The worst compared to what?
I mean, humans can be evil as fuck but also ‘good’ as fuck.
We don’t really have a baseline for intelligent species.
If you look at some of the smartest animals they too be can be pretty cruel.
Chimps are bloody brutal, you don’t want to be a chimp... they literally tear each other to pieces.
I think I recall hearing about a group of chimps who ganged up on another chimp and proceeded to rip his genitals and attack him with it, or so... they’re cruel as fuck lol.
Wolves kill even when they’re not hungry. Because they enjoy it.
Dolphins aeenvicious as hell, too. I’ve heard of dolphins killing fish to use them as masturbation aids.
Spoiler : Forum Mafia :
FM VI: Ash (Sinner) FM VII: Glen (Drug Dealer) FM VIII: Liane (Vigilante) FM IX: Andrei (Reserved Proletarian) FM X: fm Deathfire123 (Modkilled Blacksmith) FM XI: Corki (Citizen) FM XIII: Phoebe (Bodyguard) FM XIV: Helena (Grave Robber) FM XV: FM Pikachu (Mayor) FM XVI: FM Master Chef (Escort)
Would you rather we all died?
Anyways humans are just doing what all other predatory species would be doing. We’re btw the only species with Animal Cruelty movements and who care for other species.
We certainly don’t exterminate everything we get our hands on.
Unlike cats, say.
inthe end, i think this is a pretty stuwupid discussion. r humans shitty?yea. so what??uVu
Last edited by theoneceko; June 21st, 2020 at 11:56 AM.
holy crap y'all are commies or some shit?
Bruh I'm so patriotic, I piss red, white, and blue. My doctor said it may be pancreatic cancer. I told him to shut his COMMIE mouth
First off, the wording is terrible for the federal vs unitary section. Federal should mean the union of regions (e.g., federal government) whereas local / regional should refer to subdivisions within a country (e.g., provinces, prefectures, states, metropolitans).
Nearly 50-50 on democracy vs authority because it's all on a case-by-case basis. For global threats like COVID-19, climate change, mineral exhaustion, warfare / mass destruction, agricultural crisis, give all the power to authority to ensure the issues are quickly resolved ASAP temporarily. Democracy otherwise is important for equality between people and gives people vested interest in their political system.
Peace mostly benefits all countries because usually diplomacy is based on economics where deals are both efficient and beneficial for both countries because of specialization in labour. During war efforts, the only countries benefiting are those tied to the production of arms and supplies who are sitting on the sidelines (e.g., US during WW2). However, you still need a military force for self-protection in case you have any unstable political neighbours who keep on eyeing your resources.
50-50 on securities vs freedoms. In general, I'd rather be safe than to keep certain freedoms I don't even use against threats. If there aren't any threats, I don't see why people can be free to do what they choose.
Socialism is OK depending on the policies instituted, but it's far better to have a mixed economy where national corporations are competing with private sectors to innovate. If that national corporation can't survive, it should be privatized to increase market efficiency.
Fuck religion - it shouldn't have any place in politics or society. Keep it as far away from the state as possible.
Technological progress is good. Even if automation displaces people's jobs, it was a dying industry anyway and only improves people's QOL generations down. No need for horse caretakers and horse carraige taxis if there's no economic demand for them, and they would go into other more in-demand sectors.
Living in Canada, there are good and bad sides to multiculturalism. People should be free to practice their own cultures so long as they don't harm the country's values. But too many immigrants is bad for a country's identity because besides the indigenous people's cultures, I can safely say that Canada itself has no culture. And I can proudly say this because it seems that modern Canadian culture is still based on the roaring 20th century of Canada of Tim's, Canadian beer, beavers, hockey, moose, toonies / loonies, and maple syrup and it hasn't changed at all. If you look at other countries' cultures, they're innovating and making breakthroughs in establishing their distinct identities (e.g., America's IT technology, French gourmet cuisine, Scandinavian industrial design, etc.). Really a problem of being a jack-of-all-trades but master of none.
Well, this test is kinda working (completed the long version)
I agree with plan C.
Even if game is already over, I am still agree, why not?
