View Poll Results: What's your placement on the Vosem Chart?

Voters
24. You may not vote on this poll
  • New Labour

    1 4.17%
  • Liberal

    11 45.83%
  • Libertarian

    7 29.17%
  • Anarcho-syndicalist

    2 8.33%
  • Authoritarian

    0 0%
  • Totalitarian

    2 8.33%
  • Conservative

    2 8.33%
  • Paleo-conservative

    2 8.33%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 40 of 56

Thread: What's Your Placement on the Vosem Chart?

  1. #1
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default What's Your Placement on the Vosem Chart?

    Due to a recent discussion with tcaud, I've been studying various political classification systems. The most interesting one I've found so far is the Vossem Chart, similar to the Nolan Chart but with three axes instead of two. So I decided to make a poll!

    Read the following descriptions, and decide which one most applies to you in each category (Cultural, Fiscal, and Corporate). At the end, combine them to find out which category you fit.

    CULTURAL

    CLASS 1: A person belonging to the first camp in the cultural sphere supports cultural freedom. People in this camp believe in the right to have sex in any position or with any gender you want (assuming it's not rape), drug legalization, the right to burn the flag, the right to request one's life ended (suicide or euthanasia) and government non-regulation of things like prostitution, gambling and pornography. They welcome diversity in dress, means of expressive speech, language (including foreign languages being spoken in public), living arrangements, art, and ethnic varieties of food, recreation and religious ritual. Since they hold the view that activities that don't hurt anyone (except possibly the people engaging or requesting the activity themselves) should not be punished by the law, this means they believe such activity should not be punished regardless of who does it, and therefore they are strongly in favor of civil rights. Believe in equality regardless to gender, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, religion, disability, nativity, socioeconomic class . . . Characteristic catchwords: government out of our bedrooms, tolerance, intolerance, consensual, victimless crime, do your own thing, born free, chains of society, fascist police state, gestapo.

    CLASS 2: The second cultural camp is much more puritanical. People in this camp call for repression (both through an individual's self-control and through government enactment and enforcement of laws) of personal urges. A person with these cultural views will call for said repression in the name of "tradition", or of "law and order", or perhaps will summon both. Sex "between consenting adults" is just not good enough if it violates from some social convention, religious dictum or other moral belief. While people in the other cultural camp are militant supporters of the equality of demographic groups, people in this cultural camp will sometimes sacrifice equality in the name of tradition or other causes, such as believing, perhaps, that a man should have authority over his wife. They will be much less likely to condemn racial profiling, and will even often unapologetically support it if they feel it is in the name of national security. Youth are viewed not to have the same capacity or deserve the same rights as adults, and such policies as curfews and a punitive drinking age are strongly backed. They believe parents should be given maximum power to enforce rules on their children, as the concept of authority is very important to them, people in positions of authority never to be disobeyed, questioned or mocked, even when they are in the wrong. Investment in the military is crucial and they shudder at the thought of what any cut in defense, relative to whatever has traditionally been spent for the military of their country, could do to the security of their nation. They have a strong emphasis on patriotism and accepting the nation and its laws as they are; remarks that condemn the country or acts of civil disobedience are never OK and flag-burning is out of the question. Some idealize a national homogeneity based on a modern conception of "mainstream" culture (mainstream-American, or mainstream-Canadian, or mainstream-Australian, or what-have-you) in standards for lifestyle, while others' views on proper lifestyle and rites of passage in life come from ethnic tradition. Social conventions, including restraint of emotions and traditional rules of dating and roles of the sexes, are very important to them. People and practices that are eccentric or new to them are seen as not simply "weird", but as scary, and something to be deeply alarmed by and suspicious about. Characteristic catchwords: tradition, law and order, chaos, protect people from their own stupidity, people who know better, honor and duty, these laws exist for a reason, God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.
    FISCAL

    CLASS 1: People in the first of the two fiscal camps believe in activist government in the fiscal sphere of life. They dream of a government that provides money for social security, welfare, and college tuition, as well as offering free universal health care. Some will even go so far as to make college free and universal, just as grades K-12 are. Prescription drugs would be given to seniors for free, and Medicare and Medicaid would be under the arm of the government. Many also believe in funding for the arts, although some who are also conservatives in the cultural sphere will oppose funding certain art if they find it to be pornographic, or may even support strict legal control over what can be painted or sculpted, so that they will not have to pay any tax money to a state that will monetarily redeem the painting of art they object to. People in the first fiscal camp are in favor of government-funded charities. They do not mind paying and levying higher taxes for all of this. Down inside, they believe in the power of government to take on grand projects. They believe that if people worked together with their government, great things could happen and we could build a better tomorrow. Characteristic catchwords: compassionate, free and universal, support, invest in our country's future, cold-hearted, stingy, wants to rob our children.

