Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
The Political Compass Test. (Read 3847 times)
John Smith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 75402
Gender: male
Re: The Political Compass Test.
Reply #45 - Sep 10th, 2013 at 3:48pm
 
Lord Herbert wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 2:27pm:
John Smith wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 2:18pm:
Lord Herbert wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 2:17pm:
perceptions_now wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 1:26pm:
Finally, this thread shouldn't be deleted, just because you disagree with some of its outcomes, ...


I was being ironic (tongue-in-cheek).

I must try to be a little more obvious in future.

You'll notice that John took me seriously too.



I tend to notice when people cry.


Being Italian you probably notice a lot of plaster-of-Paris figurines of the Virgin Mary crying too, don't you?  Grin Grin


yeah, heaps .....
Back to top
 

Our esteemed leader:
I hope that bitch who was running their brothels for them gets raped with a cactus.
 
IP Logged
 
Mnemonic
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 1530
Melbourne
Gender: male
Re: The Political Compass Test.
Reply #46 - Sep 10th, 2013 at 3:53pm
 
Life_goes_on wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 3:17pm:
Their levels of authoritarianism could be compared. Economically they were very different. Hitler allowed - even supported - free enterprise. He didn't Nationalise any business. Competition was encouraged. Even benefits for the people were allocated using a different principle in that you had to be seen to be productive before you got anything back - not the state supported you in return for work model the Soviets used.


Well, when I said that it wasn't because I didn't think the Stalinist regime was "socialist." It was just that even if it was, the nationalism would have made it right-wing -- as in "nationalist socialism."

The other thing was that the Stalinist regime went against the "Marxist" socialist concept of workers owning the means of production. They took farms away from farmers. They "nationalised" the farms and factories. That probably meant the farms and factories were used to sustain the military more than the common people. The Soviets weren't content to just "be," they wanted to expand militarily. That was a very right-wing thing to do.

The desire for a strong military is a right-wing attitude. The Soviets made nuclear weapons. They got involved in a Cold War with the USA. They occupied Eastern Europe and invaded Afghanistan. They were militarily aggressive.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Kat
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Socialism IS the answer.

Posts: 17709
Everywhere and no-where
Gender: female
Re: The Political Compass Test.
Reply #47 - Sep 10th, 2013 at 4:15pm
 
My Vote compass result...
Back to top
 

Capture_2.PNG (38 KB | 23 )
Capture_2.PNG

...
 
IP Logged
 
Lord Herbert
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 34441
Gender: male
Re: The Political Compass Test.
Reply #48 - Sep 10th, 2013 at 4:19pm
 
Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 3:28pm:
Lord Herbert wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 12:44pm:
These two preside over immigration programs that continue to import tens of thousands of Muslims each year into their country.



This is not a social idea, its an economic reality.


From an industry point of view ~ yes.

But from the point of view of the electorate, the government also had a duty-of-care to ensure that this immigration influx was composed of cultures, religions, and races that were compatible with the social heritage and identity of the British host people.

The Labour party under Blair has since been exposed as having deliberately flooded the UK with immigrants of diverse cultural background in order to overwhelm the local Brits.

I am bug-eyed with utter amazement that Tony Blair and those others responsible for this perfidy have not been dragged from their hiding places to be lynched in the local parks. I go to my grave utterly baffled by this inertia.

Horse-whipping is too good for those traitors who secretly conspired to bury the native Brit under sedimentary layers of incompatible foreigners.

Dsmithy70 wrote on Sep 10th, 2013 at 3:28pm:
To maintain our consumerist society we need to consume, there is only so much stuff a person can have/afford.


Only just recently the House of Lords released a research paper that showed that mass-immigration had done bugger-all for the betterment of the native Brit.

Quote:
In 2008 the report of the Economic Affairs Committee of the House of Lords concluded (Para. 62) (Click here):

“The overall conclusion from existing evidence is that immigration has very small impacts on GDP per capita, whether these impacts are positive or negative. This conclusion is in line with findings of studies of the economic impacts of immigration in other countries including the US.”


source


******

Quote:

The World Bank produces figures which track migration in terms of the
amount of remittances posted by migrants from host countries to countries of origin.
The latest officially recorded remittance flows to developing countries reached $316 billion in 2009 ...


source

This financial outflow to Turkey from second and third generation German-Turks pissed off Angela Merkel no end. She even told them to go home.

And then .... just months after she had told them to make up their mind if they're Turks or Germans ~~ the Turkish Prime Minister visited Germany and made a speech in which he told the local Turks to ...

Quote:
"Never forget you are Turks first, and German second"
.

Grin

How "inyaface, Merkel!" is that?




Back to top
« Last Edit: Sep 10th, 2013 at 4:27pm by Lord Herbert »  
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print