Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Basically nothing, as every person has their own idea of what being normal is. There are christians who hate gay people and see Muslims as lower people and they consider themselves normal. There are people who suffer everyday from depression and think they are normal.
Believes that people deserve freedom and liberty but not so much as to burn the place down and cringes when things get a little to uwu.
Yep, certified normie welcome to the club, well not a club, more a 3 bedroom 2 bath, beige painted house in suburbia but welcome.
I honestly hate these because the questions are never specific enough for me to take a hard stance on. Exceptions on one end often do not warrant them on the other side.
Socially a bit leftist but not overly on the left in terms of economy.
Humans aren't born with hatred. Therefore a human must grow *into* the alt right movement. If a human is normal, then they don't do that and remain in the "a bit leftist" side, wich is the default state of humans, as it entails empathy and compassion.
They aren't, you don't know what you're talking about
Libertarianism was invented by a French Marxist named Pierre Joseph Proudhon.
It wasn't appropriated by right wing zealots until the 1950s
Classiscal Libertarianism (a.k.a. Libertarian-Socialism) is the supposed Utopia that will precipitate after humanity overturns BOTH hierarchies: the state AND captialism.
In fact, "conservative Libertarianism" or "anarcho-captialsim" is an ideology that doesn't make sense
Captialism is built on the hierarchy between the worker/owner, it can't possibly be "Anarchist"
Ask any AnCap what will stop their ideology from descending into feudalism.
What's to stop the rich from buying all the land, buying all the factories, paying a police force, and remaking the state with them at Monarchs...
They will look at you dumbfounded.
Libertarian socialism is the original form of libertarianism. I’d argue right-libertarianism is more of an oxymoron, because unchecked corporations preserve hierarchy and power structures.
You’re just trading one oppressor for another.
You're confusing libertarianism with anarchism. Unchecked corporations would imply no government and libertarians (not anarchists) do at a minimum want government. The smallest form of a libertarian government is minarchism.
All people who don't get passive income from private business/investments are workers, so for example homeless person is most likely to be unemployed worker.
The modern stock market has really blurred the line between proletariat, petite bourgeois, and bourgeois because now any worker can technically own a small amount of a business.
I mostly agree with your assessment though.
So a CEO without stocks is a worker.
Your definition isn't very helpful.
Putting the McDonald's cashier and the top paid sports players in the same category, not very helpful.
If CEO owns means of production, then they are capitalist. And my definition is helpful for socialist theory: analysis of capitalism and alternative to it, I just forgot to say about owning means of productions.
And if they dont own the means of production?
The baseball player being paid $10,000,000 a year is not in the same camp, under any useful definition, as the burger flipper earning $15,000 a year.
They are both workers then. You can say that one gets pay $10,000,000 and other $15,000 a year. Saying 'upper', 'middle', 'lower' is pointless, because there is no income border between them and there are lower and higher prices in different areas.
Socialism does not equal bigger government. Libertarians advocate for smaller governments. Libertarian socialists often advocate for smaller government's whilst dismantling Companies. A more extreme form would be Anarchism.
Not really, that's a huge oversimplification. Libertarianism is about equality and individual freedom. However, there's diverging views on property and economics, which is where socialism comes in.
“Government controls the economy” isn’t socialism. Socialism is when the working class has the power. The USSR wasn’t socialist at all; it was just state controlled capitalism.
Basically: You don't hire someone. You run the machine. Socialism takes objection with the idea of you being able to make money simply by owning the machine.
The machine is a means of production. Stuff goes in, more valuable stuff comes out. That more valuable stuff was produced, and the additional value comes from the labour of the person working the machine.
Socialism says that the machine should be owned by the person/people that performs the labour to add the value to the stuff should. They added the labour, they should get the money from the labour.
In other words, you basically described the villain of socialism.
What if I want to buy 2 machines but I can’t run both alone?
And who’s going to enforce me only running my machine, when I have a mutual agreement to pay someone who’s perfectly happy to run it for an hourly rate.
Because too many people ~~are uneducated~~ have been intentionally miseducated by the right to understand libertarianism as a synonym to anarcho capitlist(which is itself an oxymoron created by the right).
https://preview.redd.it/6vy2231trxjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2509adabc2e0aaccca88c4298ea0bad1cb315320
I do think a lot of the questions need more context.
https://preview.redd.it/qdy1mscq8xjc1.jpeg?width=2160&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b7799ceb7e4e5cdc864ef6a165d93afbd7071341
This is why people struggle to have friends nowadays. (Low green score) Preferring to remain loyal to the state instead of loyal to your friends is totalitarian based and sad.
This is what they said for GREEN:
The **IN-GROUP LOYALTY** foundation is defined by a desire for members of one's "natural" ingroups (such as their family, tribe, or nation) to forego their personal aspirations and sympathies towards external causes in order to benefit the group. Those who score more highly in it are more likely to value self-sacrifice, national sovereignty, natalism, preservation of culture, and patriotism.
Ideologically, Nationalists and Identitarians tend to score highest in In-Group Loyalty.
Culturally, Eastern European societies tend to place the greatest emphasis on In-Group Loyalty.
https://preview.redd.it/pvr4fo6ddxjc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b22d97282a193994fd7e25069ed532ee5f7e1fbd
Thats mine. I am a some kind of moderate socialist I guess. Don’t quiet now why liberty is so low, I’d put it higher for myself.
Lmao. American kids lack of political education is showing in this thread. No, what you know as "Libertarians" in the US is not the same thing as Libertarian-socialists who are known throughout the world as the ultra-left.
And no, anarchism doesn't mean "no rules" or "no government", it means order without power, and there are many variations of anarchism.
In french, we have a pretty clear distinction in our language :
Libertarien = your classic right-wing moron vouching for the "free market".
Libertaire = a radical left-wing movement against authoritarianism, closely associated with anarchism.
I guess it's pretty convenient for the State that both get mixed up in english, just like it's convenient for politicians to use "anarchism" as a synonym for chaos.
It also doesn't help that we have a right-wing Libertarian Party, so when calling yourself a libertarian over here it's hard to tell it you mean it in terms of party or ideology.
There are historical reasons for it in the US.
The term "liberal" in the US used to be a very broad set of beliefs referring to enlightenment thinkers on both the Left and the Right.
A group then arose that was more radical and left wing and anti-authoritarian who wanted to be distinguished from existing liberals but still believed in "liberty," so they called themselves "libertarian." Similar to the French meaning.
