Political compass thread
The stories and information posted here are artistic works of fiction and falsehood.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact.
Political compass thread
>>698109292
Website
Politicalcompass.org/
>>698109469
* https://www.politicalcompass.org
give me counterarguments against being a libertarian, my goal is to be dead center
>>698110230
The government knows wat's best for you, anon. Your opinion doesn't matter.
deb8 me
>>698109958
>>698109958
>>698110396
No, because there's a 100% chance of you being insufferable
>>698110503
Only because you know im right.
>>698110433
Reluctantly checked
>>698110594
That's it
>>698110594
Then why don't you run for president?
h8 me fagets
>inb4 berniefag
Fuck American politics it's all rigged anyway
>>698110777
Adam Kokesh is running in 2020, so theres no point when I can support him.
>>698110777
TRIPS! Tell us your policies and platforms anon
>>698111005
literally who the candidate
Okay buddy
>>698111085
No government
Legalize it
>>698110331
The government may know what's best for me, but they will only ever do what's good for most people, I prefer for them to leave me be and let me do things myself, for better or worse
Bring the hate
Obligatory
>>698111603
Reasonable
>>698111603
Pretty based. I'm a little more left and a little closer to the authoritarian line. On my phone at work, don't have my actual pic.
>>698111630
>American politics
>>698111785
>>698111630
Sad that this is not too far from the truth in how many americans think
>>698111722
Check em
>>698110230
>counterarguments against being a libertarian,
that would an argument "for" being a libertarian
I think you just proved why we shouldn't be. Lack of uniform education standards.
I feel I am a lot more authoritarian than the graph shows
Boom
>>698111345
When I converted an Anarcho-Communist into Capatalist.
>>698112197
Nice
>>698112213
Honestly, I think that AnCom was just a bit of an idiot, who did it to be edgy
>>698112213
>in socialism you get punished for not helping
lol
>>698112443
any of that "anarco" stuff is
you can't put that in practice for millions or billions of people
anon needs to start a colony on Mars
>>698110230
>Politicalcompass.org/
libertarians don't believe in any government intervention, corporations would run amok even more than they already are, they could pollute upstream and poison your drinking water and you couldn't do shit about it. Smaller government means less infrastructure, roads would fall apart, schools would get even shittier, hospitals would only serve the rich.
It would be corporate monarchy, or at best a corporate republic. Basically being a libertarian is saying "lets not give godzilla anypower" then not knowing what to do when mothra takes over.
Libertarians generally don't understand world finance, international trade, and have a very shallow superficial understanding of social sciences, world/political history, and human nature.
>>698113444
trips don't lie.
>>698113227
I'll give you that, it will probably not work in a society with the population of most modern countries.
If it is more so on a communal level, then it could. Say a commune of maybe 1k-2k people. (Could be federated into larger entities with mutual cooperation between communes)
>>698113444
I think the term you are looking for is oligarchy, which is what we currently have.
>>698111967
Lol fair enough, but you get my point, nit picky faggot
You have made me realize, though, that a more authoritarian system could protect against a society in which the blind lead the blind, so thank you
>>698113689
not against the idea in principle, but it would take a highly educated populace
not retards driving around in Dodge Rams voting Trump
>>698113444
Libertarians are usually just high school kids that want to smoke weed legally, or old gun nuts that want to take over congress with ar-15's because a free health care bill is obviously the start of fascism.
>>698113871
no we currently have a democratic republic where we could change things through voting and legislation
libertarianism believes voting and legislation hampers business interests
>>698113929
It could not be a sudden transition.
It must be gradual, with education of the masses being a primary concern
>>698113871
>oligarchy
I think that term is not specific enough. Many forms of government are oligarchy. In a corporate monarchy it wouldn't even be people in charge, it would be the corporate personhood. The bottom line, making profits for the stockholders would be in charge. A CEO's duty is to serve the stockholders. They can't make any decision that would hurt the stock prices, even if it is ethically the right decision.
Essentially no one would be in charge, but a big greed monster of conglomerated faceless shareholders. It's far more dangerous than an old monarchy because the human element is removed completely and replaced by numbers.
>>698110230
LOL
I got the same exact result as you did if I picked "strongly disagree" for every question :^)
>>698113227
even then it wouldn't work. The human condition is flawed. Not to mention that 1 out of 20 people is a sociopath. Someone would fuck it up and take advantage.
