that you have to work, and you should be entitled to the fruits of your work while so many of your peers are just sitting around smoking weed and talking about how they want to fight "the system." Why should you have to pay for them to just sit around and do nothing? Who is the government to force you to pay taxes to this trash? Why do we even need a government if it just protects and enables the lowest of the lowest scum?

Finally, once you've come of age and spent time in the real world, starting to earn your place in this world and take responsibility for yourself and work with your fellow man, you realize that everything up to this point was just youthful idealism. A society will crumble without proper authority. The niggers and libshits will riot in the streets and loot everything, turning the nation into a third-world shithole. You need law and order, but also, you need morality. Throughout history, every great empire met its demise when liberal degeneracy reached its peak. That needs to be stopped. Someone needs to take control; the people need leaders who know better.

Making peace with the establishment is an important part of growing up.

no, it's when you see reality and stop living in idealistic fantasy lands you barely understand

nope, that where you end up when you have no redeeming qualities and rely on your ancestor's achievements for internal satisfaction.

>A society will crumble without proper authority. The niggers and libshits will riot in the streets and loot everything, turning the nation into a third-world shithole.
That's a bit of a leap. That's why you buy guns, silly user. It's when you start having too much government and especially when you lose your ability to own guns that shit goes south.

I don't recall having a political leaning when I was 6. Am I a brainlet?

how the fuck were you a communist at 6-12 years old?

>no guns
top left

I admit that part is a bit of a leap, but a society without unity or proper government will destroy itself.

But my ancestors are me. Same genetic material.

Your idea that everyone is some sort of pure individual floating in free space making entirely self-motivated decisions is faulty
My ancestors live on through me, just as I will live on through my decedents

pretty much this.

Raised in an uber-left environment

When I was a kid I literally thought humanity was a disease that should be wiped off the face of the Earth. That we should give up all technology and go live in the forest with the animals. In fact I even planned an elaborate treehouse to live in when I grew up

i didnt have one until i was 20

No. This is a bad sign desu, you seem to be easily manipulated.

>The reality is that I am too stupid to make decisions for myself
I mean whatever you believe I personally think most people are surprisingly intelligent, presumably yourself included.

You haven't met many people

youtube.com/watch?v=yRZZpk_9k8E

Don't have results before 2011, but I probably was further left

I literally followed this EXACT pattern. I described myself as a socialist when I was about 12-16, a capitalist anarchist from 16-22, and here I am alt-righting it up on Sup Forums at 26.

I'll take the unity and no government then.
Especially since more often than not, government is more interested in dividing society rather than unifying people's hearts.
I can more easily feel empathy for people in need when I don't have that knee-jerk reaction of "I already pay taxes for this shit, I'm not helping anybody".
Charitable deeds have merit, government does not.

liberals are fucking trash

>Interview a hundred college students on topics unrelated to their major
>Compile those with the dumbest answers
>Le everyone is dumb

No man, most people are just really dumb. If you haven't realized this it's probably an indication you've never worked in the service sector for any length of time.

Your ancestors went outside, got laid, and had offspring

And here you are, going full retard

Interesting video for you

youtube.com/watch?v=qw3S35wGgT8

while genetics is a factor in the mix, it by itself can't determine who your are. there are too many other factors to ignore.

and yes, your ancestors are living inside you, and they can be proud of what they have created, because it was the direct result of their strife and challenges.
you can't do the same however, you simply weren't there to do anything. you didn't made any sacrifices they had to make and you haven't fought the wars they have fought. if we were to go by your logic, you could genetically link yourself to first living organism that "walked" the earth and take credit for all life.

you also have to consider that while your dna was a legacy from your ancestors, it is not identical to them. humans are the fastest evolving organisms on earth, our genetic material changes rapidly. you will always be a bit different from the last generation, and they will be a bit different from the previous one too.

for the last point (this is more philosophy then politics actually), what makes you you? your body? your memories? your genes? your soul (if you believe in that)? or a combination of these?

if you go by genes, wouldn't every organism on the earth gain the right to claim they are one and the same as our common ancestor, therefore same as us?

looks like you went too far after age 22, desu... you should have stopped a bit below the midline

youtube.com/watch?v=dqB-EMqpsUA

I have and while most of them certainly had problems they certainly were more intelligent than most people let on. However the problem boils down to the fact that you trust a powerful central government with little popular oversight over the will of the people. What keeps someone like Hillary Clinton or Saddam Hussein from coming to power in a far right country? As long as someone has support from the right groups ideology doesn't matter much and often times more right wing governments will institute liberal social policies in order to ensure continued popular support. The Second Reich despite being a near absolute monarchy had extremely liberal social programs compared to Great Britain and even France which had the first attempted communist revolution.