    CLASS 2: The other fiscal camp consists of people who oppose more government in such spending. They oppose social programs, and are readily willing to cut them or other government projects in the name of lower taxes. They push for the privatization of social security, and believe that medical plans would be best served by being privatized and left to businesses (rather than provided by the government) as well. Those in Europe work hard to have the high tax rates lowered considerably, and are often "drained" out of the country in search of lower taxes; and if those in North America, already calling for a lower tax rate in their own country, moved to Europe, they would find the tax rates absolutely scandalous and so insane as to warrant a certification of mental illness on the part of government. Generally, the more cut from taxes, the better. They are more likely to support a flat tax than people in the opposite school of thought on fiscal issues. Reasons for their views on monetarily activist government are varied and some are just primarily concerned with the rich, but generally all people in the second camp believe in responsibility. They believe that to be respected as a mature adult, a person should be able to handle his own financial affairs and not lean on support for governmental teats. For many it is an opposition to government interference in anything, anywhere, as a matter of principle. Some conservatives in the U.S., a nation founded through immigration, exploration, grueling migrations through wilderness, and rough harnessing and taming of the landscape, believe strongly that doing your own work and keeping your own rewards are important traditionally American values. People from some religious denominations find those values to be an important part of Christian conduct. Others refuse to give anything to or take anything from a government they find oppressive. Characteristic catchwords: personal responsibility, big government, tax-and-spend, welfare state, privatization, welfare cheats, rugged individualism, hard-working Americans, save you millions of dollars.
    CORPORATE

    CLASS 1: People who are in the first camp on this final dichotomy are, all around, pro-corporate. The way they see it, corporations should be treated and protected with the same rights as individuals. They want businesses to have the power to hire and discriminate against whom they want -- if an employer doesn't want an immigrant or a member of an ethnic minority working for him, he shouldn't be required by hire any people in that group, even if they are indisputably qualified. They also want everyone's business to be protected by private property rights -- the owner paid to keep the space and he can insist in anyone he wants leaving the business, including using the police to enforce this wish. Anyone walking on a business' premises against the wishes of the owner is viewed as trespassing. They oppose the right of people to strike or otherwise rebel against a business, and will favor laws that allow a corporate head to have his employees arrested for striking. They can be very strongly anti-union and view management as knowing best. Corporate monopolies are just seen as part of the game. As they see it, pure freedom of the market will take care of any injustices or inequities, and will promise diversity and creativity. If something done by a business is unethical and/or harmful, people will make the right choice by choosing another business, thereby regulating themselves. They trust the patron public will know and decide what is right. Some even support reversing government restrictions on dishonestly mislabeling or misrepresenting your advertised product. They are not quite as concerned with or offended by Enron/WorldCom type corporate dishonesty as their opponents. Strongly pro-copyright, they favor punishing Napster and want to hunt down other music site offenders on the Internet. Characteristic catchwords: it's their business, free enterprise, the magic of the market, property rights, intellectual property violator.

