Spot on political compass

>spot on political compass
>favorite album

pic
melt banana - cell scape

Other urls found in this thread:

insidehighered.com/news/2016/10/21/several-universities-cancel-appearances-conservative-writer-milo-yiannopoulos
politicalcompass.org/test
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

people that post their political compass are maybe the biggest fags of any board

nobody cares that (you)re right wing, faggot.

You cared enough to bump my thread. Thanks babe

Are you my nemesis?

Stereolab - Transient Random Noise Bursts With Announcements

this

>political compass

jesus fucking christ political compasses are the worst fucking meme ever

maybe its just because this is what i do with my actual life, but bad politics triggers the fuck out of me

Politics are informed by opinions. How can an opinion be wrong?

>Piper at the Gates of Dawn

I hope you get to live in a right wing authoritarian state at some point in your life, I bet it's a wonderful experience for the individual.

What year were you born? 97? 98?

Faggot.

your opinion is wrong

Don't fucking use that slur you pig

politics informed by differences of opinion are fine; that shit gets me hard, actually, and is a big reason i got into the field. I love a healthy debate.

but a lot of people think they understand politics, but do not. a lot of people are passionate about their beliefs, but their beliefs are based on misinformation.

I think you hit on something in your response without meaning to, which is this idea that politics is based on opinions, same as music or art, and so all opinions are equal and acceptable. This is not true. Politics is the formation of ideology based for the most part on facts and philosophy (which is in turn based on logic). If my opinion is that Trump is a lizard person and so should be impeached, that's not a valid political opinion. It is not based on the truth, and it cannot be engaged with.

All political opinions are not equally acceptable or defensible. "the state should exterminate all jews" is a political belief. "taxation is theft" is a political belief. "social security should be reformed" is a political belief. "recreational drugs should be legal" is a political belief. "racism is imaginary" is a political belief, but so is "we should kill all whites". these are not all equally valid or defensible, obviously, but for whatever goddamn fucking reason we pretend like all politics is equally valid or defensible.

yes im triggered

guys i'm literally off the chart

Ty Segall and White Fence - Hair

>tfw too intelligent to be cuck leftist

I wanna see you and everybody like you treated like niggers in the 1800s

again, what year? 97, right?

Big boy, big boy has his big boy political pants on, anonymously flaunting his right wing pants on chinese cartoon boards. Tell me, how many of your underage best friends have you dared to redpilled? Oh, man if your teachers knew how revolutionary and counter-culture you were when you secretly scoff and roll your eyes at their leftist bullshit.

Damn, you're going places.

I'm honestly closer to libertarian right now but yeah, i guess you are dude. Hitler would totally suck your dick and make you an honorary aryan

hi Stirner

Who are you to decide what is acceptable or defensible? Get off of your polsci high horse you doorknob

>an honorary aryan

you actually seem really interesting. what would you consider your political beliefs to be?

...

...

The Knife - Shaking The Habitual

I don't agree with all of their conclusions and solutions, but I agree with them on a great deal of the problems.

Hopefully one day I can read enough about communism and socialism on wikipedia and become a well informed grown up like you

...

Ween - The Mollusk

Yeah, I too view the world through a filter of marxism / not marxism

Awesome. You're quickly filling up those big boy pants. Very few people are as bright as you.

Big places is where you're going.

...

imagine if this idea was applied to literally any other discipline. i mean, i guess we don't have to, it's started to seep in there

>who are you to decide whether or not vaccines don't cause autism? get off your immunology high horse you doorknob

>who are you to decide whether or not dinosaurs are real? get off your paleontology high horse you doorknob

>who are you to decide the conductivity of a metal? get off your physics high horse you doorknob

polisci does have more grey area which really freaks people out, since they're bad at figuring out when some aspects of something are objective and others subjective, but such is the case with politics. "taxation is theft" is an example of a fringe opinion that I personally believe to be false, but is still debatable. "the globalist agenda perpetrated a false flag at sandy hook" is objectively false, and ideologies informed by that falsehood are invalid.

people just want to think that they're all equally smart with respect to politics. they aren't. Few would think it appropriate to tell mathematicians how to solve equations, or microbiologists about the functioning of organelles, but when it comes to politics suddenly everyone's Machiavelli.

you have the self righteousness of a typical far lefty. how can i be a Real Adult like you? All I want is for my political opinions to express my maturity.

You type so much and say so little. Trying to draw comparisons between the objectivity of scientific facts and political opinions is laughable. Hope your parents aren't paying too much for that education

said by the screeching autist

thanks, but i'm not sure i live up to expectations.

I'm fairly left leaning; I support capitalism to the extent that I support market based solutions for market caused problems (like cap and trade to curb emissions) but my ideal economy is very very socialistic. I just don't think we're there yet, unfortunately.

You're already doing it through your far rightism, except whereas being left is cowardly and the norm, being right is brave and counter-cultural. So you're going against the grain, you're not doing what your environment tells you to do.

You know what that shows right? Maturity. Simply growing up in a marxist society and coming out right is a strong sign of intelligence and critical thinking.

