Re: The Energumen Political Spectrum!

On 30 Apr 2006 12:02:29 -0700, "Energumen"
<energoumenos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


AlanG wrote:
On 30 Apr 2006 10:17:57 -0700, "Energumen"
<energoumenos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


AlanG wrote:
On 30 Apr 2006 07:42:27 -0700, "Energumen"
<energoumenos@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I find it mostly unreadable

Well I've now reproduced everything but the axis label and the title in
the thread. So care to comment on the substance of it?


QUADRANT 1 (top right):
Pro national autonomy and anti transnational bodies
Crime is the fault of the criminal, not social conditions - "hang em
and flog em"

Crime has many causes from the fault of the criminal to the fault of
the state or even social causes.

I think you're barking up the wrong tree. The point of a political
spectrum is to describe how various opinions correlate together amongst
the population, not to discuss the merits of those opinions.

But you're only inviting opinion from those who believe in a binary
cause


Anti-immigration - ethnic make-up of countries should be left as they
are
Anti-Islamism - tends to believe reform of Islamic countries is
difficult if not impossible
Pro free markets and anti central planning
Favourable view of America
Favourable view of Israel
No antisemitic tendancies

QUADRANT 2 (bottom right):
Pro national autonomy and anti transnational bodies

All those transnational bodies who set international standards so we
can all trade and interact or the bodies who set up international
standards like the ones against torture and human rights? Which type
would the antis be against?

Again you seem to be trying to argue the *merits* of people's opinions.
That's not what a political spectrum is for. Obviously UKIP, BNP,
Fortuyn are / were all nationalistic and eurosceptic - eg. Fortuyn
wanted to abolish the European Parliament and abrogate the Schengen
Treaty etc. You may think such views are wrong - fine. That's not what
we're discussing.

But there are other transnational bodies besides those.
Again you're going for the binary opinion


Crime is the fault of the criminal, not social conditions - "hang em
and flog em"
Anti-immigration - ethnic make-up of countries should be left as they
are
Tendancies towards sympathy for Islamist terrorism - "America had it
coming"

There are many people who believe the attack on USofA was inevitable
who do not condone terrorism.

I am using extreme characterisations of the points of the axes. Most
people should be closer to the origin of the graph. I am not, of
course, saying that everyone who falls anywhere in each quadrant will
wholeheartedly agree with all the statements listed. The issue is
whether these opinions *when measured relative to the average between
the extremes* correlate together with each other in the way that the
model describes ie. do the opinions tend to go together.


Anti free markets and pro central planning
Anti-American
Anti-Israel
Antisemitic tendancies - "Zionists control the White House"

QUADRANT 3 (bottom left):
The nation state will eventually whither away - nationalism causes wars
Crime is caused by social conditions - we must understand that if we
are to deal with it effectively

See other comment on multiple causes of crime
How do you define crime anyway? There are many victimless crimes. Does
someone eating a cannabis cake in their own home harm anyone?

We would be talking about crime in the generality - not such hard
cases.

So you will be talking about rapists and murderers while I'll be
talking about cannabis grannies



Pro immigration - multicultural societies can and must work -
globalisation makes them inevitable
Tendancies towards sympathy for Islamist terrorism - "America had it
coming"
Anti free markets and pro central planning
Anti-American
Anti-Israel
Antisemitic tendancies - "Zionists control the White House"

QUADRANT 4 (top left):
The nation state will eventually whither away - nationalism causes wars
Crime is caused by social conditions - we must understand that if we
are to deal with it effectively
Pro immigration - multicultural societies can and must work -
globalisation makes them inevitable
Anti Islamism - while it may be difficult, Islamic societies will
inevitably reform

Islam has as many facets as christianity. One may be anti some
practitioners of Islam yet support others. Just as I am against the
religious fundies of the Bush/Blair genre but am quite happy to
support some of the local christian churches in their charitable
efforts

I used the word Islamism. Islamism = political Islam, Sharia, Caliphate
etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamism

But we don't know that's what you mean

Some say Islamism cannot be divorced from Islam, others that it can,
this is not the time to discuss that. Suffice to say that Islamism is
not simply a synonym of Islam.


Pro free markets and anti central planning
Favourable view of America
Favourable view of Israel

One can have the opinion that Israel should never have existed and not
be anti semetic

Perhaps, though it might depend on the definition of antisemitic. We
are however talking about correlations, not about what a person can or
cannot be. You could probably pick any combination of the eight points
and say that a person *could* believe that combo - and you'd be right.
That being anti-Israel will *correlate* with being antisemitic is
surely a no-brainer. Note that I *did* separate antisemitism and
anti-Israelism into separate points and didn't lump them together.


No antisemitic tendancies


And of course you have left out the "we hate/love people of a
different skin colour" (pick your own colour)

I don't think that people in quadrant 4 do generally have a problem
with people because of their skin colour, and I don't see why you might
think that. I don't even think that people in quadrant 1 (eg. Fortuyn,
Wilders) for the most part have any problem with people *merely*
because of their skin colour either. I don't see much evidence of it -
Wilders works closely with Hirsi Ali, Fortuyns' deputy was black etc.

It's an interesting question as to whether racism does correlate with
either of the axes though.

You're pushing it with the jewish question. You just didn't take it to
the end

What do you think? I'd be interested in your
opinion.

I think as set up, your questions only permit those who either agree
or disagree. You don't have a maybe or a littlebit for answers. I
suspect only the extremists would bother. I know I wouldn't.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: The Energumen Political Spectrum!
    ... Pro national autonomy and anti transnational bodies ... Crime is the fault of the criminal, not social conditions - "hang em ... not to discuss the merits of those opinions. ... I used the word Islamism. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: The Energumen Political Spectrum!
    ... Pro national autonomy and anti transnational bodies ... Crime is the fault of the criminal, not social conditions - "hang em ... not to discuss the merits of those opinions. ... I used the word Islamism. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)
  • Re: Anti-Gun Hysteria!
    ... You simply state opinions as fact with no ... Pro-gun cites court cases (opinions) as "fact." ... nothing to address crime either nonviolent or violent. ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Numb3rs - Maths Can Solve Crimes
    ... Joe Bloggs wrote: ... I am just wondering what people's opinions of this are? ... what types of crime could it be used to solve? ... articles on them. ...
    (uk.education.maths)
  • Re: fear of crime
    ... Do you feel like the crime ... What do you believe to be the factors of fear ... Please post all your ideas and opinions they will be greatly ... representative of the population than this lot, lol. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)