    CLASS 2: Someone in the second camp opposes corporate power and rule of the business over the individual. They believe that a corporation is not a person and cannot be a person, and therefore does not deserve the same rights as a person. Businesses are viewed as a form of authority, akin to government authority, that can be oppressive. The major heads behind huge corporations, furthermore, are viewed as greedy rich folks who will do anything to make even more and keep the oil flowing to them. Many of these people are anti-WTO, anti-IMF, etc. If you see someone engaged in a protest against "corporate goons", taking it to the streets like the Seattle protestors of 1999, they no doubt belong to this camp. They consider discriminatory or otherwise unethical behavior by a business owner or manager completely inexcusable. They consider it unacceptable to have to watch anyone -- even one person -- be legally hurt by a business' practices in order to get people to finally bring the business down with their own boycott. They do not trust the common people alone to be able to drive every and any immoral business into the ground with their purchasing choices. They fail to see any flourishing of diversity or creativity of products due to the market; rather, they view increasingly richer cannibal companies as having homogenized the market and given us too few different companies and too few products. The overwhelming power of a few names over radio stations has likewise ruined the diversity of music. Some even turn to Internet file-sharing. They are opposed to the concept of "intellectual property". Characteristic catchwords: corporate greed, people before profits, Naderism, sell-out, monolithic corporate culture, pigs, Micro$oft.
    Results:
    Culture Group 1, Fiscal Group 1, Corporate Group 1: New Labour
    Culture Group 1, Fiscal Group 1, Corporate Group 2: Liberal
    Culture Group 1, Fiscal Group 2, Corporate Group 1: Libertarian
    Culture Group 1, Fiscal Group 2, Corporate Group 2: Anarcho-syndicalist
    Culture Group 2, Fiscal Group 1, Corporate Group 1: Authoritarian
    Culture Group 2, Fiscal Group 1, Corporate Group 2: Totalitarianism
    Culture Group 2, Fiscal Group 2, Corporate Group 1: Conservative
    Culture Group 2, Fiscal Group 2, Corporate Group 2: Paleo-conservative

    If you're on the line between two of them, vote both.

    The full article I'm quoting from, including descriptions of the different results, is here: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/6/14/45425/6208
    Quaero Veritas.

  2. #2
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm on the line between Conservative and Libertarian, so I voted for both. If only actual elections worked that way!
    Quaero Veritas.

  3. #3
    CILi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    635
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Cultural: Class 1.5
    Fiscal: Class 2
    Corporate: Class 1

    You beat me to it, Krig.

    If I had to pick ONE cultural class, I'd go 1 and end up Libertarian, I think. Though I'd personally choose to live like the uptight prudes in "Class 2", I'd want for others the choice of "Class 1" to act however they please.

    Why'd you straddle that line, though, KtV?
    Last edited by CILi; 01-11-2011 at 12:47 AM. Reason: I'm Bad With Numbers

  4. #4
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CILi View Post
    Cultural: Class 1.5
    Fiscal: Class 2
    Corporate: Class 2

    You beat me to it, Krig.

    If I had to pick ONE cultural class, I'd go 1 and end up Libertarian, I think. Though I'd personally choose to live like the uptight prudes in "Class 2", I'd want for others the choice of "Class 1" to act however they please.

    Why'd you straddle that line, though, KtV?
    Pretty much my line of reasoning as well. I'm an uptight prude who doesn't like telling other people what to do. Or at least who doesn't like the government telling other people what to do.

    I couldn't bring myself to vote "pure" Libertarian, since the way the description was worded sounded like actually advocating the things I am personally opposed to, instead of just tolerating them.
    Quaero Veritas.

  5. #5
    Executor MatthewZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    TIM
    Ne-LII
    Posts
    800
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Cultural: 1
    Fiscal: 2 (with a major point about how 'ethical' taxation is)
    Corporate: 1.2 (I'm strongly anti-copyright, otherwise a 1)

  6. #6
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Cultural - 1
    Fiscal - 1
    Corporate - 2

    Liberal

    I don't feel it captures the exact spirit of my political believe though, I just matched it to the criteria as best as I could.

    Culturally, my values are probably more conservative, but I believe the government shouldn't impose culture values, I think its better to err on the side of cultural freedom.

    Fiscally, I support public projects and taxation, but I'm against beurocracy... so in a sense I support public projects as an ends but not given the current means the government has.

    Corporate-wise, my values aren't purely anti-corporation, its more that I dislike the prospect of corporate fascism. In general I support new fresh ideas for corporations, a new fresh wave of enterpenuers, and small business.... versus the old established corporate power structure.

    Overall I'm more for a pragmatic style of leadership and for innovation/growth/evolution of society.

