Post by aric on Dec 30, 2007 3:08:45 GMT -5
World's Smallest Political Quiz
Every once in a great while, these quizzes pop up and we all have some fun. Here's one involving politics. Now, I'm guessing this is an American political test since it seems to be using our alignments and definitions of those alignments.
Here are my answers to the quiz:
Q: Government should not censor speech, press, media or Internet.
A: I picked M for the first one for the following reasons: 1) I don't believe our rights as laid out in the Constitution are absolute. There are limits to freedoms. For instance, using speech to endanger the lives of others(such as in the often-used instance of yelling "fire"), 2) there are examples of speech that I think are harmful to society - hate speech being one of them, but 3) I don't think everyone can agree on what is harmful and what is not- I may think that prejudiced speech against homosexuals are harmful while someone else (probably a conservative) would think otherwise - as such, it might be the safer (and perhaps fairer) policy to let almost everything get aired out. For these reasons I am rather torn between the two choices, so I chose M.
Q: Military service should be voluntary. There should be no draft.
A: In times of peace and limited war, I think the armed forces should be strictly voluntary and professional. In such cases, they'd be more effective. But in dire circumstances, where everything needs to be thrown in, then we would probably need conscription.
Q: There should be no laws regarding sex for consenting adults.
A: Fairly simple. I don't see why two consenting adults should not be allowed to do what they want as long as it isn't hurting others. As such, who cares whether a woman is having sex with another woman (or a man with another man), or whether there are sexual relations happening before marriage.
Q: Repeal laws prohibiting adult possession and use of drugs.
A: I'm guessing they mean "illegal drugs" like heroine and marijuana. We already have a problem with substance abuse with legal substances like alcohol and tobacco. Tolerating more doesn't seem to be a good idea. I'm not against the use of marijuana for strictly medical purposes. However, I think there may be some evidence that the US War on Drugs isn't working. Therefore, a M for my answer.
Q: There should be no National ID card.
A: "D" for an obvious reason: we already have a national ID in the form of our social security numbers. This question is retarded from the get-go.
Q: End "corporate welfare." No government handouts to business.
A: By and large, supply-side economics is ruinous for most Americans. Privileging corporate elites and letting everyone else make do with the scraps from their table is untenable and fundamentally un-American. The middle class is shrinking because of this policy. Therefore, an "A" for making corporations truly competitive and eliminating government subsidies.
Q: End government barriers to international free trade.
A: Disagree. Globalization is inevitable. No smart person can deny that. But that doesn't mean it has to result in Wild West conditions where corporations can profiteer off of sweat shop labor and what not. Nor does it has to mean that the middle class in developed countries must compete with people barely out of slums in developing countries for their jobs. It's insane.
Q: Let people control their own retirement; privatize Social Security.
A: I'm not all that informed about this subject, though I (like most Americans) should, since it's pretty important. I voted M on the safe side since at least this allows for one to increase their SS benefits without bnecessarily putting a direct strain on taxes. But I don't like how one could just as easily lose that money on something that's as potentially volatile as the stock market, as well. Not to mention that it even further chains Main Street to Wall Street.
Q: Replace government welfare with private charity.
A: No way. Charity is over-rated. Americans might give out a lot, but the idea that people will magically come together to help out others in a consistent, widespread, and effective way is ridiculous. Government has better potential for that, even if it doesn't currently live up to that potential. I'd rather have a government assure benefits rather than gamble on the idea that people will want to be nice to me in away that helps me in the long term should I fall on particularly hard times.
Q: Cut taxes and government spending by 50% or more.
A: Who could disagree with that? However, this is often the phrase used by those who want to roll back social programs and taxes on the rich while simultaneously maintaining (if not jacking up) funds for the military. The logic that undergirds this principle in practice is linked to the corporate welfare question above. It doesn't make sense to do it the way people usually mean when they say stuff like that, so I can't fully agree with that either.
So, my answers have shown me to be a centrist:
Not exactly terrible in the grand scheme of things.
What about you folks?
- Aric
Every once in a great while, these quizzes pop up and we all have some fun. Here's one involving politics. Now, I'm guessing this is an American political test since it seems to be using our alignments and definitions of those alignments.