>>698114380
well it's not going to happen at all if we don't address our unsustainable environmentally toxic social habits
20 years tops if we keep fucking shit up like we're doing
>>698113929
even education doesn't override corruption. For it to work there would need to be complete honest and zero corruption. It's just not possible with human beings. Robots maybe.
>>698114587
>wouldn't even be people in charge
This is exactly what we have right now.
Corporations can donate unlimited money via a superpac to any canidate they want. In return for being in their pocket when big bills come up.
Look at big tobacco, they are still a billion dollar industry.Its legal cancer, yet good ol bible belt congressmen keep it going
I'm oddly close to the centre. Is this good or bad, in your opinions?
>>698114741
the odds would be better with an educated populace and universal health care
right now we do need to reduce our footprint as a society and give more green space back to the earth for habitat. That means federated villages like anon is talking about.
>>698114880
Let me guess, an individualistic anarchist?
>>698114887
Obviously. Unlike most Anarchists, I see that there are more pressing concerns (like the environment), but the end goal is a classless, Stateless society.
>>698114889
citizen action checks corruption, so no
we are at the point in our evolution where switching over to collectivism is possible, and with issues like climate change, necessary.
>>698115061
depends on your answers
what questions were you really not sure about?
>>698115452
Unsure. I believe I potentially got further left than I expected as, like, 6 questions revolved around homosexuality. I know a dozen LGBT people, so of course my views are more accepting. I think this leaned me more in the bottom left axis.
>>698114124
Democratic Republic in name only. In Practice it is closer to a Single Party Oligarchical State.
I thought I'd turn out to be more right-wing and authoritarian than that.
heh.
>>698115703
No in practice it's still a representative democracy.
Just because you're a cynical teabagger does not mean you get to redefine what this government is.
>>698115925
you probably said "strongly disagree" to "would you really really REALLY kill the puppy?"
>>698115112
1) Do you have a valid reason to believe such a thing would/could work?
2) What about those, who don't want to live in an anarchistic society?
3) Why do think there haven't been any successful anarchistic communities? (And no, Catalan wasn't a successful community. It ceased to exist quite fast.)
>>698115943
Funny. I'm am not a tea bagger at all.
>>698116307
>What about those, who don't want to live in an anarchistic society?
given our growing environmental problems and other unsustainability issues
they really wouldn't have a choice
and they'd live decent lives to pursue their own interests like all of us
>>698116312
Whar are those two balls outside the chart?
>>698116578
then why do you use the same retarded argument?
This is a democracy. We have the power to change things. We can't change things if there are people like you out there insisting our vote doesn't count.
Is this ok
>>698110396
How's the 7th grade going?
>>698112842
what up
>>698110230
Hello my fellow on-the-line libertarian!
>>698116925
how can you "strongly disagree" with everything?
>>698116762
you were probably an asshole with one or two of your questions
which ones?
>>698116312
So much spooks ...
>>698116624
Now tell me, how exactly are organized societies and sustainability mutually exclusive?
Also, as anarchy is anti-authoritarian, why would you force your world view on others? Can't people decide for themselves, how they want to live?
>>698117198
I don't know. Probably the one about art.
I also struggled with the people needing to be obeyed and people needing to be commanded.
>>698116665
There are the only ones who get it : egoists.
>>698117107
What makes you infer that I did? I really did answer honestly
Clintrump
>>698117508
>>698111603
Pretty much me
>>698117364
They are deciding for themselves. Just as we do. The benefit of education and logic would dictate collectivism as the best choice. There wouldn't be paranoid survivalist types like what you're talking about.
What does this mean
>>698117501
Because as a joke I responded to each question with "Strongly Disagree" and I got your exact result.
>>698117847
It means you are one toke over the Nazi line.
Best.
>>698115192
>citizen action checks corruption
HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAH
OMg that is some fucking funny shit.
>>698117694
>>698117864
Hm, thats interesting...
>>698118082
why is that funny?
You don't believe it is the job of the people to check government?
Fuck you're cynical.
>>698118135
I'm going to try it with "Strongly Agree" and will post results
>>698115192
it's just fucking adorable how naive you are. You must be like under 25, probably still in college.