Even if your empire does have the benefit of having an enlightened despot nothing ensures his successor will be as intelligent and capable a leader.

...

Everyone should be proud of their ancestors. It should motivate you to follow their example.

Disillusioning someone from their ancestors is the first step to deconstructing their identity. Which is how you destroy them as a people.

What makes a human? Well a huge collision of factors. Environment, identity, culture, history, genetics. You are a product of all these things. Like a ripple in a roiling sea.

How the fuck would you know those curves? You would have to take the political compass test like every 6 months since you were 6 years old to get data like that.

Fuck off.

Who says a fascist government has to be dictatorial?

I personally advocate limiting voting rights. The requirement to vote should be much stricter than simply having a pulse.

Everyone has different ideas on how best to structure things, some are better than others.

Historically the elite class has been a genetically separate group. Carefully bred to ensure they will be the best possible leader for their people. In fact, you could argue that the dissolution of the European elite left them defenseless against stronger outside forces

i am not saying you shouldn't be proud of them. you should be. its how societies survive.

what i am saying is, while we are the descendants of our ancestors, we are not them. that is all i was saying.

and yes, i love this culture, and would do everything to preserve it. but i am open to change too (not in a libtard way). i think we should be able to discard (((some))) (not to the point where we become unrecognizable) traditions in order to raise the life standards of our society. if a tradition or a value is clogging development, i don't think there is any reason in holding onto that tradition.

Every time I changed my positions I veered towards the center

Probably because it's safe and nonjudgemental

>(((the elite class)))

are you saying we SHOULD be ruled by the jews?

>implying race is the only major factor in a society
>Ignoring the fact that the rules of the game do far more on manipulating how people act.

Look back in time at the European aristocracy. These geniuses who came up with all this advanced mathematics, philosophy, technology....etc.

They had meticulously managed their gene pool. Young adults among the aristocracy were carefully bred in arranged marriages to produce the absolute most intelligent, strongest leaders.

>Who says a fascist government has to be dictatorial?

Nobody, but would a strong authoritarian government be a dictatorship or one party state.

>Historically the elite class has been a genetically separate group.

Implying every elite class have allways been kikes.

>cling to the state for meaning

No it's when you realize democracy is a weaponized bludgeoning implement that exists solely to divide and conquer the masses until complacency is achieved while a handful of oligarchs rule the nation from behind the scenes. In a single party state these antagonistic divides between political positions will cease to be in all forms except among those who are politicized enough to become proper ideologues, as for the common man there won't be resentment over which party who voted for, and you've accomplished the same, if more effective, form of governance as what you already have anyway (the distinction between standard Republicans and Democrats, for example is found only in minor social issues that creates the illusion of choice).

>no value structure

It's the exact opposite you moron. It is precisely the EXCESSIVELY individualistic (individualism is fine as far as protecting one's property and family goes) culture bred by the libertarian capitalist origins of the United States system of governance that for sure has led to its growth, but also ensured its own demise and the total collapse of the existing Western value systems and demographics. When everything is permissible, it is the tendency of the ordered structure of society to corrode over time as people forget more and more of their history and embrace transient hedonistic impulses, the minor failures of the parents of one generation grow exponentially into the rest. There needs to be legal confinements for basic morality and traditions to be upheld or else they deteriorate, nobody wants to hear about personal responsibility and sacrifice and the things that allowed us to reach this point. Allowing the basic morality of the father culture to perish will lead to the collapse of society and the regression of several centuries of social progress, a truth that echoes back through the ages.