I'm 14 questions into the long one, and I already think half the questions asked are really poorly/ambiguously phrased. Like "Local governments give each region good representation of their views." I'm not entirely sure what the fuck this question is even supposed to mean. Like... it depends? I'm sure a local government comprised of, say, KKK members in a mostly minority community would probably not give good representation. In an ideal world, under a democratic system? Sure, maybe - depends on voters, levels of voter engagement, and a bunch of other factors (like how gerrymandered / representative is the voting process to begin with).
No clue how to answer about half of these in just different strengths of "agree/disagree" because for many of the questions, I both agree AND disagree: e.g. "should anyone who wants to be free to enter the country?" I feel like I agree with the general sentiment of this (freedom of movement is important, as is the freedom to immigrate - it's one of the things that has historically made my country strong), but the way the question is phrased makes it seem like a trap - like "AHA! So you DO want Nazis to be able to enter the country freely!"
Curious to see what my results will be.
"Military spending is a waste of money."
Come the fuck on. Yes, when you are at peace (IF you are spending disproportionately high on military compared to things like social safety nets or basic infrastructure, etc; though obviously not for just maintaining basic defense). Obviously not when you are being like... Red Dawn'd by hostile paratroopers. How do I add context to "agree/disagree/unsure"?
"Laws should be completely consistent within all regions of a nation"
Seriously? Why isn't there a "depends on the damn law" option? A total campfire ban / stringent fire regulations makes sense in California; less so on the Gulf Coast. But there's a good case to be made for things like, say, murder being fairly universally standardized.
I don't think I'm going to make it to 216 because every fucking question makes me want to type up a new rant on how bad the questions are.
"The national government needs more power"
Fuck the people who wrote these questions.
Am I an authoritarian fascist if I strongly agree that the national government needs more power to enforce climate regulations without thinking that they just need a blanket "more power" in every category? I feel like I am answering "neutral/unsure" to every question except the obvious gimmes like "should we wipe out countries that don't serve us" or shit like that.
Please define "more power" you quiz writing hacks. That's like the vaguest thing ever, and it's been in like five questions now. "More power" can mean anything from extra taxation powers for infrastructure maintenance to fucking death camps.
"When people have already suffered for technology to be developed, we should use that technology"
Is the technology in question like... new, better solar panels, or Skynet? FFS
"Nations should cooperate whenever it benefits them both"
There are more than two nations. "Sure, but not if it comes at the cost of a third nation, unless the third nation is doing some fucked up shit" doesn't seem to be an option, so I guess neutral/unsure it is.
"The United Nations should have a military to enforce its resolutions"
It kind of does?
So near the end finally got a bunch of questions where I could solidly answer how I felt one way or the other. But those early categories were hard to get through without a little more nuance.
Last edited by Lysergic; September 13th, 2020 at 10:03 PM.
Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?
Whenever I started thinking "well it depends on..." I just picked the middle answer and didn't even get angry. Maybe you should have tried that.
I'll stop the "quote the post" trend and just say I'm addressing Lysergic lol.
The test isn't perfect, obviously, but I think we're meant to assume the questions are not traps and use common sense considered from the point of view of a democratic country's citizen. For example, "more power" in the situational meaning of "more autonomy" is to be assumed if we're talking about local vs federal/unitary governments, and not "freedom to establish gulags in a specific area".
Your answer to "Laws should be completely consistent within all regions of a nation" is simply "disagree". The question clearly states "completely consistent", which means you're being asked if you think ALL laws should be the same everywhere in a nation. I have the same stance, by the way (maybe not on guns (people can still be shot on the Gulf Coast), but that's another story), so I just "disagreed".
Skynet is obviously not a good technology... people having suffered for a technology that would benefit the country may be a better wording though, so I'll give you that.
The UN has a military (more or less), yes, and you're free to agree or disagree with that reality :P
In the end, I agree with yzb's conclusion: putting every single question in a purely absolute context to give a purely absolute answer will make you "neutral" on many topics on paper while you could be not neutral at all in reality; that seems to be what happened to you here.
You’re giving the test WAY too much credit. It’s clickbait crap...
In mafia terms, y’all are assuming some intended WIFOM here and you’re right. But the WIFOM is there to get clicks, not to actually analyze jack shit
Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Jar Jar the wise?
Horseshoe theory always seemed dumb to me tbh. Marxism-Leninism and fascism may both suck, but you can't just conflate them because they both happen to be authoritarian and bad.