Karmagun, many of the propositions are so extreme that few people will stray from one answer. If no fascists, ultra-Marxists, law-of-the-jungle capitalists or total anarchists turn up, we can just go onto the next one more quickly.
This thread inspired me to take the test and find out where I’m located on the compass -5.38, -0.15. In other words, I’m moderately far left economically, but about as smack dab in the middle as one could expect to be on the social scale. This amuses me, though I’m not sure why.
With respect to the sentiment: My country, right or wrong. I think I ticked agree. Not strongly agree–It is possible for my country to go down the wrong track, and I have to sympathize with the sentiment that G.W. Bush as President is inclined to promote the going down of the wrong track. (Note: As a data point, I was not particularly horrified when he was elected. Not happy, exactly, but not horrified. Since September the 11th, I have wished many times that we could turn back the clock and see what would have happened as a result if Gore had been president). On the other hand, I am, mostly, proud to be an American and annoyed when people suggest that they are ashamed. Although, there are many things that this country could do better.
Hmm, I wonder if my compass score would have been different if the answers were “always, sometimes, never” rather than agree or disagree?
I’d always support my country, whether it was right or wrong.
I read this as, “My estimation of my country’s correctness does not affect my support.”
erl answers: strongly disagree
Strongly agree: “My personal opinions on policy matters are not a part of how I view what a government should do.” In fact I feel government policy should to some degree reflect my own opinions.
Agree: “Though we may disagree on policy matters, and though it is important for me that a government should agree with me, I will still support my country’s actions anyway.” My support is based on whether my government agrees with me, so this cannot be the case.
Disagree: “Generally, I will tend to not support my country if my country disagrees with my own opinions on policy matters, though there may be exceptions.” My support is based wholly on whether the government and I agree.
Leaving, Strongly Disagree: “As a matter of course, my support is entirely conditioned upon whether my government agrees with me.” Which is my opinion.
[QUOTE=erislover]
Strongly agree: “My personal opinions on policy matters are not a part of how I view what a government should do.”
[QUOTE]
And that defines surrender to authority.
I did this test a long time ago, I scored in the SW quadrant right next to Ghandi, interestingly enough. I’m fine with that.
I’ll start out by stating that I love my country, America. I hold the freedoms and rights that it represents dear to me.
Having said that, I must point out that my love for America does not translate into a love of the Federal government. Should the Federal government begin overturning those rights and freedoms, even in a completely illegal manner, they will have destroyed America in its essence. I take a strongly Jeffersonian viewpoint in this - I am certainly not of the opinion that rebellion is anti-patriotic, and I could see myself taking part in such an action should the government dissolve said freedoms to an nth degree.
Having said THAT, I feel it is my patriotic duty to protest and try to have a rebellion of votes before anything disintegrates too far, and that the concept of “with us or against us” goes against everything America stands for.
So I strongly disagree, my country can do plenty wrong.
This view is unpopular but not non-existent. Historically there have been those who argued that the individual only finds meaning by making herself part of the state. The state is the source of correctness, meaning, prosperity, etc. These people would certainly strongly agree.
On the other hand, you might have those who support a government even though they disagree because one supports the place one lives. I might, for example, feel that if the government banned gay marriage (through a vote, through a mandate, etc whatever the government does to institute a law) I should support that ban even if, in fact, I do not support the ban because the government’s mechanisms were followed and should be respected. These people should agree. These people would likely not find any call for civil disobedience and would only respect methods inherent in the government for social change.
I’ve spent some time thinking about this issue(while doing other things) because it bothered me a little that so many people seemed unable to imagine how someone could agree with the My country, right or wrong. Despite this, I do agree with this proposition. The core of the answer is that we are framing the question differently. When I say that I support my country, I do not mean that I support the president or the present administration. I mean that I support the people of my country and the ideals of my country(as set out say in the Constitution or the Declaration of Independence, not as gleaned by watching prime time television). I say that I agree and not I strongly agree because I can imagine a country whose ideals were not something I could agree with(I’d like to believe that if I had been in Germany during WWII I would not have supported Hitler or his policies)
I selected Strongly Disagree, but not because of my political ideology. I’m politically neutral on this. A man should be free to treasure his country above all else so long as he is peaceful and honest. I simply do not love mine that way. So my selection was aesthetical in nature. Once again, as with the other one, my opinion that is neutral politically is being forced into an artificial and arbitrary political slot.