I'm merely a leftie, I haven't accomplished anything, I can't even be counted as an individual, I am part of a cancerous bulk mass.

Assuming that the only reason I'm right wing is because I'm trying to be counter culture goes to show that you are just as informed by memes as the average Sup Forums shitter

Condescending, but you missed my point. Politics is more subjective than "hard" science, but objective facts inform what is acceptable within that subjectivity. we can reasonably disagree about taxation, but we can't reasonably disagree about policy that addresses problems that do not exist. There are certain issues where you can't say "agree to disagree" in politics and certain ones where you can. Not too tough to understand.

appreciate the concern, but the university pays for my education.

Absolutely, I'm sure someone born 97 has had plenty of time to develop tons of nuanced political opinions that actually mean something beyond acting as a fashion statement.

I mean it couldn't POSSIBLY be the latter, you didn't just post a political compass on a music board, right.

Kid, you're ahead of the game.

True, I'm sure there's a substantial degree of unvarnished self-interest in there

You aren't even throwing any arguments at this point, you're just repeating yourself over and over again.

Nice to see an autistic manchild bickering on the internet, sure feels good acting big online when you know you can't even make small talks with strangers outside.

XXX - Danny Brown

Headhunters - Herbie Hancock

How many times are you gonna assume i was born in 97? Seems like some hard projection.

I don't need arguments. I went into this accepting my loss at the start. I'm just here to pat you on your back for your bravery.

Repeat

>Me

Not an individual, leftist cuck, I belong to one vision shared by everyone you hate

>You

Individual, critical thinker, nuanced

Am I wrong?

Yes. 93. Im probably older than you son

pfft, you are like little baby.

boc - geogaddi

Are you lonely user?

Incredibly. You?

Strange Days by Le Doors

everyone in this discussion embarrassed themselves to be perfectly honest. the point stands, though: right-wing authoritarianism is a meme ideology that has committed some of humanity's greatest atrocities and inflicted profound harm on the societies it seduced.

All extremes are fucking stupid, go too far left and you're off to the gulags, go to far right and you're being ethically cleansed.

Everytime i see anyone talking about how they're either far right or far left i assume they are either memeing or just trying to push buttons.

and left wing politics have been a gift from god i.e cambodia, vietnam, china, soviet union, farc in colombia etc etc

>Mao
>right

i mostly agree, but what you're describing is the authoritarian/anarchist aspect of political affiliation, not left/right. That's why stalin and hitler looked so similar, not because of left/right but because they were both authoritarians.

left wing authoritarianism sucks too lmao. the difference is that i see way less of leftist authoritarianism being espoused as a legitimate belief than right wing authoritarianism these days.

just because someone says "X is responsible for bad things" doesn't imply "All bad things are a result of X", don't be an idiot

Paul McCartney - Ram

Women - s/t

...

>the difference is that i see way less of leftist authoritarianism being espoused

so you dont see people shouting "free speech is hate speech" and people being unable to talk at universities because of differing opinions?

I get that mixed up often, but i see what you're saying. What i meant was people who want hardcore authoritarian rule.

hello yes my name is Bookchin

also Wu-Tang - 36 Chambers

Can you show me evidence of what you had said?

Magnolia Electric Co.

i don't see people craving a leftist authoritarian state, no. Personally, I also don't have an issue with certain people being unable to speak at universities. Not all censorship is bad.

also, anti-racism or PC culture is not inherently left-wing. people just associate it with that because of the American Democratic party.

death grips - the powers that b

Go to ANY college in the US.

sick source bro wow here i am at one of the US' many colleges and now I understand goddamn why didn't i think of it sooner

Can - Tago Mago

insidehighered.com/news/2016/10/21/several-universities-cancel-appearances-conservative-writer-milo-yiannopoulos

Yeah we need more Stalin, right?
left shit its the worst thing ever.

They kill more than anybody. Just because one kill Jews dont mean nothing when the other kill of starvation to his own people. Its defenitly the worst system and NEVER HAPPEND TO WORK.
Pic relate: Guess one its from Hitler and wich one from the Soviet work

>Go to ANY college in the US.
>except the Christian ones, the private ones for the rich, the private conservative ones, the corporate-sponsored ones, you know

yeah, milo "lesbians aren't real, i chose to be gay because I fantasize about interracial gangbangs" yiannopoulos wasn't allowed to perform his "dangerous faggot" tour where he could discuss his views on how gamergate is a feminist conspiracy and how gay men should get back in the closet. how fucking FASCIST. I can practically smell the end of the republic. Universities should be compelled to spend their money, either federal or privately earned, on content like that.

good job responding to something nobody said user

not an argument

Iron Maiden - Powerslave

I don't see it personally either, but when you look at any anti-trump or college protest, there's always a bunch of hammers and sickles. Mostly though it's just fags trying to get at that hipster pussy, but even so it's getting pretty fucking scary. It starts off as a fashion statement, but then you have a bunch of antifas throwing rocks and molotovs at people. Also, free speech is free speech, it's a college, everyone should be able to speak their mind freely without being persecuted for it. I don't want to be told what i should and shouldn't listen to, it's alot easier to manipulate someone when they don't have that choice. You shouldn't ban someone from speaking just because they say a few things that aren't politically correct, it's like if i told you that you can't read mein kampf even if you're interested in it for the historical significance and not because you're a closet nazi.