Holy shit, reality is going to hit you like a fucking cinder block to the face when you get out into the real world. Brace for it.
>>698118069
what is the test of the far left of the image
>>698117730
So let's say that all governments disappeared tomorrow and I wanted to put up a new one with a couple of like-minded people, you would be ok with that? After all, it's the type society we would like to live in.
>There wouldn't be paranoid survivalist types like what you're talking about.
Are you sure? Because I happen to know one. Lives in the mountains and all.
>>698116307
>In a small community of a few hundred to thousand, individuals can raise their concerns and be heard. Decisions are more likely to be agreed upon by general concensus
>Like >>698116624 , Chances are that they won't want to leave, but if they so desire, no one is stopping them from leaving and going about how they wish
>Free Territory in Ukraine was begining to take root, but the Soviet Red Army crushed it. Now we have Rojava (Not quite Anarchist, but quite close) showing its worth in being able to stave off Daesh and other enemies. But how will it fare when the war is over? only time will tell.
>>698118169
It's not cynicism, it's skepticism. Don't confuse the two, they're not the same thing. Citizen action RARELY checks corruption. Corruption is RAMPANT in all societies throughout ALL of history.
Learn about history. Like how it really works, with backdoor dealings, personal relationships and all the cloak and dagger shit people pull. For every exposed corrupt motherfucker that's dozens that never get caught.
Citizens are too busy edging out a living to be checking corruption. Vigilantes have a bad name for a reason, citizen action, mob mentality, is USUALLY wrong and unjust. You're placing power in a SYSTEM without accounting for human behavior.
Stay out of the blue otherwise you're a beta male
>>698118135
>>698118246
>Strongly Agree only answers
the exact opposite on the axis
wouldn't you know
>>698118283
>insults
>teabaggery
kek
>>698118322
GOvernments are gone, we instantly digress back into a warlord tribal society. It would take a VERY long time, and many wars to build back the fragil stability we now have.
>>698118811
Actually citizen action has changed government policy in every civilized country, so no.
>Learn about history
what, Nazi Germany? You're a cynic, we get that.
Maybe you should learn about the history of activism, since you clearly don't know what it is. :^)
>>698118910
Saying you're young is an insult...but.. you are....
Teabaggery? Is that a reference to the tea party? How could you possible infer that from what I said? Those people are like my mortal enemies. All the ones I met were literally on the autism spectrum and full as shit of ignorant blissful confidence. They're cancer.
>>698118322
we are talking about a hypothetical society of the hopefully near future, not tomorrow. No, government wouldn't suddenly disappear. It would take planning and education as I've pointed out.
>>698119321
I'm just laughing because you have no idea how old I am. Just because I don't buy into some rigid frankly self-hating sort of cynicism that you do doesn't make me a "millennial" or naive.
>>698118113
only disagree with the genocide part really
>>698119321
right. Teabaggers are your "mortal enemies" but you use the same kind of irrationalist discussion tactics as they do, such as belittling their opponents as naive children who trust government too much. Which is exactly what you're doing.
>>698119664
fuck what kind of answers did you give to get that?
>>698119133
Yes, in the course of decades and centuries, that happens. In the meantime corruption is rampant, not only in government, but in organized crime, and day to day life on every level.
>learn about activism
Dude i went to a liberal arts college. I literally took classes on 20th century activism. I was tear gassed at both FTAA protest in montreal and iraq war protests in chicago. You don't know shit. I knew idealist kids like you in college. They were always stupid as shit and thought they knew everything. Most of them are heroin addicts and alcoholics now.
>>698109292
If you're talking about the USA then, WRONG! It's a left leaning country. If you're talking about Texas, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, it's a PBR drunk leaning country.
>>698119481
this is great
>>698119664
simple man
>>698119798
There you go again
not addressing the argument and assuming your opponent is a college aged millennial just because your baseless cynical argument was called out.
You're hopeless.
>>698110594
That is correct - you are right! And you too can be always right, fellow anons. All it takes is adopting a worldview that forms a logical closed loop completely disconnected from empirical reality! Learn the objectivist greatest hits, like "A=A, prove me wrong!", "it's just logic, are you against rationality or something?", and "you must not understand basic economics (as practiced by robot zombies with no irrational self-interest programmed to obey the laws of capitalism)"! Just send us a check for $39.99 made out to the Ayn Rand Fantasy Land Foundation or an equivalent value of gold bullion.