>Implying every elite class have allways been kikes.

Not what I'm saying. The elite class were of different stock than the commoners. They had different features, different proclivities, and even a different culture among themselves.

It's fair to say they were genetically refined. Not to the point of being a separate ethnicity though

>I personally advocate limiting voting rights. The requirement to vote should be much stricter than simply having a pulse.
And who sets those requirements? What prevents someone from changing those voting rights? Everyone who serves in the military can vote? If so than a war that requires a draft makes the whole law pointless. What prevents the military or government from actively excluding certain groups from the military?

Pray tell what is your ideal form of government beyond just limited voting right? Perhaps level of centralization, government control over the economy and individuals' personal lives, any particular social programs. For all that Sup Forums bitches about socialized medicine and social security fascist countries tended to be very fond of those kinds of policies as they tied the middle and lower classes to the state making them loyal for pragmatic reasons (if the state collapses I don't get free healthcare). If it makes you feel better I could post a general summery of what I consider a semi-ideal form of government.

I think I'm on the right track.

>most people are just really dumb
It's almost like a giant, overbearing nanny state incentivises braindead follower behaviour.
Let people be free to fail, you fucking bootlicker. Nobody's so stupid they can't feed and clothe themselves.

haha hitler haha

fucking retards with no idea about politics. true centrism is power and keeping all these morons fighting against each other in different quadrants is how you control the world.

or evry 2 yrs.
i did that, but mine only went directly down, or near the center... and i mean literally, never left nor right(maybe to the right by 1 degree at the most?), only up or down, but never past the middle portion into the upper

>>The reality is that I am too stupid to make decisions for myself
or you're smart enough to recognize that while you may have a far better grasp on your individual needs than the state will ever have, that does not make you omnipotent in addressing them, nor should you have to in some cases
the true stupidity is realizing that putting too much power in the hands of the state is dangerous, and then concluding the only solution is its near or total annihilation and complete ignorance of the realities and complexities of modern society, rather than simply seeking balance
it's cool to play pretend and posture yourself as the sort of virtuous, self-reliant pioneer the purple quadrant appeals to the most, but those days are long over, and you're only deluding yourself to continue living in Jefferson's agrarian dream land

you could argue that the same thing is happening now. you rarely see an elite marry a regular person

>Historically the elite class has been a genetically separate group. Carefully bred to ensure they will be the best possible leader for their people.
This is really retarded. European aristocracy were generally the same ethnicity as the people they ruled over for the most part up until the 17th century when noble families began to gain control of lands well outside their country and the relatives of monarchs married each other more often instead of marrying local aristocracy.

Beyond that aristocracy weren't bred to rule, they were bred for political alliances or on some very rare occasions out of actual romantic interest. There is a reason monarchs are so hit and miss, King Richard I was an idiot who drove England into debt in pointless wars that failed to even accomplish their goals, John II was a weak king, Henry II and Edward I were both competent but Edward II was as weak as John. While this was going on the aristocracy was in near constant revolt in order to increase their own political power and authority relative to the king.

>true centrism is power
>keeping all these morons

Ironically you just participated in the same D&C kikery you were making fun of everyone else of for. Centrists seem to have somehow deluded themselves into thinking they aren't a faction of political ideologues participating in the democratic clusterfuck of clashing ideals along with everyone else. There's a level of conceit there that I find startling, like Homer Simpson in that one episode: youtube.com/watch?v=jZuktUfF0nE

Approximating a little bit here. I first took the political compass test we all know in around 2006 and I was in the green, and moved over to the purple over time until moving back into the green. Now I'm back in the purple.

It's not a leap, it was the fundamental condition of civilization - that we are humanized by being civilized, and civilized by being virtuous and refined, and that civilized behavior being the core and ongoing condition of civilization itself, it must stand to reason that the institutions of governance retain some capacity to ensure a refined and disciplined populace.

Or in counterargumentative form to its predecessor on the chart: any society whose exclusive stipulations are to do no immediate harm to thy neighbor will soon enough find itself populated by animals, incapable of following even that simple guideline.