Sup Razorfist.

heres the link to the test btw
politicalcompass.org/test

...

The NOTORIOUS B.I.G - Life After Death

The Dodos - Beware of the Maniacs

By the way what the fuck is a libertarian socialist? That feels like a contradiction in terms to me

I find it hard to agree with that, because i think there's a meaningful difference between a book being available to read, Mein Kampf for example, and a college sponsoring a reading of Mein Kampf. I don't believe everyone should be afforded a platform at universities; people with fringe beliefs like Alex Jones or nazis or bigots like Milo (who doesn't just occasionally say not-PC things, btw, but has made a message out of demeaning certain minorities) or people advocating for ethnic cleansing or murder should not be afforded a platform. There's an important difference between information being available and ideology being actively presented at a university, and i think the latter should have a lot of leeway w/r/t the university's ability to censor it

Social libertarianism is not the same as economic libertarianism.

What are you even saying? You are contradicting yourself so much.

>If my opinion is that Trump is a lizard person and so should be impeached, that's not a valid political opinion. It is not based on the truth, and it cannot be engaged with.

Surely the remedy there IS to engage and show evidence that contradicts that belief, though?

I think the major problem with politics is that people only really contradict and criticise the beliefs of others in order to denigrate and insult. To me, willingness to criticize someone you believe to be wrong or show them evidence that contradicts their beliefs should be a mark of respect, not insult.

The main issue is that the definition of that phrase 'cannot be engaged with' is blurry. For some, it means, as I said, attempting to correct people who believe erroneous claims. For others, it means ignoring them. For some (antifa activists currently), it means violent suppression of those beliefs.

libertarian socialist is literally the OG libertarians before the term got stolen by american right-wingers.
It is to some extend an umbrella term that all kinds of left-wing historical figures have used to describe themselves, people like Bookchin, Orwell, Luxemburg and Oscar Wilde all classify as libertarian socialists.

>they have DANGEROUS opinions so throwing bricks at them is okay

hang yourself.

The argument was implicit, so it might have been a little tough to detect if your logic or reading comprehension skills aren't quite up to snuff, so I'll do my best to break it down very clearly to avoid some of the unfortunate confusion you suffered on the first go-round.

Milo's views are fringe at best, bigoted (le meme word) at worst. A privately funded university has the discretion to refuse anyone a platform that they choose, and someone who could be construed as having a hateful message falls into that category. A publicly funded university actually has greater standards to meet, and if a speaker or event actively promotes a hateful view I believe a publicly funded university would be obligated to deny them a platform. There's judicial precedent for that as well.

Hope that cleared things up!

Define exactly what a "hateful" view is. I find Lena Dunham quite hateful, so should she not be barred from speaking as well?

My point was that you can't engage in a meaningful way with those ideas; they don't have a legitimate foundation. The most you could faithfully engage with them would be to, as you said, try to disprove them.

My initial point was more that people tend to believe that all political views are legitimate, that belief is equal to validity, and that that position is false.

I think there's a compelling case to be made that, yes, a university could refuse her a platform. If my college did so I would have zero issue with it

Sam Rivers - Fuchsia Swing Song

I think that where that user was coming from is that political opinion, at some point, is informed both by subjective value judgement (i.e. personal principle) AND objective fact.

Political debate, therefore, requires an acknowledgement and tolerance of different opinion but also an ability to recognize the facts of an event.

The issue with political debate is that a lot of people treat their opinions as facts and facts as your opinions.

For example, take Trump's current policy on immigration. It would be erroneous to say that his current policy is a blanket ban on Muslims; this simply is not true. It would not be erroneous to say that his prior rhetoric DID call for a ban on Muslim immigration, and on from that point on informed opinion can form the basis of debate; is this current ban simply testing the waters for greater discrimination of Muslims or simply an attempt to appease voters who elected Trump on the basis of a Muslim ban?

hi guys

>Bruce Springsteen - Born in the USA

who are you to define what is hateful and what is not? a public university has an obligation to it's funders to allow a wide range of thought and opinions to permeate on campus

I agree there, user. It's actually pretty refreshing to see left-leaning people like yourself come back to the idea that political discussion needs to have rational, evidence driven bases. I think that a recent abandonment by the left in the early 2010's has led to the populist right adopting that view for their own politics, which has led to their rise currently. And that's concerning.

The problem is I don't think a university would.

I have no qualms from a legal perspective about a private university refusing to host a speaker, but I feel that publicly-funded universities have a responsibility to allow other speakers. It's not just about Milo; Ben Shapiro gets protested all the time and he's a standard conservative. There's nothing extreme about him at all.

Literally where did i say that

to be honest, I think they should be afforded a platform BECAUSE they have these 'fringe beliefs'. The whole point of university platforms is to show the students there the different beliefs of others - why should some beliefs be funded and others not?

Also to keep us on topic;
how to leave town - car seat headrest.
last time i checked i was in the green area