  7. #7
    tereg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    TIM
    EII/INFj
    Posts
    4,684
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm on the line between Liberal and Anarcho-syndicalist

    Cultural - 1
    Fiscal - 1.5
    Corporate - 2

    Edit: Actually, corporate is more like 1.75 or something.
    Last edited by tereg; 01-11-2011 at 01:38 AM.
    INFj

    9w1 sp/sx

  8. #8
    Creepy-bg

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    Overall I'm more for a pragmatic style of leadership and for innovation/growth/evolution of society.
    ^ that. all the options seemed to have their strengths, faults, and dangers.

  9. #9

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Brescia (italy)
    TIM
    LII
    Posts
    23
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This test is mainly for american. However:

    Cultural: Class 1
    Fiscal: Class 2 - but freedom from disease is a fundamental right, state must work for promote that kind of freedom.
    Corporate: Class 1 but i'm not for heavy copyright, like software patents.

  10. #10
    aka Slacker Slacker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    North Korea
    TIM
    IEE
    Posts
    8,819
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Class 1, Class 1, Class 2 - Liberal

  11. #11
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Anarcho-Syndacalist? Wtf? I'm kinda undecided about the last dichotomy. So I guess I'm either Libertarian or Anarcho-Syndacalist. However, liberatarians sounds kind of boring...

    Generally, I'm considered "communist" by right-wing people, "fascist-capitalist" by left-wing people.
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  12. #12
    Trevor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,860
    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Since I'm all about ethical solutions:

    ..they're all same. None of it is inherently more ethical. It is the context that decides which one of those should be picked.

    Yay..context awareness is also of great importance to me.

  13. #13
    ._. Aiss's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    TIM
    IEI
    Posts
    2,015
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What these descriptions lack is moderation, and there's no other way to make up for it in the answers except to choose all and blur any preference. I'd be a liberal going by the spirit of them.

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    Generally, I'm considered "communist" by right-wing people, "fascist-capitalist" by left-wing people.
    That's a common issue when getting in any sort of political debate, especially with fanatics, unless you have radical views yourself. *sigh*

  14. #14
    Crispy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,097
    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Scored Anarcho-Syndacalist. I'm surprised he classified Libertarians as pro-intellectual property laws. Besides that I could be in between.
    ILI (FINAL ANSWER)

  15. #15
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Liberal as well.

  16. #16
    Marie84's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Toronto, Canada
    TIM
    EII
    Posts
    2,359
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1, 1, 2= Liberal

    I don't necessarily like everything about Cultural 1 but think people have the right to make those choices nonetheless.
    Fiscal 1 I feel strongly about
    Corporate 2 is something I lean towards but don't feel as strongly about
    EII INFj
    Forum status: retired

  17. #17
    star stuff April's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    chatbox
    TIM
    NG human sorcerer
    Posts
    917
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    For those who aren't Cultural Class 1, or aren't strongly so, can I ask why? I'm not interested in a debate, but I just don't understand that mindset or reasoning.

  18. #18
    Glorious Member mu4's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Mind
    Posts
    7,966
    Mentioned
    568 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)

    Default

    1
    1.5
    1.5

    I actually have no problem with people, business or government, but they all need to be checked in power.

    As far as big developmental projects, there is a great deal of money that have to be spent in the beginning that will have little or no immediate benefit. Only something like a government is willing to make this kind of investment without resorting to business practices like vendor lock-in, standards manipulation and patent trolling. Occasionally business will do this sort of advancement but rarely. Also things like roads need to be non-privatized, think of how messed up society would be if roads were privatized.

    Ultimately, I would like to see government as a regulatory and standardization role which offers a baseline service to all it's citizens in healthcare, education and other services. As far as I'm concerned, in a developed society, health-care, education and many other social services are necessary to maintain the quality of life for all it's citizens. Degrading quality of life only leads to eventual destabilization. As far as people's ability to get rich is concerned, once you're rich enough I could care less if you get any richer. The rich choosing to take their money elsewhere can leave and take their businesses with them, because ultimately if they leave a market for another market, someone within that market will fill their void. Ultimately, nobody really leaves a market until it's been milked dry.

  19. #19
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'm a fan of Singapore's model. It's called 'soft authoritarian'

    It has had the fastest growing welfare in history of any country. They must be doing something good!

  20. #20
    CILi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    635
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno
    [Singapore] has had the fastest growing welfare in history of any country. They must be doing something good!
    Didn't they do eunice too?