/thread

I don't support democracy though. I already have loyalty to the church family and home I don't need to bend over to a national government that is outside the bounds of what my ancestors agreed on. western civilization has been build on the idea that society is built from the ground up. Starting with the individual and the family.

>And who sets those requirements? What prevents someone from changing those voting rights?
Remember that these sorts of requirements are in effect to this very day. We forbid people classified as "retarded" from voting. We also forbid people under a certain age. This is an acknowledgement that certain people are not capable to make fair choices in an election.

Historically these requirements were much stricter. In the original America, only land-owning white males in good standing with the law could vote.

Ideally the system would be set up in a clever way so that voting power organically flowed to those who were more competent, more knowledgeable about government, and more respected within the community. There are all sorts of different techniques being worked on for organically managing large networked populations.. For example chess ELO ratings. You just have to be clever about it. No problem is too difficult for us to find a solution.

As far as ideal form of government, what you have to realize is that human beings fundamentally evolved to be part of an integrated national unit. Most people should not be expected to be able to make decisions for themselves. They need to be told what to do, what to eat, how to live.....etc. They crave leadership.

The ideal society would recognize the reality of how we evolved and work rationally from there, instead of imposing some pie-in-the-sky philosophical idealism

Also this is an absolutely stellar post.

Being purple doesn't mean that you desire complete dissolution of the state, it simply means greater limits on the power of the state in general and central government in particular. A large part of classical liberalism which was represented in the constitution and the earlier articles of confederation is a very weak central government. If Kentucky wants to outlaw abortion and mandate bible classes in their state, that should be their right, while if California wants to have universal healthcare it shouldn't be able to force it upon Alabama. The central government should only act as a way to unify the states politically. When it comes to domestic policy the states should have near total autonomy.

Hell classical liberalism doesn't even mandate popular selection of the central government, one could have state senators elect senators to send to the capital likewise in the early US the electors for presidential elections were generally chosen through means beyond popular vote.

>They crave leadership
Then why make being led mandatory? If all those sub-human plebs crave your glorious leadership so badly, why wouldn't they all flock to your wisdom in a free society?

>The niggers and libshits will riot in the streets and loot everything
why not just shoot them?

They do. People erect leaders all over the place.

Whether it's Bernie Sanders, Stephen Hawking, or some Youtube e-celeb. People latch onto these personalities and mass behind them. This is why fanbases are a thing.

People are craving identity right now. Because they lost their aristocracy, they have no leadership, no role models, no one showing them the way in the harsh world.

youtube.com/watch?v=vrrky5Jg9D0

This makes more sense if you read from right to left

>the fucking leftist shills in this thread
god dammit Sup Forums needs a great cleanse

Then why are you against a free society? According to your philosophy, we'll all swarm around the strongest leader anyway (and I'm assuming here that in your fantasy, that leader is you). Why restrict people's freedom if they're just going to use that freedom to shackle themselves for you anyway?

I have ascended and now occupy the entire graph based on context

>The ideal society would recognize the reality of how we evolved
Humans didn't evolve to live in large groups. Humans are only really capable of caring for about 60-100 people outside of those people everyone else is essentially a statistic. Do you break down crying every time you hear about a murder in the News? Unlikely. Would you cry if you found out that your father or mother or girlfriend were murdered? Much more likely.

Using this logic the ideal form of government would be a highly decentralized form of government where people only decide on issues that effect them and the people they care about. Beyond that relatively small closely knit communities are much more similar in ideology meaning that a consensus or near consensus could be much more easily reached. Ergo logically speaking the ideal form of government would combined duty to allow for protection of the whole while using human connections to ensure that people vote in ways that benefit themselves and the people around them.

Such a system would likely involve very small subdivisions (likely individual towns or sections of cities) which agree to a mutual defence treaty and nothing more. In the US this is even more feasible since the US has no real existential threats as a nation. Even if each county gained complete independence the Mexican or Canadian armies wouldn't invade because the sheer population would make their invasion a blood bath. As an added bonus since every community is nearly entirely autonomous if upper class white and Jewish neighborhoods want to "save" Mexicans or Arabs they would have to let them move next door.