>>698111630
better gay than republican
>>698109292
Far left master race checking in. Fuck you fascists.
Okay
>>698119519
Claims of cynicism are the go to for people like you that don't want to hear why their ideas are stupid.
Think maybe it's possible you don't know what the fuck you're talking about?
>>698110998
Funny how it isn't so rigged when faggots like you stay home and the Republicans vote themselves back into office. :^)
>>698120053
>>698111864
You forget our older American population was indoctrinated to believe while growing up that Communism was a threat to this country during the Soviet Union.
Expected this. I would say the only thing I'm super duper crazy over is gun politics, but I'm an arab who moved during the Lebanese Civil War to America, so it's to be expected.
Any other LebAnons here?
All degenerate
>>698120254
Nazi's were far right idiot. First thing they did when taking power was criminalize labor unions, ban abortion, arrest homosexuals and going on a racist purge.
>>698119985
I'm hopeless eh? So what would your system of collective euphoria do with all the people like me? How do the hopeless fit into your system?
I'm just a random guy on the internet and I'm opposing you completely. How would you deal with dissenters in your utopia?
I'm pretty centered politically too. After you've dealt with me you'll have to deal wtih the nuts too? How will that work out for you? Have you even thought about that?
You just think highly educated people will do what's right always? and everyone will agree to what is right?
Are you fucking kidding me? Can you even get 8 people to agree on what type of pizza to order?
>>698120523
>>698119531
>american dream literally right next to traitors
this is american politics.
>>698120090
It's not my idea, nor is it stupid.
The question was asked "how would we deal with corruption even in an educated society?"
Citizen action by sheer definition is that check. It takes the people to recognize the corruption is there, and root it out. This has happened throughout the history of civilized countries, and is not going to be a lesser force in addressing it.
You responded with a bunch of emotional bullshit and insults. And are still doing it.
We're done.
>>698120523
b-b-b-but it's called national SOCIALISM
It's got the word in it so it must be the same, because that's how rational analysis actually works.
>>698118651
Next set of questions:
1) People used to live in that type of tribal communities but over time the tribes grow larger, merged with one another and eventually formed the societies we know today. Why do you think that is?
2) That has already happened too. Naturally the world lived in anarchy in the beginning but that didn't last. It's safe to assume that the current system is supported by a majority of people. Otherwise we would live in a different kind of world. If I claimed that societies evolve in a similar manner as animal species, would you argue that current system is in fact not the best possible we could have had for this situation?
3) Is Rojava truly an anarchistic society or just a society under development? I.e. do you think that the current administration is the way it is by choice and not by necessity? Will it stay the same, when the security situation changes for better or worse?
>>698119050
Pessimistic but completely possible. I'd assume there would be many factions trying to take advantage of the situation. Basically it would be a form of social Darwinism.
>>698119377
But would you allow the re-establishment of governments in any time-frame?
>>698120624
Everytime you see a Hitler thread say HIAH!
>>698120540
You'd probably need to be reprogrammed. And you don't sound like you would be issued a weapon, either, because you might be tempted to use it in some ill-advised rather annoying attempt at rebellion. So yeah, I guess you'd be in a holding pattern until we figure out what to do with you. :^)
>>698120540
and who's to decide what education is? what should be taught? and with what bias? will you use propaganda to convince people like me your system is the right one? will you include that in your "education"
citizen action brought us the taliban and isis in the middle east. They overthrew their government with citizen action.
YAY CITIZENS! WHAT A GREAT WAY TO FIGHT CORRUPTION> NO ONE NEEDS TO WATCH THE WATCHERS!!! WE'LL JUST ALL WATCH EACHOTHER!!!
>>698120777
Why would we need to re-establish an outdated form of government?
>>698120841
LOL
/thread
>>698120523
Nazis are not left or right, they're the third position, nor is it facism
>>698120332
Yep. And now those same Americans believe that the youth are being indoctrinated into being good little commies.
While in fact, we are still being taught about how Socialism and by extension, Communism is all an Evil Statist ideology
>>698120881
all this autoritarians make me lmao
Question for thoose who care about countries like Germany: Would you rather have it be like it was in the 1930s, or would you have it as it is today?