Here are my answers to the quiz:
Q: Government should not censor speech, press, media or Internet.
A: I picked M for the first one for the following reasons: 1) I don't believe our rights as laid out in the Constitution are absolute. There are limits to freedoms. For instance, using speech to endanger the lives of others(such as in the often-used instance of yelling "fire"), 2) there are examples of speech that I think are harmful to society - hate speech being one of them, but 3) I don't think everyone can agree on what is harmful and what is not- I may think that prejudiced speech against homosexuals are harmful while someone else (probably a conservative) would think otherwise - as such, it might be the safer (and perhaps fairer) policy to let almost everything get aired out. For these reasons I am rather torn between the two choices, so I chose M.
Q: Military service should be voluntary. There should be no draft.
A: In times of peace and limited war, I think the armed forces should be strictly voluntary and professional. In such cases, they'd be more effective. But in dire circumstances, where everything needs to be thrown in, then we would probably need conscription.
Q: There should be no laws regarding sex for consenting adults.
A: Fairly simple. I don't see why two consenting adults should not be allowed to do what they want as long as it isn't hurting others. As such, who cares whether a woman is having sex with another woman (or a man with another man), or whether there are sexual relations happening before marriage.
Q: Repeal laws prohibiting adult possession and use of drugs.
A: I'm guessing they mean "illegal drugs" like heroine and marijuana. We already have a problem with substance abuse with legal substances like alcohol and tobacco. Tolerating more doesn't seem to be a good idea. I'm not against the use of marijuana for strictly medical purposes. However, I think there may be some evidence that the US War on Drugs isn't working. Therefore, a M for my answer.
Q: There should be no National ID card.
A: "D" for an obvious reason: we already have a national ID in the form of our social security numbers. This question is retarded from the get-go.
Q: End "corporate welfare." No government handouts to business.
A: By and large, supply-side economics is ruinous for most Americans. Privileging corporate elites and letting everyone else make do with the scraps from their table is untenable and fundamentally un-American. The middle class is shrinking because of this policy. Therefore, an "A" for making corporations truly competitive and eliminating government subsidies.
Q: End government barriers to international free trade.
A: Disagree. Globalization is inevitable. No smart person can deny that. But that doesn't mean it has to result in Wild West conditions where corporations can profiteer off of sweat shop labor and what not. Nor does it has to mean that the middle class in developed countries must compete with people barely out of slums in developing countries for their jobs. It's insane.
Q: Let people control their own retirement; privatize Social Security.
A: I'm not all that informed about this subject, though I (like most Americans) should, since it's pretty important. I voted M on the safe side since at least this allows for one to increase their SS benefits without bnecessarily putting a direct strain on taxes. But I don't like how one could just as easily lose that money on something that's as potentially volatile as the stock market, as well. Not to mention that it even further chains Main Street to Wall Street.
Q: Replace government welfare with private charity.
A: No way. Charity is over-rated. Americans might give out a lot, but the idea that people will magically come together to help out others in a consistent, widespread, and effective way is ridiculous. Government has better potential for that, even if it doesn't currently live up to that potential. I'd rather have a government assure benefits rather than gamble on the idea that people will want to be nice to me in away that helps me in the long term should I fall on particularly hard times.
Q: Cut taxes and government spending by 50% or more.
A: Who could disagree with that? However, this is often the phrase used by those who want to roll back social programs and taxes on the rich while simultaneously maintaining (if not jacking up) funds for the military. The logic that undergirds this principle in practice is linked to the corporate welfare question above. It doesn't make sense to do it the way people usually mean when they say stuff like that, so I can't fully agree with that either.
So, my answers have shown me to be a centrist:
Not exactly terrible in the grand scheme of things.
What about you folks?
- Aric
but it helps to insure that there is some stability out there, not just for us, but for everybody. No system is perfact, but at least it is flexible and not set in stone.
Yeah, i don't see that happening and the middle class is most of the time just getting by, they will think of their own first before others and the extra money they have (when they have it) will continue to be set aside for themselves. Yeah, there would be some charitable donations, but not enough to cover all who would need it. Keep the welfare, just tweak and restucture it a little maybe.