Since this isn't the most practical method however the closest simulation of this would be ideal which is akin to the early articles of confederation where the central government has next to no real powers. Ideally this central government wouldn't even be able to declare wars of aggression, only able to call the states to a mutual defence.

So like political Benjamin Button?

I think I've been a centrist all my life.

Someone who knew nothing and didn't acknowledge it.
Someone who thought he knew something but didn't know anything.
Someone who knows more than the majority of people but reality still didn't know much.
Someone who spends all his life on knowledge and realize it is pointless to talk to others.
Someone who realized he does not have an ideology and no amount of truth can confirm what he actually believes in.
Someone who cannot tell the difference between truth and fiction and realizes that true investigation supersedes basic research and thus knows nothing and speaks nothing, but endlessly searches for the truth to one day confirm what is known so he may rest knowing what is the truth. That is the basic truth, if any truth at all.

master race reporting in

Shackle? How is it being shackled to fulfill the mandates of your biology?

Most people are not supposed to be left to blow in the winds of the market. They aren't capable. They need someone guiding them, and leading the way.

Only those few that prove themselves, fight, struggle, and achieve rise to the level of self-determination. They are the leadership caste.

The "free society" thing is pretty much nonsense. Would get crushed by a nationalist state
You should watch this when you find the time:

youtube.com/watch?v=-6Wu0Q7x5D0

about where i am and where i was, don't save the charts when i take the test
each dot is around a year, give or take

...

>starting with the individual and the family

This is true, but these families are in proximity with other families, with whom they share a common culture, and this commonality leads to cooperation, cooperation inevitably leads to a dominance hierarchy, some are simply better at decision making, this dominance hierarchy begins as far back as the start of tribalism, and has only evolved into governance since then due to the scale of society and the increasing complexity of the number of moving parts that need to interact for the living standards of the people to be maintained. What is happening now is your home and your church family are in an antagonistic relationship with the government, which has become divorced from its parent culture and is being used to erase the value structures you embrace and no doubt want your children to embrace. Replacing such a government with one that seeks to uphold the traditions of you and your people is a boon, and is in no way worse than what you have now. Tell me how, then, a government which simultaneously protects its own businesses from predation and its own workers from exploitation or a government which teaches constitutional rights, the benefits of monogamy and the atomic family and other such things in place of the self-flagellating social sciences in school subjugates you or interferes with your loyalty to your family and church group, or your worship of god? It doesn't, all it does is stifle the growth of influences which have been systematically modifying the educational system to turn your children against you, and want to expand their influence over what is taught in home school and private school so they can do so to an even greater extent.

You sound like a really dull fucking person

I didn't have one till 12 and I didn't even have a mildly informed one till I was 16

also in case anyone didn't understand by my being on Sup Forums, i am in the purple currently, and it goes from left to right

What your neighbor does affects you.
What the town next door does affects you.

A united people is far stronger than some disparate bundle of radical individuals

>They need someone guiding them, and leading the way
Then they'll follow leaders. You're not answering the question, friendo - I'll ask one more time.
Why would you restrict peoples' freedoms if you truly believe that they'll use that freedom to follow strong leaders anyway?
Do you lack confidence in your worldview (you're clearly underage b&), or is it a ruse because you get hard pretending that a neet permavirgin posting Warhammer 40Kike images on an anime forum can be the next Fuhrer?

On the contrary, I had people tell me I'm way too weird or interesting. I have a sister who finds me the pinnacle of originality and wisdom. I think you need to spend a day with me to really understand who I am.

I went blue, red, green purple at ages 17, 19, 22 and 23. Don't see myself budging from right libertarianism.

>top left is where you start, believing the bullshit your teachers feed you about multiculturalism and that the world is a wonderful magical place

Are you retarded?, teachers feed me the bullshit "Muh 900000000000000 trillion billion" that socialism is "evil" and the "no strap on sneku" is based.