    Quote Originally Posted by April
    For those who aren't Cultural Class 1, or aren't strongly so, can I ask why? I'm not interested in a debate, but I just don't understand that mindset or reasoning.
    Poll and posts combined, I'm not sure anyone's yet picked 2, but having come semi-sorta-close myself...

    If someone's absolutist on a moral issue (or 50), be it for good or bad, the security of "Class 2" is pretty reassuring.

    Example: It doesn't matter a bit to me who a person wants to marry, whether or not they toke up, what they do with the flag, or how they enjoy themselves and have fun. Go ape; I'm all for it. But on a single issue (abortion), I'd be pretty hard-pressed to budge. To have a say on just that one matter, I'd gladly give up most of my own freedoms/rights/what-not.

    From the way "Class 2" got described, it pretty much sounds like me on one issue times a couple dozen other issues. I really hope I'm not "that guy", and I hope "that guy" doesn't exist -- but this is America. They likely do.

  21. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well Krig given that you have an eye for extreme ideas, it's not totally surprising that you would choose the Vosem Chart. I dismiss it for a similar reason: I detest delusion and abhor the extreme.

    The Vosem Chart well depicts politics in the British Commonwealth states. However beneath the veneer of liberal and conservative, there exist in full the Mitchell divisions.

    Some commentary:
    - Labour is historically an anti-conservative paleolibertarian movement. It represents at all times an alliance between Mitchell's Radicals, Individualists, and Communitarians. Its historical enemy is the crown and the nobility: as recently as the 1990s, Tony Blair made weakening the House of Lords a part of his election platform. Aristocracy ("rule by the best") is the natural governing style of paleoconservatives (who are better called, by the way, institutionalists), and the struggle between them and individualists at least hearkens back to Beethoven. The progressives are somewhat estranged from this alliance, as are left-libertarians. They have teamed together to form the Liberal Democrats.
    - In Canada and Australia, there is no nobility, hence a left-right dichotomy emerges representing the rich vs the poor (in the aggregate). Politicians determine whether they are positivists (right) or negativist (left) at a young age, and team with people who decide similarly. The three-branch system of government also reinforces the left-right tradition. (in Europe, legislature control of executive positions necessitates the building of coalitions just to govern, thus there is no leverage on the part of the executive to say "you are with me or against me." The tradition of "loyal opposition" to a directly-elected executive keeps the two-party system healthy. As such the other parties are limited to people who are "at war within", people who basically have emotional issues towards and apparently limited capacity to take in information. "Psychotics "and "consequentialists" are the operant terms, particularly when a majority of a given information subsector reaches for compromise with its opposite and the purists find themselves left behind. Ron Paul is a case in point: a positivist who insists on turning back the social clock all the way to the late 18th century, while ignoring the irreversible changes wrought by technology. It's an absurd philosophy and as such he and other libertarians remain on the political sidelines, a media darling with no real influence. As for the anarcho-syndicalists, Ashton is one.

    By the way, I'm not addressing this just to Krig. I want to make that clear. You should read my article on the political types, which descend directly from fixations on specific subelements. So to say, Mitchell's types exist because of fixations on developing certain aspects of the functions themselves, particularly at the expense of developing other such aspects. I described that in depth in the "Political type theory and Immanence thread": the priority system for the subfunctions effect the Jungian archetypes themselves.

    Oh and, get a second opinion on Mitchell's work. Krig is NOT a reliable source because his sources are unreliable -- he doesn't give enough attention to their credibility; for that matter, he tends to give character flaws a pass in people if he and them are aligned in terms of personal values. Poor attention to character = poor grasp of credibility of sources.

    Krig, I'm sorry I have to attack you like this, but you are using thought-terminating language and I must, I must impress that what you have offered vis-a-vis Mitchell is a misinterpretation and, alas, misinformation.

    Maybe I should have just said "What Krig says is not the whole story". Maybe I'll just say that next time. ...Either way it seems to paint you with unflattering colors, but what can I do? You seem to specialize in setting up atmospheres of suspicion. You should really talk to your dual more, I think. And I should say, a dual who will challenge you, not a sycophant who casually laps up your Ti.