Why aren’t you just answering for yourself?
Because they won’t let me. Where is the option that says “Politically irrelevant” or “Neither agree nor disagree”?
(-3.75, -3.33)
Most people forget (or never knew) the second half of this quote:
I’m with Carl Schurz on this one.
Just to be clear, in addition to the answer I already gave, let me repeat that my own view of countryphilia is not politically derived. It is aesthetically derived. Is this a test of politics or aesthetics?
Several people seem to be saying that the proposition is biased, but perhaps it is weighted. If they reason the same way most of the people here do then a Strongly disagree may only rate a moderate liberal result while a strongly agree would result in a very high authoritarian result. Unless we know how it is calculated we cannot say.
I’m not saying it’s biased; I’m saying it’s a non sequitur. “My country right or wrong” need not have a political bias at all; it can be entirely an aesthetic view.
Who cares what your justification is? Perhaps I feel marijuana should be legalized because it begins with the letter “m”. How does that matter if the proposition is simply, “Marijuana should be legalized”? Don’t I agree?
But it’s supposed to be a test of politics, isn’t it? Whether marijuana should be legalized is easy to answer from my political ideology. But whether a man should love his country right or wrong is not even answerable from my political ideology.
It’s like a math test that says a forest ranger arrested 2 poachers in the morning, 3 poachers at noon, and 8 poachers in the evening, and asks whether you agree or disagree with whether the forest ranger had the moral authority to make the arrests. How can that measure your mathematics acumen? It isn’t even a mathematical question.
It is as if you walk into an algebra class and suggest that you can’t answer any of the questions because you want to do number theory.
If you wanted was for you to apply a label to yourself there’s no need for any test. You’re a libertarian, [0, -10], and who can argue? It’s your label, it means only and exactly what you want it to mean.
The question is not, “Do I feel I can derive nationalism, or anti-nationalism, or any middle-of-the-road proposition generally dealing with nationalism, from my political theory?” The question is, “How much do you agree or disagree with this statement: ‘I’d always support my country, whether it was right or wrong’?” You clearly suggest that you strongly disagree with the statement. Perhaps you rolled a die, perhaps you are a computer program designed to answer second questions as the first available choice, perhaps you hate nationalism as a matter of course and don’t know why you feel that way at all… all the same.
I’m a strict noncoercionist, and I know what I am. When I see a question about politics, that is the filter that I put it through. It. Is. My. Poltics. My objection to country right or wrong IS NOT POLITICAL. It is aesthetic. I’m not looking for a label; I’m looking for a question about politics. It is called, after all, a political compass, not an aesthetical compass. Right?
It’s been alluded to already, but those answering “Strongly Disagree” to the “I’d always support my country, right or wrong” includes people who who would not hesitate to criticize their government’s actions if wrong but retain a sense of patriotism, and others who at the first sign of some perceived wrongful act reject their nation and wish for its comeuppance/downfall.
Huh. Maybe I answered that one wrong.
I think the survey is somewhat left-biased, and I speak from my lofty lefty perch at (-2.75, -2.31), which puts me within spitting distance of Gandhi (OK Dopers, you can stop rolling on the floor laughing hysterically now).
I was especially disgusted with the survey question that is identical to one I was once asked in a jury pool - i.e. whether punishment is more important than rehabilitation in relation to dealing with criminals. I reject such a choice as largely irrelevant to society’s needs. The main objective in criminal sentencing should be appropriate separation from society.
The word was not “love”, it was “support”, which surely any English speaker would parse as having something to do with “advocating the actions of” in this context?
Agree implies the statement “I support my country even when I think it is wrong”, which I feel is strongly authoritarian by nature. My politics lead me to react to this highly unfavourably.
You are free to argue why you chose a particular option, Lib, but if it is nothing to do with politics, perhaps you might simply consider the proposition “a bit dodgy” and wait for the thread on one wherein you can talk politics?