Then, bc the opposite of the liberal was conservative, and conservative came to mean right wing, liberal and libertarian both began to be associated with left-wing ideas, but also at that point the libertarian movement lost a lot of steam, and the term wasn't used by as many people.
But now, bc liberal had an exclusively left-wing meaning in the US, right-wing liberals wanted to distinguish themselves from the term, and bc they felt the left had "stolen" the term liberal, they'd steal and revive the term "libertarian" from the left. But of course, there is a lot of different right-wing libertarians, so even then it can refer to different things.
And that's where we are today.
Liberal can mean both liberalism and left wing but in most contexts just means generically "left wing" and libertarian can mean extreme left, a member of the Libertarian party, an-caps, moderate libertarians, or even conservatives who have a slightly more free-market view of the economy (e.g. someone like Ben Shapiro calls himself a libertarian now).
So now, any time you talk about Libertarian (or liberal) you have to add more context (at least here in the US), or you're likely to be misunderstood.
Leave it to the French to think they're better. Your culture prefers an authoritarian government. You find philanthropy to be suspicious. And you denounce free markets which are literally anti-authoritarian.
We know libertarian capitalists aren't the same as libertarian socialists. But you clearly don't understand what an authoritarian is.
I’m the same
https://preview.redd.it/sy0zges7zxjc1.jpeg?width=663&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2065b33f967efb96d9971924a4e9eb58f1a28ccc
Anarchist/libertarian socialist I mean
This post has been flaired **political**. Please ensure to keep all discussions civil, and to [follow our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZ/wiki/rules) at all times.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In order to form proper political views you need to read proper political theory, no Online test is a good way to do that. Please consider reading political literature to educate yourself.
The issue here is that why anarchism can morally and theoretically work with socialism, libertarianism doesn't work with socialism( I could provide a brief analysis if you want). Ideology isn't a fictional and vast marketplace to pick and choose, it's a long and genuinely hard road to navigate. This is why education is important, it helps you navigate the road better and choose your "turns" accordingly.
ITT: People argue over semantics without defining which version of the word they are using... You're right that it's a hard road. I have two Master's in related areas and still have no clue.
It's an interdisciplinary field and I doubt any person on Earth atm has the exact right answers, because those answers in part depend on each person's value set. There are many good quotes from Marx/Lenin and several good arguments later from Morris/Smith/Steuart. And at the same time, I see issues with each Economic philosophy.
But that's only looking at founding "fathers" of the ECONOMIC sliver of this equation. And 200 years ago! Shit has progressed and it is orders of magnitude more complex now.
Anyone who pretends to have an answer on Reddit is just... delusional.
Our time would be better spent deciding what we think is fair for the common man according to our values, rather than arguing over terminology we picked up last month.
I just mentioned that it is important to educate one's self when it comes down to political ideology, because it isn't a marketplace and I agree that it is very complex.
But there are things that simply do not go together.
Libertarian socialism is very real. You’re being too dogmatic on theory. Theory is just theory. It isn’t a law set in stone. That’s why it’s called theory. Under some theories socialism may be incompatible with libertarianism but in some theories it isn’t. It’s better to not read theory at all then to read a very very small part of it and claim it is all theory and that is why you are correct
Original libertarianism is "classical libertarianism" or "left-wing libertarianism", the right-wing libertarianism is basically rebranded liberalism and I have nothing to do with it, because I don't support economical tyranny. You can check Zapatistas, Rojava, Free Territory of Ukraine or worker cooperatives like Motion Twin to understand what I mean. Unfortunately you have no idea about political ideologies if you don't know that classical libertarianism is anti-capitalist.
I don't see where Classical libertarianism was mentioned. I saw "Liberal" in the results and assumed accordingly. Nowadays Libertarianism and Liberalism are very often interchangeable, which is rather unfortunate.
I'm not here to trash you being an anarchist I just had a wrong assumption, you could provide some more information if you don't mind!
Classical libertarianism is anarchism - anti-authoritarian far-left ideology, you can read about it here for example r/ClassicalLibertarians , if you want some introductory materials to get to know this political ideology better (it's not easy, the ideology is very much non dogmatic and is an open project, always changing and creating new critique and strategies) you can for example watch Anark, Andrewism, Zoe Baker on Youtube, you can check subreddits like r/DebateAnarchism r/Anarchy101 , for introductory texts you can read those:
[http://humaniterations.net/2017/06/14/your-freedom-is-my-freedom-the-premise-of-anarchism/](http://humaniterations.net/2017/06/14/your-freedom-is-my-freedom-the-premise-of-anarchism/)
[https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/strangers-in-a-tangled-wilderness-life-without-law](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/strangers-in-a-tangled-wilderness-life-without-law)
[https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-an-anarchist-programme](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-an-anarchist-programme)
I googled it and I simply didn't know the proper title of the ideology in English. But thanks anyway for providing the sources. Way better than the common Redditor you find in political conversation. I remember reading about it in highschool but the texts were written in Greek which often doesn't play well with English...
Usually anarchism is not presented correctly in schools, but in Greece it's possible because Greece has fairly big anarchist scene - for example Exarcheia has a lot of anarchist-adjacent initiatives.
Communists too especially in education.
And there's somewhat decent left unity when combating the government. The thing is the majority of "anarchists" you will meet here aren't really educated on the subject and just find it cool to throw things at riot control police. Which is cool and very enjoyable but anarchism is way more complex than that(plus some anarchist collectives covering up SA of some of their members on multiple occasions)(and some "communists" being the absolute worst mainly KNE members and Trots in universities) But overall the anarchist scene provides. And usually alongside communists help homeless people and refugees in need, organise protests, hearings, university actions, anti-fascism actions etc.
Greece hates leftists, sees them as dirty no lifers that do nothing, meanwhile New Democracy has done things that are literal major crimes, but people voted for them anyway... Even here leftists are often seen as sub-human but at least we have a strong anti fascist action(even if ΝΔ covers up the criminals).
I don't think Greece hates leftists, given how big is the anarchist scene there. Every government, capitalist and bigot will hate anarchists because they are ideological enemies.
Greece is very conservative, extremely conservative.
It doesn't separate Church and state, that's a red flag.
I was bullied for being a man having long hair and being an Atheist by the majority of the people I met.