>>698109292
hi peeps
>>698119050
it's not one bit pessimistic. It's completely pragmatic. It's literally what are genes are programmed to do. It's literally the evolutionary program we as organisms are running on. There's absolutely no reason why that wouldn't happen.
Most peoples IQ's are close to 100. Most people just want as much as they can take, and want friends only as much as it insures their own survival.
Unless you understand neuroscience you don't understand the human animal.
Just because YOU THINK you are a good person, doesn't mean everyone else is.
>>698121020
Oh god no, we can't have SOCIALISM.
We'd be like Best Korea. Better keep sucking corporate cock and being good li'l wage slaves.
>>698121214
no Internet in the 1930s
>>698120943
If that's the society I want to live in. Would it be allowed? This is a topic that I always discuss with anarchists, because it creates a difficult situation for them; on the other hand they say that they promote freedom of choice but on the other hand they are seem to think that everyone hates the establishment as much as they do.
>>698121214
Hmm, exactly which racial, religious, ethnic, and gender viewpoint are we assuming in this reactionary hypothetical? It's really hard for me to guess based on this question alone.
>>698120332
they were indoctrinated, but the soviet union also was a legitimate threat, so it's not without legitimacy. All the crazy witch hunting mccarthyism resulted because there actually were russian spys, and there was russian money being spent on trying to corrupt the usa from within. Some communist groups were taking money from russia. Most communist spys were never caught.
The usa did the same thing to russia, but with far greater success. Yes it's fucked up and awful what happened, but the indoctrination could be what helped us win against the only other world power at the time.
There's many ways of looking at history.
>>698121493
You wouldn't know any different, anon.
You would be raised in an environment where you learned the value of collectivism and sustainability.
What's more, the values gleaned from the Constitution would still be the law of the land.
There would still be representation and direct democracy as we have now. You'd just be silly.
>>698120777
>I am not a Sociologist, so I am unable to answer accurately.
>I would say that what we had was the best for its point in time, but now we are at a new stage, that requires a socio-political evolution to sustain human society
>It is not truely Anarchist, but the Democratic Confederalist is a system that the PYD and associate parties follow is definitely within the Lib-Soc Spectrum. I think that Rojava's admin will evolve to better suits it's needs, but will remain a Lib_Soc society at its core.
>>698114158
Fuck, dude you're my clone.
>>698121698
>There's many ways of looking at history.
Yeah, there's the Team America perspective, and then there's all the others, which are Badthink and should never, ever be considered or discussed.
>>698121698
>But the soviet union also was a legitimate threat
not after Stalin died, and that's what? The 1950s?
The social conservatives in the US wanted the US to be the top economic and military power.
And they've frankly used the same fear successfully since. Now it's "Terrorists" instead of "Communists" although Socialism is still bad because Communism.
It's a racket.
>>698121301
Some socialist institutions are good. But a socialist government is bullshit. Juts look at australia and their internet censorship nanny state.
socialism and capitalism both have great merits and huge flaws. The systems don't need to be exclusive.
>>698121301
Basically how we were taught in school.
Socialism = Marxist-Leninist (Maoist) and those only.
Nothing on Trotsky, Bakunin, Kropkin, and others.
>be european
>white dispossessed
>losing control of cities to immigrants and arab ethnicities and religions
What's the point with democracy, if other peoples and cultures are gonna have a say in it. It would not be a decision made by the people, it would be politics for all kinds of people. Everyone is looking for something for themselfs instead of a people looking after itself. We're beyond fucked. But the shittiest part is that the other cultures, somalian etc, still will have pure nations. Why would you be for this anon?
>>698122092
Why do you equate public ownership, which is what socialism is, to Internet censorship in Australia?
I mean do you even know what you're talking about? :^)
How fucked am I?
>>698121963
so a society being a bit facist to ensure it's own survival is "team america"?
what about ancient rome? they were fascist as fuck, but as soon as they stopped being that way, things all went to shit.
There has to be a happy medium. You can't just be a hippie and not to get hurt by hells angels because you both like drugs.
>>698122108
Or Eugene Debs here in America.
I had to learn that on my own.