This might be the most autistic post I've ever seen on this board.

you're right, it was a little extreme to go that far, and on compass tests I often rimjob the purple myself, but it feels like most of what I see from this part of the spectrum is a rather unnecessary degree of antagonism towards the state

vesting too much power within it is certainly dangerous, and the inefficiency is impossible to ignore, but I don't know if I can fall into the perspective of classical liberalism as you describe, government may fundamentally exist to protect its people and ensure their liberty, but I also assign other responsibilities such as hard decision making, protecting ideas such as culture and values, and ensuring moderate standardization across its territory where they are universally beneficial. a moderately strong state is not always a bad thing, as long as there are ways to check it.

I've taken the test twrice. The path and other points are just approximation

This is actually pretty actuate graph.The first years in life one gets everything provided to them free of charge and expects everything to be given to them. In later years one often becomes rebellious to ones parents and listening to nu-metal bands. Then yet as one gets old and obtains a basic income one desires independence and as one ages still he learns about responsibility and his duty to his family.

am i worthy, Sup Forums?

I really don't understand why you're so hung up on "freedom" as some sort of ultimate virtue for the ages. Survival is a far more important virtue. Honor, duty, sacrifice. All of these are virtues. But for some reason everyone has to aspire to be some radical individual totally atomized and disconnected from the world around him.

Restricting certain freedoms leads to greater freedom for all. For example, the rules against spamming are what allows us to have this discussion right now. The rules against murder allow me to ride my bike safely down the street, or across the country, with only a minor fear that something bad will happen.

Look here. This is our society in it's pure form:

youtube.com/watch?v=B-m9A8mY-U0

>A united people is far stronger than some disparate bundle of radical individuals
Not inherently, look at the Boer Wars or pretty much any war involving the Swiss Confederacy. Being decentralized doesn't inherently mean that a nation is lacking in military might. Indeed a decentralized nation could be more powerful as a whole as almost all of its taxation would be dedicated to national defence as most other tasks are handled by smaller subdivisions such as states, counties, and municipalities. While the more extreme variants may be incompatible with Eurasia where large military powers border each other it still doesn't mean that decentralization isn't possible.

>take the political compass test when I was 16
>dot is right on the black line of left/right but physically touching the word libertarian
>take the test again when I'm 26
>dot hasnt changed position

AM I BEING DETAINED ON THIS COMPASS POSITION?

Your political compass is retarded and doesn't make sense graphically. you can't have 6-12, 12-16, 16-22 age groups. every 6 years do you just decide to change your political beliefs? What are you really saying?

I went from Blue (full Authoritarian, very slightly right) at 14-17 to Purple at 18-22 to finally return to Blue again (this time a lot more on the right though).

Try reading some books and forming hard opinions, desu.

>not mentally stable

>Freedom = ABSOLUTELY NO RULES AT ALL
>Still not answering the question
Yeah nah I think we're done, unless you have something intelligent, interesting or insightful to bring to this conversation.

>Implying that you've reached maximum ideological wisdom at 22 and stay there until you die

You're a retarded young faggot, and I hope you remember this dipshit post when you're 30.

>Survival is a far more important virtue.
Survival isn't an issue in the modern world

>Honor
For what purpose, my service doesn't actually help those I care about.

>duty
Towards who, some people who happen to be distant relatives of yours who you have never met?

>sacrifice
For what the glory of a state which cares nothing for your existence or survival outside of a tool to increase the GDP and empower the state?

I'm a career army office with a degree in mechanical engineering (studied engineering, hated it, graduated and decided to become an infantry officer), however I don't have any delusions of my actions being for some great purpose. I serve in the military because I enjoy it, if the US government collapsed the next day I would likely support the conqueror or the resistance simply because it allows me to do what I want. My actions don't help the American people, they don't help my family, and they don't help my race, at the end of the day I am simply a pawn of powerful individuals.

>Honor, duty, sacrifice.
gay as fuck LARPing terms
don't impede my freedom because you need big brother to hold your hand cunt

Every single act of harm and suffering in the world can be ended with freedom. Anything that violates another's freedom should be considered an enemy. Cause and effect is the basis of freedom which is the literal basis of reality and Love (see: God).

insult me all you want but i'm still going in the right direction

This kid is smart as fuck tho, just too young to understand the stuff. Most of the kids of that age nowadays are kinda autistic and only care about seeing some retards on Youtube.

In the future I bet he will redpilled as fuck.