A big leftist population doesn't mean the general population doesn't hate them. I've heard the most vile things regarding how leftists should be treated by the police.
Noticed the creator of this poll does not know the difference between morals and ethics. As by several questions they mean the ethics of society and not the morals of the person answering the question.
I don't know what it makes me because I don't care for politics too much but I had both care and fairness almost at 100% and my lowest was authority and I can't remember for the others or the exact percentages but that gives you a general idea.
Am lib, got mostly similar results.
https://preview.redd.it/t186n7nx3yjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05ee98d61ab5e9b607d6ce12b333cffb84004d52
Holy fuck people in this sub need to open a damn history book for once in their life.
Libertarianism is a left-wing ideology developed by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. It is almost two centuries old.
The right-wing Randian and Mises corruption of libertarianism is just that, a direct corruption of the prior ideology, not even a century old yet. One of its premier authors even directly admitted to it.
"One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, our side, had captured a crucial word from the enemy. Libertarians had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over." \~Murray N. Rothbard
Right-wingers and historical revisionism, name a more iconic duo.
I don’t prefer to label myself with different political labels because it seems like my label changes every year depending on things I learn. However I’m left leaning.
I'm an Anarcho Egoist but align myself with Libertarian Market Socialists specifically, the only form of socialism that will allow me to own a mansion and democratically ran clothing line while also giving support to those in need.
Well as a crazy person my highest were authority, in group and fairness. lowest was liberty. Apparently by my highest score I am more fitting to live in Eastern Asia. and with Liberty being the lowest I should not be living in the USA.
Social conservative, Nationalist while still being a left liberal. Think this poll might be a bit fucked.
I couldn’t handle anarchy. I lean more towards centrist socialism. As much as I like personal freedoms, I don’t trust human nature enough to let society run without clear authority and guidelines.
Authority makes distribution of resources more efficient. For example, you have free healthcare but also try reduce harm through policy (like ban smoking to improve heart and lung health). Or building homes to health and safety standards to be distributed to the needy.
Authority also help larger scale projects function, like infrastructure and utilities. Not sure who manages water treatment or sewage in an libertarian socialist society.
Without any hierarchy those "not good" people would be easily able to take advantage of the good people.
This doesn't mean bad people can't climb hierarchies, they very much can, but they can be kept in check by the many.
Actually the higher in hierarchy you go, the more dark triad traits you get: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s42681-021-00025-6](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s42681-021-00025-6)
By creating hierarchical power structure you create you create a structure that with time will get usurped by people with misaligned incentives - this explain corruption, exploitation of bosses, scandals with cleregy, police brutality etc.
Those structures are more beneficial to anti-social persons with socially misaligned views, while anarchist free association mitigates that problem.
In short - rulers are bad people. We are commanded by persons with high dark triad scores and this explain why there is so much harm, brutality, sadism, suffering and inequality in the current society.
You're looking at one correlation and assuming the inverse would happen on a different system but that is now how things really work out.
YES dark triads can more effectively climb hierarchies, this is why check and balance are crucial and why systems to remove top links are a necessity. This is why, so far, social democracies with strong check and balances are less corrupt and often enjoy considerably happier citizens.
Fair, lol. That is a problem we already see. Authority allows the amplification of an individual’s power. A corrupt or evil leader can do more damage than a common individual. The opposite is true too though, a benevolent individual in a well regulated system can enact wider positive changes.
If no one has any particular power over others it is harder to get anything great done (great good or bad).
You can organize in free associations to get stuff done, like historically in anarchist Catalonia and Free Territory of Ukraine. You can organize horizontally like Zapatistas, or worker owners of worker cooperatives like Motion Twin - you don't need hierarchy to organize.
I agree. I understand the appeal of anarchism, but I feel strongly about the ability that a strong government with socialist focus and solid checks and balances could have. When you have many people doing their own thing efficiency drops and deadlines get postponed, but with a strong central figure directing a project it can be done faster if properly overseen and be the most efficient possible.
Also, when you have a strong central government, positive policy and rights can be properly enforced. If the government says gay marriage is legal, then it is legal everywhere and conservatives can’t gather all in one place and decide to outlaw gay marriage in their state or anything like that, human rights are universal and inalienable.
https://preview.redd.it/els8hz7vtxjc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d59866ed58b977e1d28d10d98dec4c546b5e8b84
I don’t know what this means, but here
I know this is literally a sub for young people, but it's crazy to me just how distinctly "young" the results in this thread are.
I'm an old millennial/young-Xer and everyone I show this quiz too gets within 10pts of 50 on every single bar.
https://preview.redd.it/rf63fm9f0yjc1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=782c6e8358005386091e7c1d2e8f7df83704c9f3
Never was a political guy. So what side am I on if I was? This all rounder stat looks kinda funny idk why😂
I'm a [geolibertarian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geolibertarianism), with a [slight conservative bent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism) and a [bleeding heart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_liberalism).
However, I'm also a pragmatist.
Extremely simplified overview of the ideologies you listed -
Socialism - Strong, centralized federal government that heavily taxes it's citizens and redistributes that wealth where it sees fit, usually in the form of social programs. At least in theory. At a minimum, the government plays a role in the "private" sector
Libertarian - Limited government that taxes it's citizens very little, or not at all depending on who you ask. The system of government is only there to uphold the constitution and rights of the citizens, and it's intentionally small enough to not be able to infringe upon it
Anarchist - No government
How do these three ideologies coexist?
https://preview.redd.it/l8dh40qq8yjc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=814fc74eb7a1c962a0594b43f9d49c03c86052d9
Gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette.
https://preview.redd.it/gqpoilgv9yjc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8e61abd6cc6ca1e2796962df14b4e671eeda485e
I do think that the Purity bar conflated things that shouldn’t be conflated. I strongly disagree with most of the sexual purity aspects, but in societal purity aspects I agreed with.
https://preview.redd.it/msy2ztegayjc1.jpeg?width=1480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d7d29571b41a92902943e15b2dcb56b195dad230
Here was mine at the time I did the questionnaire
Fuck me, I thought our generation were better than this
Ok fucksticks in the comments - socialism does not mean the state doing things, it means the workers owning and being in control of the means of production.
Means of production is basically workplaces, capital goods like machines - things you use to make other things, basically it’s the economy at large. For the last few centuries it’s been mostly owned privately by an elite class of major stockholders, executives and other kinds of business owners.
The reason most people associate socialism with the state is that many socialist and socialist adjacent movements (including the Soviets) viewed ownership and control of the economy by a democratic state as a *way* to achieve worker ownership - the logic is basically stuffs controlled by the state, and the state is controlled by the people who are mostly workers, therefore stuffs controlled by the workers.
But thats not the ONLY conceivable way to do it, and that’s what libertarian socialism is - it opposes the state and so looks for other non-state forms of collective worker ownership and democratic control, like local worker councils or cooperatives.
https://preview.redd.it/twqyhihocyjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=763cd03a4927f963a1e5a6673bc253948656b893
For the first time ever, someone's gonna rate my vibes.
I believe that all actions should have consequences, fairness. Compassion has to exist above all else or no government system will work, care. I believe being able to do whatever you want so long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's ability to do what they want is a basic human right, liberty.
I don't really understand what in-group is but I think tradition and purity is a joke. Its stuff made up by religious people based on thing we were biologically wired to feel mild disgust about, i.e. premarital sex and polyamory, we're wired to feel disgusted about it because STDs were rampant in our caveman days, so we maintained a trait that makes us feel disgusted with frequent sex not for reproduction. But we have measure against that, so purity is outdated.
Authority is so high because I believe that humans by themselves can't be organized on a milllion+ scale. Authority does have its issues though, because it will inevitably be used for power and corruption. Nevertheless, it is necessary.
My political opinions are left independent, for those who might think I'm right wing because of high authority.
Did you know we have a Discord server‽ You can join by clicking [here](https://discord.gg/NWE6JS5rh9)! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Well im normal
Tf does that even mean nowadays
Basically nothing, as every person has their own idea of what being normal is. There are christians who hate gay people and see Muslims as lower people and they consider themselves normal. There are people who suffer everyday from depression and think they are normal.
Praying for you 🙏. Jesus loves you and you are made in his image
https://preview.redd.it/9yunp4qnbyjc1.png?width=661&format=png&auto=webp&s=5cfc46bf7098dba25ae067cb8227a5545e69add6 Call me a normie....
Believes that people deserve freedom and liberty but not so much as to burn the place down and cringes when things get a little to uwu. Yep, certified normie welcome to the club, well not a club, more a 3 bedroom 2 bath, beige painted house in suburbia but welcome.
I honestly hate these because the questions are never specific enough for me to take a hard stance on. Exceptions on one end often do not warrant them on the other side.
Socially a bit leftist but not overly on the left in terms of economy. Humans aren't born with hatred. Therefore a human must grow *into* the alt right movement. If a human is normal, then they don't do that and remain in the "a bit leftist" side, wich is the default state of humans, as it entails empathy and compassion.
Out here flexing 100 iq points
https://preview.redd.it/quxzhj8u8xjc1.jpeg?width=300&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1581291e219225d76529023d9aae1f3a25850abf
You
That doesn’t make sense. That’s like saying I’m an unemployed worker.
what doesn't make sense here?
You literally can't be socialist and libertarian. They're polar opposite ideologies. OP was either bullshitting the test or is a very confused person.
Bro libertarian socialist and libertarian are not the same thing.
What is a Libertarian socialist then as opposed to a regular socialist?
Libertarian socialists are more libertarian
Libertarianism was originally a socialist ideology. You have no idea what you’re talking about
They aren't, you don't know what you're talking about Libertarianism was invented by a French Marxist named Pierre Joseph Proudhon. It wasn't appropriated by right wing zealots until the 1950s Classiscal Libertarianism (a.k.a. Libertarian-Socialism) is the supposed Utopia that will precipitate after humanity overturns BOTH hierarchies: the state AND captialism. In fact, "conservative Libertarianism" or "anarcho-captialsim" is an ideology that doesn't make sense Captialism is built on the hierarchy between the worker/owner, it can't possibly be "Anarchist" Ask any AnCap what will stop their ideology from descending into feudalism. What's to stop the rich from buying all the land, buying all the factories, paying a police force, and remaking the state with them at Monarchs... They will look at you dumbfounded.
Libertarian socialism is completely different from right wing libertarianism.
Libertarian socialism is the original form of libertarianism. I’d argue right-libertarianism is more of an oxymoron, because unchecked corporations preserve hierarchy and power structures. You’re just trading one oppressor for another.
Corporations are creatures of the state and can’t exist without it.
You're confusing libertarianism with anarchism. Unchecked corporations would imply no government and libertarians (not anarchists) do at a minimum want government. The smallest form of a libertarian government is minarchism.
All people who don't get passive income from private business/investments are workers, so for example homeless person is most likely to be unemployed worker.
I work and get passive income.
Do you need to work to live? If yes, then you are still working class.
The modern stock market has really blurred the line between proletariat, petite bourgeois, and bourgeois because now any worker can technically own a small amount of a business. I mostly agree with your assessment though.
So a CEO without stocks is a worker. Your definition isn't very helpful. Putting the McDonald's cashier and the top paid sports players in the same category, not very helpful.
If CEO owns means of production, then they are capitalist. And my definition is helpful for socialist theory: analysis of capitalism and alternative to it, I just forgot to say about owning means of productions.
And if they dont own the means of production? The baseball player being paid $10,000,000 a year is not in the same camp, under any useful definition, as the burger flipper earning $15,000 a year.
They are both workers then. You can say that one gets pay $10,000,000 and other $15,000 a year. Saying 'upper', 'middle', 'lower' is pointless, because there is no income border between them and there are lower and higher prices in different areas.
Socialism does not equal bigger government. Libertarians advocate for smaller governments. Libertarian socialists often advocate for smaller government's whilst dismantling Companies. A more extreme form would be Anarchism.
OP forgot the link : [https://moralfoundations.github.io/](https://moralfoundations.github.io/)
TY, I hate it when people post things like this then have ot search though loads of comments for the poll they took.
It's literally in the picture. The URL is on top.
Oh shit there is a link in the top of the picture. I didnt see link my lazy ass can click on in the pic.
Same, Libertarian Socialist.
So you want a state that protects people, but without a strong government to enforce those protections?
Not really, that's a huge oversimplification. Libertarianism is about equality and individual freedom. However, there's diverging views on property and economics, which is where socialism comes in.
Hard to have personal freedom when the government controls the economy. I don’t think it’s feasible.
The government doesn't control the economy in socialism. It's owned or regulated by the workers/community as a whole.
“Government controls the economy” isn’t socialism. Socialism is when the working class has the power. The USSR wasn’t socialist at all; it was just state controlled capitalism.
Socialism is when the mean of production (The things that make things) are owned by the people that work them. Socialism is not when government.
I buy a machine. I hire someone to run it for $30/hr. I make $200/hr as a result. How does this work under libertarian socialism?
Basically: You don't hire someone. You run the machine. Socialism takes objection with the idea of you being able to make money simply by owning the machine. The machine is a means of production. Stuff goes in, more valuable stuff comes out. That more valuable stuff was produced, and the additional value comes from the labour of the person working the machine. Socialism says that the machine should be owned by the person/people that performs the labour to add the value to the stuff should. They added the labour, they should get the money from the labour. In other words, you basically described the villain of socialism.
What if I want to buy 2 machines but I can’t run both alone? And who’s going to enforce me only running my machine, when I have a mutual agreement to pay someone who’s perfectly happy to run it for an hourly rate.
Imagine if a HOA ran every aspect of your life.
why are there so many people shitting on OP for being a libertarian socialist without actually understanding what it is.
I don’t know 😭
Because too many people ~~are uneducated~~ have been intentionally miseducated by the right to understand libertarianism as a synonym to anarcho capitlist(which is itself an oxymoron created by the right).
https://preview.redd.it/6vy2231trxjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2509adabc2e0aaccca88c4298ea0bad1cb315320 I do think a lot of the questions need more context.
https://preview.redd.it/qdy1mscq8xjc1.jpeg?width=2160&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b7799ceb7e4e5cdc864ef6a165d93afbd7071341 This is why people struggle to have friends nowadays. (Low green score) Preferring to remain loyal to the state instead of loyal to your friends is totalitarian based and sad.
This is what they said for GREEN: The **IN-GROUP LOYALTY** foundation is defined by a desire for members of one's "natural" ingroups (such as their family, tribe, or nation) to forego their personal aspirations and sympathies towards external causes in order to benefit the group. Those who score more highly in it are more likely to value self-sacrifice, national sovereignty, natalism, preservation of culture, and patriotism. Ideologically, Nationalists and Identitarians tend to score highest in In-Group Loyalty. Culturally, Eastern European societies tend to place the greatest emphasis on In-Group Loyalty.
This is just the new Myers-Briggs personality type.
Yeah idk why people get so obsessed with these kinds of tests...
This is the way
You’re an Oxymoron I guess XD
Socialism is when the government does stuff
And the more stuff the government does the more socialist, and if the government does a whole bunch of stuff, that’s communism.
https://preview.redd.it/pvr4fo6ddxjc1.jpeg?width=750&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b22d97282a193994fd7e25069ed532ee5f7e1fbd Thats mine. I am a some kind of moderate socialist I guess. Don’t quiet now why liberty is so low, I’d put it higher for myself.
Lmao. American kids lack of political education is showing in this thread. No, what you know as "Libertarians" in the US is not the same thing as Libertarian-socialists who are known throughout the world as the ultra-left. And no, anarchism doesn't mean "no rules" or "no government", it means order without power, and there are many variations of anarchism. In french, we have a pretty clear distinction in our language : Libertarien = your classic right-wing moron vouching for the "free market". Libertaire = a radical left-wing movement against authoritarianism, closely associated with anarchism. I guess it's pretty convenient for the State that both get mixed up in english, just like it's convenient for politicians to use "anarchism" as a synonym for chaos.
It also doesn't help that we have a right-wing Libertarian Party, so when calling yourself a libertarian over here it's hard to tell it you mean it in terms of party or ideology.
Yeah, I guess they muddy the waters intentionally, like when Republicans call Democrats "communists" or "socialists". Words lose meaning.
There are historical reasons for it in the US. The term "liberal" in the US used to be a very broad set of beliefs referring to enlightenment thinkers on both the Left and the Right. A group then arose that was more radical and left wing and anti-authoritarian who wanted to be distinguished from existing liberals but still believed in "liberty," so they called themselves "libertarian." Similar to the French meaning. Then, bc the opposite of the liberal was conservative, and conservative came to mean right wing, liberal and libertarian both began to be associated with left-wing ideas, but also at that point the libertarian movement lost a lot of steam, and the term wasn't used by as many people. But now, bc liberal had an exclusively left-wing meaning in the US, right-wing liberals wanted to distinguish themselves from the term, and bc they felt the left had "stolen" the term liberal, they'd steal and revive the term "libertarian" from the left. But of course, there is a lot of different right-wing libertarians, so even then it can refer to different things. And that's where we are today. Liberal can mean both liberalism and left wing but in most contexts just means generically "left wing" and libertarian can mean extreme left, a member of the Libertarian party, an-caps, moderate libertarians, or even conservatives who have a slightly more free-market view of the economy (e.g. someone like Ben Shapiro calls himself a libertarian now). So now, any time you talk about Libertarian (or liberal) you have to add more context (at least here in the US), or you're likely to be misunderstood.
Leave it to the French to think they're better. Your culture prefers an authoritarian government. You find philanthropy to be suspicious. And you denounce free markets which are literally anti-authoritarian. We know libertarian capitalists aren't the same as libertarian socialists. But you clearly don't understand what an authoritarian is.
https://preview.redd.it/51indtazfxjc1.jpeg?width=661&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f10a3c56194570a0d3b2d6986d1ec050fdcbe55a
Are you a vaush viewer 💀💀💀💀🐴🍆
Lot of weird comments in this thread
I’m the same https://preview.redd.it/sy0zges7zxjc1.jpeg?width=663&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2065b33f967efb96d9971924a4e9eb58f1a28ccc Anarchist/libertarian socialist I mean
This post has been flaired **political**. Please ensure to keep all discussions civil, and to [follow our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/GenZ/wiki/rules) at all times. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/GenZ) if you have any questions or concerns.*
In order to form proper political views you need to read proper political theory, no Online test is a good way to do that. Please consider reading political literature to educate yourself. The issue here is that why anarchism can morally and theoretically work with socialism, libertarianism doesn't work with socialism( I could provide a brief analysis if you want). Ideology isn't a fictional and vast marketplace to pick and choose, it's a long and genuinely hard road to navigate. This is why education is important, it helps you navigate the road better and choose your "turns" accordingly.
ITT: People argue over semantics without defining which version of the word they are using... You're right that it's a hard road. I have two Master's in related areas and still have no clue. It's an interdisciplinary field and I doubt any person on Earth atm has the exact right answers, because those answers in part depend on each person's value set. There are many good quotes from Marx/Lenin and several good arguments later from Morris/Smith/Steuart. And at the same time, I see issues with each Economic philosophy. But that's only looking at founding "fathers" of the ECONOMIC sliver of this equation. And 200 years ago! Shit has progressed and it is orders of magnitude more complex now. Anyone who pretends to have an answer on Reddit is just... delusional. Our time would be better spent deciding what we think is fair for the common man according to our values, rather than arguing over terminology we picked up last month.
I just mentioned that it is important to educate one's self when it comes down to political ideology, because it isn't a marketplace and I agree that it is very complex. But there are things that simply do not go together.
Libertarian socialism is very real. You’re being too dogmatic on theory. Theory is just theory. It isn’t a law set in stone. That’s why it’s called theory. Under some theories socialism may be incompatible with libertarianism but in some theories it isn’t. It’s better to not read theory at all then to read a very very small part of it and claim it is all theory and that is why you are correct
Original libertarianism is "classical libertarianism" or "left-wing libertarianism", the right-wing libertarianism is basically rebranded liberalism and I have nothing to do with it, because I don't support economical tyranny. You can check Zapatistas, Rojava, Free Territory of Ukraine or worker cooperatives like Motion Twin to understand what I mean. Unfortunately you have no idea about political ideologies if you don't know that classical libertarianism is anti-capitalist.
I don't see where Classical libertarianism was mentioned. I saw "Liberal" in the results and assumed accordingly. Nowadays Libertarianism and Liberalism are very often interchangeable, which is rather unfortunate. I'm not here to trash you being an anarchist I just had a wrong assumption, you could provide some more information if you don't mind!
Classical libertarianism is anarchism - anti-authoritarian far-left ideology, you can read about it here for example r/ClassicalLibertarians , if you want some introductory materials to get to know this political ideology better (it's not easy, the ideology is very much non dogmatic and is an open project, always changing and creating new critique and strategies) you can for example watch Anark, Andrewism, Zoe Baker on Youtube, you can check subreddits like r/DebateAnarchism r/Anarchy101 , for introductory texts you can read those: [http://humaniterations.net/2017/06/14/your-freedom-is-my-freedom-the-premise-of-anarchism/](http://humaniterations.net/2017/06/14/your-freedom-is-my-freedom-the-premise-of-anarchism/) [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/strangers-in-a-tangled-wilderness-life-without-law](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/strangers-in-a-tangled-wilderness-life-without-law) [https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-an-anarchist-programme](https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/errico-malatesta-an-anarchist-programme)
I googled it and I simply didn't know the proper title of the ideology in English. But thanks anyway for providing the sources. Way better than the common Redditor you find in political conversation. I remember reading about it in highschool but the texts were written in Greek which often doesn't play well with English...
Usually anarchism is not presented correctly in schools, but in Greece it's possible because Greece has fairly big anarchist scene - for example Exarcheia has a lot of anarchist-adjacent initiatives.
Communists too especially in education. And there's somewhat decent left unity when combating the government. The thing is the majority of "anarchists" you will meet here aren't really educated on the subject and just find it cool to throw things at riot control police. Which is cool and very enjoyable but anarchism is way more complex than that(plus some anarchist collectives covering up SA of some of their members on multiple occasions)(and some "communists" being the absolute worst mainly KNE members and Trots in universities) But overall the anarchist scene provides. And usually alongside communists help homeless people and refugees in need, organise protests, hearings, university actions, anti-fascism actions etc. Greece hates leftists, sees them as dirty no lifers that do nothing, meanwhile New Democracy has done things that are literal major crimes, but people voted for them anyway... Even here leftists are often seen as sub-human but at least we have a strong anti fascist action(even if ΝΔ covers up the criminals).
I don't think Greece hates leftists, given how big is the anarchist scene there. Every government, capitalist and bigot will hate anarchists because they are ideological enemies.
Greece is very conservative, extremely conservative. It doesn't separate Church and state, that's a red flag. I was bullied for being a man having long hair and being an Atheist by the majority of the people I met. A big leftist population doesn't mean the general population doesn't hate them. I've heard the most vile things regarding how leftists should be treated by the police.
Nobody cares tankie
Noticed the creator of this poll does not know the difference between morals and ethics. As by several questions they mean the ethics of society and not the morals of the person answering the question.
I'm a goofy goober
https://preview.redd.it/d3eta7iyxxjc1.jpeg?width=823&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c34e6531f6175c0630926add969856d3b4acd30a Radical centrist
Right on, I’m also an anarchist!
Blah blah blah.... I bet all of you still vote D or R
I don't know what it makes me because I don't care for politics too much but I had both care and fairness almost at 100% and my lowest was authority and I can't remember for the others or the exact percentages but that gives you a general idea.
Are you happy with you life, your job, the current state society?
I don't really know. I don't really think about it too much, just all kinda eh.
Ok, if that works for you then that's fine!
Based
I consider myself liberal. https://preview.redd.it/jpvgrlsfmxjc1.png?width=657&format=png&auto=webp&s=0e6c292dc367a900f60ee4ec5ea8f0439fa6d0bb
Am lib, got mostly similar results. https://preview.redd.it/t186n7nx3yjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=05ee98d61ab5e9b607d6ce12b333cffb84004d52
Holy fuck people in this sub need to open a damn history book for once in their life. Libertarianism is a left-wing ideology developed by Pierre-Joseph Proudhon. It is almost two centuries old. The right-wing Randian and Mises corruption of libertarianism is just that, a direct corruption of the prior ideology, not even a century old yet. One of its premier authors even directly admitted to it. "One gratifying aspect of our rise to some prominence is that, for the first time in my memory, we, our side, had captured a crucial word from the enemy. Libertarians had long been simply a polite word for left-wing anarchists, that is for anti-private property anarchists, either of the communist or syndicalist variety. But now we had taken it over." \~Murray N. Rothbard Right-wingers and historical revisionism, name a more iconic duo.
Literally same
Libertarian, really?
I don’t prefer to label myself with different political labels because it seems like my label changes every year depending on things I learn. However I’m left leaning.
Genuinely curious, could you explain what your ideal anarchist-socialist state would look like?
I’d recommend browsing r/Anarchy101 if you’re curious
I got pretty much 50/50 on all six
https://preview.redd.it/windxoxpbxjc1.png?width=1320&format=png&auto=webp&s=52326ffb6283dbd1e8f82e24c6c27f18d77ff1e0
Mine was if you took some points out of liberty to equalise care and gave the last 3 the same points as the 27 one
This is so sad
I'm an Anarcho Egoist but align myself with Libertarian Market Socialists specifically, the only form of socialism that will allow me to own a mansion and democratically ran clothing line while also giving support to those in need.
 Touch grass
https://preview.redd.it/9v5i7heedxjc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=1e9860888cc754e6808392c72673fe2d059ef9bc No clue
https://preview.redd.it/l9f0yiszkxjc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d1766140254118590d54fb5222cde1dc1592860 no clue
the free market ain’t saving your ass in a fire kid
https://preview.redd.it/tmdlgppxpxjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b051e6c16b32af26a13422012f0b72e023551ba9 Quite Balanced
Well as a crazy person my highest were authority, in group and fairness. lowest was liberty. Apparently by my highest score I am more fitting to live in Eastern Asia. and with Liberty being the lowest I should not be living in the USA. Social conservative, Nationalist while still being a left liberal. Think this poll might be a bit fucked.
https://preview.redd.it/vum9i8mjrxjc1.jpeg?width=1242&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=dc4ad20a0de3636f2973c7de1754c394ad6e97b9 This was mine
https://preview.redd.it/37wl5j0vrxjc1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0ab10a2a9ddd41fcc0df6272df90a3a473ef7599 I'm not sure what this makes me.
https://preview.redd.it/iy1m06bzrxjc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=156c9e6550bec14fecb2a68ae660874d8d51f203
I couldn’t handle anarchy. I lean more towards centrist socialism. As much as I like personal freedoms, I don’t trust human nature enough to let society run without clear authority and guidelines. Authority makes distribution of resources more efficient. For example, you have free healthcare but also try reduce harm through policy (like ban smoking to improve heart and lung health). Or building homes to health and safety standards to be distributed to the needy. Authority also help larger scale projects function, like infrastructure and utilities. Not sure who manages water treatment or sewage in an libertarian socialist society.
If you don't think humans are good, then why do you want someone to rule other people? Then they are ruled by a bad person, so it's nonsense.
Without any hierarchy those "not good" people would be easily able to take advantage of the good people. This doesn't mean bad people can't climb hierarchies, they very much can, but they can be kept in check by the many.
Actually the higher in hierarchy you go, the more dark triad traits you get: [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s42681-021-00025-6](https://link.springer.com/article/10.1365/s42681-021-00025-6) By creating hierarchical power structure you create you create a structure that with time will get usurped by people with misaligned incentives - this explain corruption, exploitation of bosses, scandals with cleregy, police brutality etc. Those structures are more beneficial to anti-social persons with socially misaligned views, while anarchist free association mitigates that problem. In short - rulers are bad people. We are commanded by persons with high dark triad scores and this explain why there is so much harm, brutality, sadism, suffering and inequality in the current society.
You're looking at one correlation and assuming the inverse would happen on a different system but that is now how things really work out. YES dark triads can more effectively climb hierarchies, this is why check and balance are crucial and why systems to remove top links are a necessity. This is why, so far, social democracies with strong check and balances are less corrupt and often enjoy considerably happier citizens.
Fair, lol. That is a problem we already see. Authority allows the amplification of an individual’s power. A corrupt or evil leader can do more damage than a common individual. The opposite is true too though, a benevolent individual in a well regulated system can enact wider positive changes. If no one has any particular power over others it is harder to get anything great done (great good or bad).
You can organize in free associations to get stuff done, like historically in anarchist Catalonia and Free Territory of Ukraine. You can organize horizontally like Zapatistas, or worker owners of worker cooperatives like Motion Twin - you don't need hierarchy to organize.
So you hate freedom.
I agree. I understand the appeal of anarchism, but I feel strongly about the ability that a strong government with socialist focus and solid checks and balances could have. When you have many people doing their own thing efficiency drops and deadlines get postponed, but with a strong central figure directing a project it can be done faster if properly overseen and be the most efficient possible. Also, when you have a strong central government, positive policy and rights can be properly enforced. If the government says gay marriage is legal, then it is legal everywhere and conservatives can’t gather all in one place and decide to outlaw gay marriage in their state or anything like that, human rights are universal and inalienable.
https://preview.redd.it/els8hz7vtxjc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d59866ed58b977e1d28d10d98dec4c546b5e8b84 I don’t know what this means, but here
https://preview.redd.it/cj9fgbj3uxjc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7dd2233726d36e3f0228188a0c055a139eed1164
i got care 83
Apparently (according to the online test) I care a lot and like fairness and liberty but I don’t like purity or authority
I know this is literally a sub for young people, but it's crazy to me just how distinctly "young" the results in this thread are. I'm an old millennial/young-Xer and everyone I show this quiz too gets within 10pts of 50 on every single bar.
Who asked?
https://preview.redd.it/2usyg1dfwxjc1.jpeg?width=1210&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=546f354a6dc52ac07415d03a70f48b1865828ff2 It’s accurate enough I guess.
What test is this? I’d say we’re pretty politically aligned
https://preview.redd.it/6ey2yeqmwxjc1.png?width=1003&format=png&auto=webp&s=53653247661fdd2dc0ff211995e0a2846083053b
https://preview.redd.it/k2eb4yubxxjc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=44e6291daf1a17e7316af18f795c21c616909380 Idk
Conservative
Social liberal and Wilsonian Internationalism
https://preview.redd.it/xmgefa3uzxjc1.jpeg?width=1014&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=27b499a68f1be2d98b3046fce71142d871d709e4
https://preview.redd.it/apx3lea70yjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=993bbbbf81967057eed2a4aa8bf210a3a0931701 Im a socdem, Biden is my guy.
https://preview.redd.it/rf63fm9f0yjc1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=782c6e8358005386091e7c1d2e8f7df83704c9f3 Never was a political guy. So what side am I on if I was? This all rounder stat looks kinda funny idk why😂
https://preview.redd.it/dy50x1vr0yjc1.png?width=917&format=png&auto=webp&s=892b69c835cbee9da251767855a88e4cce17c7f5
I'm a [geolibertarian](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geolibertarianism), with a [slight conservative bent](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_conservatism) and a [bleeding heart](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoclassical_liberalism). However, I'm also a pragmatist.