  22. #22
    Hot Message FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Freiburg im Breisgau
    TIM
    ENTj
    Posts
    15,632
    Mentioned
    157 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    I'm a fan of Singapore's model. It's called 'soft authoritarian'

    It has had the fastest growing welfare in history of any country. They must be doing something good!
    It's a dictatorship..:/
    Obsequium amicos, veritas odium parit

  23. #23
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FDG View Post
    It's a dictatorship..:/
    nah, it's called 'soft authoritarian' in my sociology book.

    Dictatorship would be totalitarian.

  24. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    nah, it's called 'soft authoritarian' in my sociology book.

    Dictatorship would be totalitarian.
    I'd like to hear the arguments for "soft authoritarianism" as distinct from dictatorship.

  25. #25
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  26. #26
    ILE - ENTp 1981slater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Spain
    TIM
    ILE (ENTp)
    Posts
    4,866
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I'd like to hear the arguments for "soft authoritarianism" as distinct from dictatorship.
    Soft authoritarianism= gamma girlfriend

    Dictatorship = gamma wife
    ILE "Searcher"
    Socionics: ENTp
    DCNH: Dominant --> perhaps Normalizing
    Enneagram: 7w6 "Enthusiast"
    MBTI: ENTJ "Field Marshall" or ENTP "Inventor"
    Astrological sign: Aquarius

    To learn, read. To know, write. To master, teach.

  27. #27
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    I'd like to hear the arguments for "soft authoritarianism" as distinct from dictatorship.
    they are definitions. I can look them up for you, but you can probably find enough from it on the internet.

    In my book their are 4 catagories, I've not read very well into it, but this is the result.

    democracy
    monarchy
    authoritarian
    totalitarian

    singapore has a 'fifth' catagory, called soft authoritarian. It's like a non votable party, that has the power, but instead of abusing it like in normal authoriatian or totalitarian, it uses all it capacities for the people's benefits. The society is strict government ruled like communism, but it's economy is based on capitalism. So the best from both styles is combined.

  28. #28
    force my hand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    2,334
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the first two categories are relatively sound, but the third is Ameri-centric, and for that reason, detrimentally cynical. I disagree with the way it's set up. A different dichotomy would probably place me as New Labour.
    SLI/ISTp -- Te subtype

  29. #29
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    tcaud: You always seem to assume that my posts are some sort of deliberate attempt to sway public opinion. That mindset is bizarre to me. I am interested in exploring ideas, and sometimes enlist the aid of others to do so. In this case, I wanted to see where other people fall on the Vosem Chart, to see how it plays out in real life, and whether it holds up as a useful political categorization scheme.

    I've reserved judgement on Mitchell's theory until I read his book.

    Also, what the devil is "thought-terminating language"?
    Quaero Veritas.

  30. #30
    Creepy-Korpsey

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Also, what the devil is "thought-terminating language"?
    It's use of catchphrases or terms dismissively stereotyping individuals or groups, deeming them beneath consideration for embodying undesirable social, ethnic, economic, psychological, political, or other traits. Examples relevant to this thread would be "moonbat" or "wingnut" (they also exist in self-flattering forms such as "conservative" or "progressive"). Their deployment generally signals that the user's opinions on a given matter are prejudicially fixed and unalterable.

  31. #31
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rps3y View Post
    It's use of catchphrases or terms dismissively stereotyping individuals or groups, deeming them beneath consideration for embodying undesirable social, ethnic, economic, psychological, political, or other traits. Examples relevant to this thread would be "moonbat" or "wingnut" (they also exist in self-flattering forms such as "conservative" or "progressive"). Their deployment generally signals that the user's opinions on a given matter are prejudicially fixed and unalterable.
    damn, do you also study dictionaries?

  32. #32
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    I'm a fan of Singapore's model. It's called 'soft authoritarian'

    It has had the fastest growing welfare in history of any country. They must be doing something good!
    Interesting the question though is if at a certain point such a governing model begins to breakdown, the benefits become fully saturated and the positive effects begin to stagnate.

    It always seems like authoritarian styles of governing work best in times of urgency and lend to fast rapid growth up to a certain point, but during established peace time in progressive societies it begins to damage the population.

  33. #33
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    Interesting the question though is if at a certain point such a governing model begins to breakdown, the benefits become fully saturated and the positive effects begin to stagnate.

