this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
996 points (93.9% liked)
Memes
45704 readers
1314 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Maybe we become more extreme in our existing beliefs. My political compass position drifted right from bottom left as I hit my thirties. After the Iraq invasion of 2003 and recessions following 2008 it swung back towards Ghandi. I became convinced that conservative politics isn't working in my late forties and that has only been reinforced as I try to access the creaking UK healthcare system.
To be fair, the political compass is astrology that makes no actual point.
It's definitely a terrible system, and there are better ones out there like 10Groups. But astrology is completely meaningless. The PCT at least tells you a vague (terrible, yes), but somewhat meaningful direction in which you believe.
For example, I know that since I'm libertarian left on the PCT, that I'm going to disagree with 90% of the things somebody who's authoritarian right on the PCT believes.
Astrology doesn't have that ability to reliably compare, since it is literally and completely meaningless.
But again, shit like 10Groups is better and everybody should switch to measures that have more than 2 axis.
It's completely meaningless, actual positions and ideologies are the only way to actually measure.
I just gave an example of how it is meaningful.
It really doesn't, though. Two people with wildly different views can occupy the same space, what matters is literal positions and stances.
Not completely. If two people occupy a similar space, it means they agreed on something. That is meaningful. It's vague, sure. But it isn't completely random nonsense like astrology.
It doesn't. Someone with a "left" view and a "right" view can cancel each other out, occupying the same space as someone with a "neutral" view. It's worthless.
Plus, someone can say they are for something, but actually not support it in reality.
Only if the person with a left view also has a right view. And only if the other person with the right view has a left view.
You seem confused. The point of it isn't to give a fully accurate explanation of a person's views on every topic. It's to give somebody a general idea.
All political measurements fall victim to that. It's a moot point. But just because some people are like that doesn't mean everyone is.
It doesn't, though, plus the test itself is highly flawed and biased.
Sure it does. I already explained how.
You failed to. It gives an inaccurate view that misleads the user. What matters is what a person actually supports.