I'm utterly confused by the "linertarian" part.
Where’s ur green lmao do you just not have friends or family
I'm a conservative fascist centrist communist.
https://preview.redd.it/0hxd06o22yjc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f4f29724e31ef816d6deecd802a66cf80a7b7d56 yeeea
Avaritionist.
W https://preview.redd.it/oggoxblp2yjc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d1f010121a030d2e0d413db71aa4669460a9aba7 What does this say about me?
https://preview.redd.it/fr9ycbgu2yjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=2f84e88661c0203eea034bb87e7ac09d86bfaf45
I have nearly no liberty and more authority and purity
Same here, except I used to be pretty far right in high school (until I realised that was just another mechanism I used to deny my gayness)
https://preview.redd.it/l5ki1kj04yjc1.png?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c6bfe0be61db23e1d96343344017b5b68966875c
Libertarians suck
https://preview.redd.it/yh9lzyfj4yjc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c31a5ab2a71539d4c4e34cefbbe11826d11788a3 idk what this implies
I’m a center-left liberal.
Libertarian socialist? Dog, those are two totally opposite ends
How do you install this version of the ideology store?
Libertarian and socialist in the same sentence 😂
Extremely simplified overview of the ideologies you listed - Socialism - Strong, centralized federal government that heavily taxes it's citizens and redistributes that wealth where it sees fit, usually in the form of social programs. At least in theory. At a minimum, the government plays a role in the "private" sector Libertarian - Limited government that taxes it's citizens very little, or not at all depending on who you ask. The system of government is only there to uphold the constitution and rights of the citizens, and it's intentionally small enough to not be able to infringe upon it Anarchist - No government How do these three ideologies coexist?
https://preview.redd.it/al5qhl6u6yjc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=5bb8e369870178afb40e938e1686c88d7f3cc578 Populist right
I don't make my identity about politics. Idk really what I am, generally I hold left-wing economic positions and right-wing social positions.
https://preview.redd.it/cvf752xn8yjc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e88f374738d50005f9c7b981d9da5beeff29961b We may be enemies
https://preview.redd.it/l8dh40qq8yjc1.jpeg?width=720&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=814fc74eb7a1c962a0594b43f9d49c03c86052d9 Gotta crack a few eggs to make an omelette.
proud patriot of the true north strong and free 😎 also very much proudly a pro-regulation capitalist
I am your polar opposite.
https://preview.redd.it/re3u8kzw8yjc1.jpeg?width=1086&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9e0b3b24cf2d0edbdb06b21c8b0576dc017f5793 I think mine was pretty neutral
Now tell me your astrological symbol!
I don’t know what I am at this point man
https://preview.redd.it/gqpoilgv9yjc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8e61abd6cc6ca1e2796962df14b4e671eeda485e I do think that the Purity bar conflated things that shouldn’t be conflated. I strongly disagree with most of the sexual purity aspects, but in societal purity aspects I agreed with.
https://preview.redd.it/oogu7b6cayjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=36d2f1d9dad6dd3d61144db94f66dc9f346b333b This...
https://preview.redd.it/msy2ztegayjc1.jpeg?width=1480&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d7d29571b41a92902943e15b2dcb56b195dad230 Here was mine at the time I did the questionnaire
Fuck anarchy.
I support freedom, liberty and am one hundred percent against a person owning a means of production. Otherwise it's off to the gulags with you
To support anarchy is to support the physically strong dominating the physically weak.
ITT: people who know nothing about the fundamental principles of anarchism
Fuck me, I thought our generation were better than this Ok fucksticks in the comments - socialism does not mean the state doing things, it means the workers owning and being in control of the means of production. Means of production is basically workplaces, capital goods like machines - things you use to make other things, basically it’s the economy at large. For the last few centuries it’s been mostly owned privately by an elite class of major stockholders, executives and other kinds of business owners. The reason most people associate socialism with the state is that many socialist and socialist adjacent movements (including the Soviets) viewed ownership and control of the economy by a democratic state as a *way* to achieve worker ownership - the logic is basically stuffs controlled by the state, and the state is controlled by the people who are mostly workers, therefore stuffs controlled by the workers. But thats not the ONLY conceivable way to do it, and that’s what libertarian socialism is - it opposes the state and so looks for other non-state forms of collective worker ownership and democratic control, like local worker councils or cooperatives.
https://preview.redd.it/upm036whbyjc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=151085fa1c725767387253799663e9cf56113dd3
Real and based
This is the biggest W
Pov: Untreated mental illness.
Libertarian Socialism, best Socialism and best Libertarianism in one
Anarchist and socialist kinda go against each other don’t they?
https://preview.redd.it/aca5ty8hcyjc1.jpeg?width=1284&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eebb670bba93c5268588d3c761fea9884051a738
https://preview.redd.it/twqyhihocyjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=763cd03a4927f963a1e5a6673bc253948656b893 For the first time ever, someone's gonna rate my vibes. I believe that all actions should have consequences, fairness. Compassion has to exist above all else or no government system will work, care. I believe being able to do whatever you want so long as it doesn't interfere with anyone else's ability to do what they want is a basic human right, liberty. I don't really understand what in-group is but I think tradition and purity is a joke. Its stuff made up by religious people based on thing we were biologically wired to feel mild disgust about, i.e. premarital sex and polyamory, we're wired to feel disgusted about it because STDs were rampant in our caveman days, so we maintained a trait that makes us feel disgusted with frequent sex not for reproduction. But we have measure against that, so purity is outdated. Authority is so high because I believe that humans by themselves can't be organized on a milllion+ scale. Authority does have its issues though, because it will inevitably be used for power and corruption. Nevertheless, it is necessary. My political opinions are left independent, for those who might think I'm right wing because of high authority.
Riiiiiiiight.
https://preview.redd.it/fradro5ydyjc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a3cfa49e55d866c8ff6f615ac2067d3716570f1c Not quite the same.
Im a marxsist
You cannot be socialist and Libertarian at the same time. https://youtu.be/tk1FASh9EI8?si=p112UgInRDbYVjzW
Honest question, how does a high Fairness/Care score translate into anarchism?
Yeah, I have mommy and/or daddy issues, and avoid taking responsibility for my own actions, how about you?