So I got around to doing it. I have to say the questions on this test were definitely not written with English in mind. There were so many questions I was like "WTF are they asking here?" There is probably 10-15% more "uncertainty" in my answers than there should be.
The summary of me which I think did pretty decently.
Going down the line here.
Why are the people how they are? This axis allows you to situate yourself between two opposite poles which answer this question.
The constructivists consider that people build themselves from their environment (notably social) and that the caracteristics that make them who they are, are acquired.
On the contrary, the essentialists consider that an individual is by nature how he/she is and that his/her caracteristics which make this person who she/he is, are innate.
I think this is because I'm pretty determinist in my beliefs. The facts as I see them is we are born with a truckload of the problems we have with ourselves and not everybody is equal. Some people simply had a better hand dealt to them.
The ones in favor of the rehabilitative justice consider that the role of justice is to put the condemned on the “right path” again by making them understand why they should not do what they did and why they were condemned and by accompanying them all along the process.
Converesly the ones infavor of the punitive justice consider that the role of justice is dissuasive, both for the condemned (to avoid recidivism) and for the rest of the society (by making them examples not to follow).
Justice should treat the cause not curb the symptoms. The offenders are people who are going to be let back into society eventually and they need to be equipped to succeed.
The progressists try to build social progress, make a better society without caring about traditions. They often consider the present as better than the past and that it is necessary to keep on this path.
On the contrary the conservatives want to keep the status quo and even to reinsert some values already considered as disapeared or disapearing. Traditions, among those the religious heritage, are put forward as a source of wisdom.
I think conservatives are right very often, but I generally don't think the status-quo should be unchangeable.
internationalism is a set of different ides which have for common point to stop making a hierarchy between contries and their inhabitants and to promote as much as possible their cooperation. Pushed to its maximum the final objective is the abolitions of borders.
On the other hand, nationalism is a set of heterogeneous ideas which, when applied, favour one country and its citizens over foreigners, it also justifies the idea that each people has a nation
Hell yes private property & means of production. There's perhaps 12% of things that I think the public should pay attention to, the rest of it is non-ya-business-who-asked-you
This axis represents the attitude that a government needs to have concerning the market economy in which an important part of the means of production are private. Liberals and kenesiens are opposed to the method that needs to be adopted without putting into question capitalism. If you are more capitalist, this axis represents your goal in terms of economy. If you are more communist, this axis represents the least bad that you can expect of the current system.
Regulationnism or interventionism is an idea in which the economical activity should be regulated for the commun interst. It can be through legislation, planification, subventions, a variable taxation...
On the contrary, the laissez-faire is the ideas in which the economical activity should not be regulated because it would in itself correspond to the commun interest. It can be through a weak legislation, few or no subventions, a fixed taxation and often weak or even the complete suppression of the role of the state in the economy.
So, 50% I'm Laissez-Faire for, the other 50% are hard questions that I gave "uncertainty" too I suppose. This has the biggest uncertainty window for me. I think there is plenty of things businesses do wrong and regulation can be inserted safely, but I guess I didn't "agree" with any answers that would have made me pro-regulation and settled into "uncertain"
Ecologie in politics privileges the protection of the environment by limiting as much as possible the impact of human activities on the biodiversity even if it implies to limit the these human activities by modifying more or less radically our current way of life.
Productivism privileges human needs notably by supporting the increase of the production or the use of methods that have an incertain impact on the environment.
The environment can, and should, be altered to suit human purposes. However, going too far is bad due to runaway effects. Climate change, over fishing, deforestation, etc. Like I don't mind fishing, some CO2 and paper, but all those things require a balance.
All in all though, I'm OK with animal exploitation, fishing, cutting down trees, and a sprinkling of animal extinction.
Revolutionaries have a tendency to privilege direct action, often in the margin of legality, to reach their goal: replace the current political organisation for totally different one.
Reformists have a tendency to privilege legal action to reach their goal: reform the political organisation step by step. This can be done through the institutions, via elections, authorized demonstrations, petitions...
The system sucks and needs to change, but sometimes the cure is worse. Reformation is better because it means people agree to the change. Revolution requires the guns to be out. Sometimes a revolution is necessary but if it's done wrong, all sorts of things can get fucked up and millions can die. However, sometimes it's necessary.
I'd attribute that to the deeply ideological modern neoliberalism and it's deep failures and suffering inflicted to have acted as a similar role to actually existing socialism to the idea that socialism lets you jump from feudalism to communism (Marx proven right once again, gommies BTFO (Wait what))
I am a Humanity. Socialism. Equality.
60% Constructivist vs. 31% Essentialist
40% Rehabilitative Justice vs. 29% Punitive Justice
71 Progressiveness vs. 14 Conservative
74% Internationalism vs. 10% Nationalism
57% Communist vs. 19% Capitalist
76% Regulationism vs. 12% Laizev Faire
36% Ecology vs. 48% Productionism
45% Revolutionary vs. 31% Reformist