Wednesday, March 14, 2012

I'm a Hard-Line, Right-Wing Zionist from Hell!


Ever since I started criticizing (excoriating?) the progressive-left on matters related to Israel and the Jewish people, I have been told by any number of people that I am a "conservative." A couple of people have even claimed that I am a Republican, which to my mind is much like accusing Barack Obama of being a Muslim.

It's just absurd.

Therefore I decided to go back and take that political compass test that people were so fond of not long ago. You know what I am talking about. People would take that little test and it would place you on a quadrant between "Social Authoritarian v. Social Libertarian" and "Economic Left v. Economic Right." I've taken this test three times, now, and each time I end up right in the same place, somewhere between Gandhi and the Dalai Lama.

I must be a fucking saint, I tell you guys!

I thought surely that by now the dial would have significantly moved, but it hasn't.

No matter what I do, no matter what I say, and no matter how many times people accuse me of political orientations that I do not hold, that stooopid friggin' political compass test tells me that I am, in truth, a fucking hippie.

I do not know how accurate or meaningful this test is, but we almost all of us took it at one point or another and a lot of people would post their score on their sig line.

Mine, as of this moment, is -3.75 / -5.23, which absolutely makes me some sort of screaming, left-wing, OCCUPY EVERYTHING, asshole.

I think that I'm just going to run off and join the Taliban!

{I gotta say, I am laughing my ass off.}


  1. I just looked at the beginning part of the test.

    It has questions which seem to have built-in false presumptions.

    For example:

    "Military action that defies international law is sometimes justified."

    A) What "international law"? U.N. (OIC) International law? Just and moral "international law"? What just and moral "international law"?
    B) What if one holds the view that military action is always wrong, and also holds the view that international law can be immoral and unjust, and that what is being implicitly referred to in the test as being "international law" is immoral and unjust?


    "No one chooses his or her country of birth, so it's foolish to be proud of it."

    A) What does "proud" mean?
    B) One could be "proud" of one's country of birth for reasons other than the fact that one was born in it.
    (Although this question does seem to take these aspects of the question into consideration in a particular way as part of how the question grades the answer to the question)


    This test seems to have been made by persons, or a person, who think of themselves as being what they think of as being "Libertarian" and "Left- Wing".

    By the way, if I had "taken" this test some years ago - I think maybe any time before, maybe, ten years ago - when I was much more ignorant about the world, and about many other things, than I am now, I think that I probably would have graded myself (that is: been scored) as being at the far end of the "Libertarian" range and at the far end of the "Left" range. It would definitely not have made me a saint.

    1. In other words:

      This test is meaningless.

    2. You mean that I am not a saint??


    3. But, I'm not saying that I am a saint. :-)

      I'm not a saint.

      But I strive to be mindful, and I strive to be discerning, and I strive to not do any evil, and I strive to do what's skillful (what's beneficial), and I strive to cleanse my own mind.

    4. :-)

      Mike, I posted my last previous comment before I saw your comment.

      In reply to your comment:

      Well, I was trying to be "non-directional", and I meant it in a "non-directional" way. I meant it in a general way. :-)

  2. My score came out as

    Economic Left/Right: -6.62
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.77

    A real lefty loony, I guess. (Or is it loony lefty?)

    But the test itself was quite bad because it typically excluded the "don't know / don't care / unsure/ it all depends " choic which often would've been my best response.

  3. I took it years ago. I ended up somewhere to the left and south of Gandhi.

    Is the lower left quadrant the saint quadrant? Does that mean that the upper right would be evil? If so (which I don't think is true), should we alter the way we think to be more in line with the saintly beliefs?

    Just thinking and typing out loud. It's mildly interesting.

    1. Well, in truth, I would say that pretty much any quadrant that I reside in is The Saint's Quadrant.

      It is for this reason that when people read what I write they should immediately, and automatically, recognize my words as God's Own Truth.

      The sad thing, really, is in the failure of so many people to embrace my every syllable.

      People sometimes disagree with me, I have noticed, and this is a big, big mistake.

  4. Off-topic, but exceedingly important:

    A video of part of a conference on one of the main methodological strategic tactics of the Islamic Jihad, and the most detrimental methodological strategic tactic of the Islamic Jihad -- the subversion of the governmental legal institutions of liberal democratic countries by the Islamic Jihad -- and on, as the most important part of that, the collusion with that effort by the Islamic Jihad by members of the governmental legal institutions of liberal democratic countries; And on what needs to be done to protect liberal democratic civilization against the Islamic Jihad.


    Brooke Goldstein
    Andrew McCarthy (17m:20s to 27m:27s)
    Sam Nunberg

    Mightier Pen 2012: The Growing Censorship of Free Speech

    Also, about this, a set of very important videos of another very important conference:


    Brooke Goldstein
    Alan Dershowitz
    Frank Gaffney
    James Taranto
    Andy McCarthy
    John J. Walsh
    Hassan Dai
    Joe Kaufman
    Marc Lebuis
    David Rivkin
    Alan Mendoza
    Douglas Murray
    David Harris
    Elizabeth Samson
    Barak Seener

    (Includes a presentation of an award to Timothy Kepshandy of Sidley Austin LLP who has defended victims of Jihad Lawfare suits Pro bono, including some of the speakers at this conference)

    (Includes a panel discussion, and Q&A period, at the end of the conference)

    Middle East Forum's Libel Lawfare Conference

    Libel Lawfare: Silencing Criticism of Radical Islam

    Part 1:
    Part 2:
    Part 3:
    Part 4:
    Part 5:

    Douglas Murray: Freedom & Blasphemy in Europe (This is an interview that took place at the conference):

  5. U.S. State Department Actively Promoting Islam in Europe, by Soeren Kern