>>698122290
It's good anon. It means you probably supported Sanders and possibly Clinton now if you listened to him.
>>698110833
>>698112197
>>698120098
Hi anons we're almost sort of the same kind of
>>698122276
because an equal ownership system has to please too many people. And when you water down things that much, terrible political decisions get made, like censorship. You're basically turning your government into a focus group, and housewives have nothing better to do than worry about what their kids see in the media, so they'll spend the most time complaining until they get their way.
>>698122388
Rome actually started fucking up after they went fascist and installed an Emperor, so no.
here. some of the statements are very poorly phrased.
>>698122583
furthermore because australia has a strong socialist political party, that was in charge when internet censorship was put into place.
DO you even know that?
>>698122583
That makes little sense, actually. How is public ownership "watering down" anything?
And you cannot prove that it leads to censorship or that your representative government is a "focus group."
You're just talking shit.
Mine
Thoughts?
>>698122772
I know you're really good at making shitty arguments based on faulty premises and circular logic.
>>698121802
The way you put your words implies that there couldn't be differing opinions. That's usually not the case though. Are you promoting brainwashing or similar activities to uphold the consensus?
What constitution are you talking about? The US constitution? And how would it be any different from the current system, if there would still be representation and voting?
>>698121859
We'll leave the first question be and concentrate on the latter two.
1) Why can't the current system be changed? Why must it be replaced?
2) Will there be democracy or will every future political decision be made in in the framework of one ideology?
>>698122487
Definitely don't support Clinton or Trump, Sander's was, alright. A lot of his following was pretty cringy though.
>>698122585
you're saying rome wasn't fascist BEFORE Gaius?
And no, they were at the hight of their power after Gaius and the emperors took over, for like at least 500 years.
It was their affluence that caused them to fuck up. Citizens didn't want to serve in the military anymore because they were too rich. This is agreed to be the seed behind the fall of rome by almost every historian I've read.
Try not acting like you know what the fuck you're talking about until AFTER you've actually read a few books on the subject please. You're cancer in this thread and your post was like a turd falling into my drink.
>>698122996
There would be differing opinions as to how society should progress, but I can't honestly imagine a well-fed educated populace wanting to revert to a previous form of government that has no place in society. Doing it for the hell of it would make no sense.
>>698122844
It's literally called "watering down the stock" when companies shift to a public ownership platform.
Fucking pleb. You walked right into that one.
>>698122585
Yeah, if I was going to choose an example to demonstrate how fucked fascism could get, I would probably pick Rome. I mean, Tiberius and Caligula were just the 2nd and 3rd emperors, and by the time Claudius was installed by the military basically the entire Julio-Claudian family had been murdered in political intrigues. The whole thing was one long shitshow with a few occasional good years that essentially came to an end as soon as they could no longer expand.
>>698123073
you said "fascist as fuck"
it's pretty fascist to just take power and destroy a democratic republic
>>698122960
so no response then? k, nice talking to you.
>>698109292
Hate all you want.
I think the only things that really pulled me back toward center are my being pro-death penalty and my general mistrust of the government (which includes my mistrust of its ability to pull off anything truly evil and get away with it--I mean, look what they have to work with).
>>698123210
No you're still a dipshit that thinks public ownership leads to censorship.
You're a fucking Teabagger.
What they used to say
>They're here because we need workers, and birtrates are low! you're not gonna be a minority goy
what they say now
>So what if they're the majority in London goy? This is a multicultural society and state now, if you dont like it you better shut up or you'll be on the list.
How will it end Anon? Globalism and multiculturalism for Europe? or a purge?
>>698123264
plus: Rome had too many frontiers
they couldn't control their own growth
>>698123073
>This is agreed to be the seed behind the fall of rome by almost every historian I've read.
Then you've been reading some pretty shitty histories, because there is no consensus on a single cause of the decline of the Roman Empire.
>>698122950
>Thoughts?
We should hang out. Me: >>698123374
>>698123073
it's also facist as fuck to conquer and enslave all of your surround territories, regardless of whether or not it was voted on by a democratic republic.
>>698122950
were you surprised?
I (>>698122693) didn't think I was gonna be so far left in economics terms.
>>698123358
I did respond. Your argument that socialism leads to draconian measures like censorship is unfounded.
Stop using the argument if you want to continue this discussion.
>>698123590
Is it because you don't know anything?
Waht dis mene?
>>698123661
explain
>>698123482
seed of =/= single cause
J. Rufus Fears is pretty damn respected on this subject. He literally said what I was repeteing
>>698123710
Do you get uptight about people doing shit you don't like?
>>698123661
t. Ayn Rand cultist and Econ 101 graduate
>>698123073
>Citizens didn't want to serve in the military anymore because they were too rich. This is agreed to be the seed behind the fall of rome by almost every historian I've read.
this is bullshit
>>698123803
not a big Ayn Rand fan, and trust me, my education in economics is far more than that.
>>698123548
>it's also facist as fuck to conquer and enslave all of your surround territories
please dont breed
>>698123620
where did your response fall on the pyramid?
Now seeing that, would you still consider it a response.
>>698123960
>durr socialism leads to fascism
>see: Australia
so you're just going to be a faggot about this the entire rest of the thread
k
>>698123758
I cannot believe that your statement is an accurate interpretation of what a serious classics scholar wrote.
>>698123930
again a non-response from a person that has nothing intelligent to add. You people are like mosquitos today.
>>698123264
>demonstrate how fucked fascism could get, I would probably pick Rome.
I'm disgusted, you have no idea what you're talking about
>>698124069
not that anon but the dude is full of shit
no mainstream historian names a single cause for Rome's fall
>>698124128
It's basicly showing a complete lack of understanding of what facism is. What do you expect?
>>698123198
To you. But remember that the majority of people are fine with the current system and want to work on the societal problems through it. It's not a problem for them. It doesn't inherently prevent social changes to be made.
One other benefit of a central government that I haven't mentioned yet is that large scale projects are easier to conduct and there isn't much time wasted on trying to make all the small communities co-operate.
>>698123853
Serving in the military ceased to be defacto-required for public service, so fewer people did it (and even that became less important as the power of the senatorial class got smaller and smaller over the years). Then, the empire started relying on mercenaries, which meant bringing more and more non-Romans into the empire. The guy you quoted has a very simplistic view of it, but yeah, that's kinda what happened.
>>698112595
Where is the website to do that test? I would love to take it.
>>698124065
when did i say fascism? Why are you putting words in my mouth.
You really like to assume a lot. It's probably because you're not aware that there's more than two stances you can take on an issue.
Australia was the most liberal example of a socialist government I could reference. Trying to give you every benefit of the doubt here. But you don't even put forth any compared examples to refute my claim. just insults is all you have. And you expect people to take you seriously?
>>698124441
>which meant bringing more and more non-Romans into the empire
Uh, oh. I know where this is going!
>>698124368
But if we have federated villages that are like states, that would also mean we have a representative parliament of some sort to enact big decisions like capital projects.
Anarco-Communism would enact the best ideas of other systems of government, yet de-emphasize power structures or centers of power. This would be a social evolution.
>>698109292
Not the same website though
>>698124441
But if Rome had ceded territory or granted independence to colonies in the East, this would not have been a problem.
They got too big.
>so many libtards here on cuckchan
Reminds me how I was 5 years ago, befor the redpill
>>698123803
Nah, Hate Ayn rand, and I'll have you know, I took Econ 101 AND econ 102!!!
Basically an expert.
>>698124069
That's because the fall was such a slow process.
He said it's one of the earliest signs that rome would not continue in the way it had for so long that made it so successful.
And it is largely agreed upon that over affluence caused Roman citizens to become lazy.
There was no actual FALL it just receded until it wasn't as important as the vatican.
>>698124806
Next time, do the rest of us a favor and fill the pill with cyanide.
>>698124618
NO NO NO STOP THATS NOT WHAT I MEANT AT ALL
>>698124892
Oh shit, my bad. Please teach me economics in one lesson, senpai.
>>698122391
We touched upon him briefly about all his whistle blowing good. But no mention of him being a socialist
>>698124510
I not only refuted your argument, I rejected it.
The censorship happened because someone voted in the social conservatives that pushed the censorship agenda.
Your premise that the government being "socialist" has no bearing on this.
'
You're just continuing to be an annoying Teabagging faggot pushing the same narrative that ironically I was making fun of earlier.
>>698124941
>being this butthurt and edgy
Go tip your fedora to your cuckporn
>>698124290
fas·cism
ˈfaSHˌizəm/Submit
noun
an authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization.
which part of that doesn't sound like pre-Gaius Rome?
>>698124894
Bullshit
Rome fell around 500s when the city was sacked by barbarians.
You are a total dipshit. Stop posting.
>>698124785
Oh, for sure they got too big. That, combined with weak emperors and near-constant outside invasion did them in in the end.
Don't Worry kids. When you get you're first job you'll move to the purple square, and after you start meeting real people outside of the internet you'll move up to the blue square where rational humans are.
>>698110833
>>698111603
>>698111722
>>698112197
>>698114880
>>698116169
>>698120053
>>698120098
>>698122290
>>698122558
>>698122693
>>698122950
>>698123374
>>698124460
Yeah, take me from the center and put me to the left just cause I don't mind a couple lesbians with a kid.
>>698109292
>>698124952
ok TS Eliot
>>698114618
Switch Nazi to the right wing and that's correct
>>698122996
>>1) Why can't the current system be changed? Why must it be replaced?
Theroretically it can evolve, but the logical step would be towards a Environmentally conscious, Libertarian Socialist society
>2) Will there be democracy or will every future political decision be made in in the framework of one ideology?
Well, the society it self functions as a Federation of Directly Democratic Communes. The decisions would probably be guided within the framework, but not bound to it.
>>698125259
My result was similar because of this question
>>698125255
>you're first job
Every single time
single
time
>>698125197
I think you're painting it with too-broad a brush. There's more nuance than to just call it "facism" because it slowly grew into what it was over time based on a lot of different factors. An oligarchic semi-democratic republic with authoritarian leanings, maybe? Am I splitting hairs?
>>698125255
Found the redneck
>>698124128
>i'll just rush to insult what i'm doing right now
whatever makes you feel superior.
>>698119531
this is retarded.
>>698125153
You sound mad, in the Down-syndrome-tantrum kind of way.
>>698125255
>first job
Gainfully employed since you were in middle school, kid. I live comfortably and it's nice knowing that assholes like you are slowly losing the fight, and have been for ages.
>>698124475
Isidewith.com
Make sure you answer EVERY question and use EVERY answer, not just the "Yes" or "No" ones
>>698125232
Is that what your teacher told you in school little boy?
You realize that rome had been sacked multiple times?
Sack of Rome (410), by the Visigoths under Alaric
Sack of Rome (455), by the Vandals under Geiseric
Sack of Rome (546), by the Ostrogoths under Totila
Which one were you referring to? You realize rome expelled all of these invaders after the sack?
I love the "you're a dip shit" repsone and you say "Rome was sacked by barbarians"
Rome continued to flourish economically for some time even after they expelled their final emperor
It really is hard to talk to people so uneducated. you're so hostile to have your firmly held beliefs challenged in anyway. It's just like wow, the anger towards people that know more than you is incredible.
So yeah... what would the crowd call me?
>>698125197
How is it "fascism" if Rome had a representative body like the Senate?
Militaristic, yes. Fascist, no. The Roman form of government inspired the US Constitution.
>>698125255
>Implying inbred blues are rational
>>698126117
>How is it "fascism" if Rome had a representative body like the Senate?
HAHAHAHAHA
>>698125750
>using accepted dictionary definition
>painting with too broad a brush
well i guess you'd better call the dictionary people and tell them they need to be more specific.
By today's standards, any government operating as the roman republic did, would be called fascism. You know it and I know it.
>>698119531
>swamp of degeneracy
>>698124806
>Libtard
>>>/Comical cucksevashit/
Or >>>/comical conservative/ if you are too stupid to know what I meant
>>698126221
Didn't Nazi Germany have one too? The Reichstag or whatever.
>>698109292
>>698126077
yeah right because anyone who calls out your rather exagerrated history of Rome must be a "little boy."
And scholars agree Rome was done around 476. Nobody cares about your maverick revisionist history faggot.
Nobody.
>>698126221
this guy gets it.
see what i'm dealing with here.
>>698126221
how is pointing your shitty trolls "funny?"
If you are the loudmouth Romefag who stumbled in here saying "you know more' you really need to stop derailing this fucking thread.