    It always seems like authoritarian styles of governing work best in times of urgency and lend to fast rapid growth up to a certain point, but during established peace time in progressive societies it begins to damage the population.
    yes this is probably the case in normal authoritarian government, but not in singapore which is an exception.

  34. #34
    Creepy-male

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    yes this is probably the case in normal authoritarian government, but not in singapore which is an exception.
    lol and how is it different from a normal authoritarian government, simply throwing an adjective in front of a term isn't exactly enlightening to what you mean.

  35. #35
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by k0rps3y View Post
    It's use of catchphrases or terms dismissively stereotyping individuals or groups, deeming them beneath consideration for embodying undesirable social, ethnic, economic, psychological, political, or other traits. Examples relevant to this thread would be "moonbat" or "wingnut" (they also exist in self-flattering forms such as "conservative" or "progressive"). Their deployment generally signals that the user's opinions on a given matter are prejudicially fixed and unalterable.
    Right, but what I meant was the way he seems (to me) to argue that people should look no further than the link he posted to understand Mitchell. Thus, he implicitly suggests that people should not expend their mental energy on learning the matter further, and that, moreover, he is a trustworthy source on the matter.

  36. #36
    Contrarian Traditionalist Krig the Viking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Canada's Prairie Farmland
    TIM
    C-LII
    Posts
    2,647
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tcaudilllg View Post
    Right, but what I meant was the way he seems (to me) to argue that people should look no further than the link he posted to understand Mitchell. Thus, he implicitly suggests that people should not expend their mental energy on learning the matter further, and that, moreover, he is a trustworthy source on the matter.
    Um, yeah, seriously, you're reading way too much into things. When I post links, I'm implicitly assuming just the opposite: that if people are interested in finding out more, they'll do their own research on the subject.

    As I've said repeatedly now, my interest in what other people believe, while not non-existent, is extremely limited. I certainly don't spend as much time thinking about it as you seem to.
    Quaero Veritas.

  37. #37
    Hello...? somavision's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,474
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I came out as a liberal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jarno View Post
    I'm a fan of Singapore's model. It's called 'soft authoritarian'

    It has had the fastest growing welfare in history of any country. They must be doing something good!
    Singapore does seems quite interesting to me - however I get the impression that it is only as seemingly as succesful as it is as Singapore is more of a City state rather than a traditional nation. As such many of the problems political divisions e.g. differences and inequalites between rural and urban populations are effectively masked. The limitations on personal freedoms and the emphasis on consumerism that I found that depsite the ethnic diversity that culturally it was the most stagnant city I've ever visited.

    I think their system seems fine for Singapore, I would not like it imposed more widely.
    Last edited by somavision; 01-13-2011 at 11:30 AM.
    IEE-Ne

  38. #38
    Haikus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    8,337
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by April View Post
    For those who aren't Cultural Class 1, or aren't strongly so, can I ask why? I'm not interested in a debate, but I just don't understand that mindset or reasoning.
    Because most people are ignorant conformists and cause more trouble in society than they do serve it. It's a historical fact, and I'm not one to disassociate. I'm not sure if many people are aware that politics are mostly corrupt, unjust and inefficient in practice, validated by more historical sets of facts. Paleoconservatism is the most personalized and politic-diminishing form of government on this list, and has lead to many less civil and technological difficulties down the road. Democracy is usually a poor attempt at being objective and there are no confident signs of it maintaining prosperity.

  39. #39
    Jarno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Netherlands
    TIM
    ILI-Te
    Posts
    5,375
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HaveLucidDreamz View Post
    lol and how is it different from a normal authoritarian government, simply throwing an adjective in front of a term isn't exactly enlightening to what you mean.
    It's not my opinion, it's general knowledge. I can write a passage out of my sociology book here, but I think you can also find enough info on the internet.

  40. #40
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    TIM
    TiNe
    Posts
    7,967
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krig the Viking View Post
    Um, yeah, seriously, you're reading way too much into things. When I post links, I'm implicitly assuming just the opposite: that if people are interested in finding out more, they'll do their own research on the subject.

    As I've said repeatedly now, my interest in what other people believe, while not non-existent, is extremely limited. I certainly don't spend as much time thinking about it as you seem to.
    Well maybe we can be friends then.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •