Interestingly, as a self-identified libertarian, I did split these right down the middle, though on a lot of them I would have objected to the conflation of law and morality on a lot of them. I'm opposed to political discrimination on the basis of religious belief, but not social discrimination, which is an individual freedom (and I'm not sure what "economic discrimination" means, exactly, but it's probably in the same category as social). On #5, I think that war necessarily has a component of "physical terror", if not torture, but I'd be vehemently opposed to either in a "political conflict".
I think that the results of this quiz will have shifted in the modern era of speech codes and left-wing thought policing, unless questions such as 2, 12, 21, 23 and others have always been hypocritical "Agrees". It's hard to imagine anything but a negative response to 27 from leftys of the past 40 years or so, though.
Odd, or maybe not. Some of them I didn't like the all or nothing, or the exceptions...maybe I erred on the side of giving greater weight to the statement having ignored political ability to take even good ideas and twist them. 21 no/disagree and 18 yes/agree.
>1. All forms of racial segregation and discrimination are wrong.
How are you going to eliminate self-segregation without trashing freedom of association?
I've reached the point were I just can't take a survey that's too careless with the quantifiers.
I don't believe that men have inalienable rights of any kind. "Rights" in this sense do not exist. I believe that every man has the duty to love and serve God, and to love and serve his fellow man, beginning with his own family, then his extended family, then his clan, then his ethnic group, then his nation, and finally the human race in general.
I support such things as retirement pensions, welfare, etc., but only in the context of the nation. (Nation = a society characterized by a common ethnicity, language, religion, and culture). The individual Flemish has the duty to care for his fellow Flemish, a Japanese for the Japanese, Spaniards for Spaniards, etc. Given a true nation-state, I would go so far as to support a guaranteed national income for all citizens. However, in the context of the modern proposition "nation", social welfare is nothing but the means by which the Power Clique buys the votes that keep it in power.
I have no problem with imperialism or colonialism so long as the colonial government in question is Christian in nature and has as its eventual goal the Westernization and independence of the colonized.
Ask yourself, and be honest: Would Africans be better off today if the White man were still running things there? Compare Algeria, Nigeria, Tunisia, and Rhodesia in 1950 to the same places today.
On second though, don't. It'll break your heart.
"I believe that every man has the duty..."
People like this would receive a hail of shrapnel upon approaching my property.
"You can only rule yourself and not prohibit others to do the same."
"I am tired of fooling around," he said. "As for the rights of anyone, tell your people they can go fuck themselves." The Colonel by Carolyn Forche
That's the nice thing about reality though, consequences are immediate and proportional: a short'n sharp feedback, no room for dithering excuses. — Remus
Robert/Nick: Many thanks forresponses. I had be interested to know associated with virtually any gains to the WEB OPTIMIZATION advertisments when this is certainly put in place.
Another example of stupidity, ill-defined terms and situation-dependent meanings, clouding lucidity of presentation. Simplicity is not synonymous with clarity!
3. Does having a right, in the questions listed, mean that government must ensure that right is fulfilled? Or does it mean that the individual has the right to get off his ass and work to achieve his right by joining, for example, with other education volunteers to form non-profit schools?
4. Is discrimination based on religious belief wrong if that religious belief demands that you be murdered for lack of that belief?
6. Suppose the popular movement is worse-behaving than the dictatorship -- Communist dictatorships vs Czarist and Chinese Chiang dictatorships, for example.
8. Why not tax people proportionately to the goods and services they derive from taxes paid by others? Why not cut government waste and uselessness by disbanding pork-fat prone agencies readily replaced by voter-controlled state agencies.
13. Yes. To simply serve as an example of what can be accomplished by all if they'd adopt and adapt fair-market capitalism and American founding principles. Time for others to let go of the nipple of dependency and to grow up.
14. Colonialism and imperialism are wrong only when they do more harm than good; ask post-British India and post WW2 Japan and Germany.
29. Read Diana West's last couple of recent books on the McCarthy era and the deliberate errors and and unjustified bad-mouthing of McCarthy's claims about communist influence in US goverment.
This is the same kind of crap that forced Stephen Coughlin out of government for his detailed expose of Islamist infiltration and subversive techniques of our government agencies.
I'd continue, but the drones are circling.
"Communists have a right to express their opinions."
"Right" is a very cheap word.
Then freedom loving capitalists have a "human right" to piss on their imperial and enslaving opinions and build a flower garden with their putrid remains.
"I could have a million friends. All I'd have to do is change my point of view." -I forget who said it.
Interestingly, as a paleo-Conservative, scored 65% "Agree". Of course, that could simply be because of a strong libertarian streak in my conservatism.
I do agree with others that many of the questions are not geared to discriminating between liberal and conservative, but to the stereotype that conservatives are authoritarian and are against the latest liberal mantra. To wit, "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion". In my experience, it is the liberals who tell me that I should not be thinking the way that I do, and conservatives say that your entitled to your opinion (even though it may be wrong -- >).