I don’t consider the proposition a bit dodgy. I consider it to be entirely, completely, and wholly irrelevant. They might as well have asked if people should love — excuse, me — *support * mayonnaise.
Do you not consider Strong Agreement authoritarian by nature?
Libertarian, it seems your objection hinges on the title of the exercise; Political Compass. If it was called a different kind of compass that could cover not only politics but economics, morality and yes, even aesthetics, would you still object so vehemently to the relevance of parts of the quiz?
The only problem then is that it wouldn’t be a compass. A compass points in a direction. It seems to me that the purpose of the exercise is to determine where you personally stand on political issues. This test does not determine that. Supporting one’s country is not, to me, a political question. It’s the same sort of thing as asking someone whether Duke right or wrong is acceptable. All the answer can determine is whether you’re a Duke fan. And if you’re like me, there’s no way to shrug it off and reply, “Who gives a shit, and what does it have to do with whether I like football more than baseball?”
It is, to those who choose to make it so. While the test is flawed otherwise, this is not a problem.
So why, exactly, are you posting in this thread? Would you have posted to a thread that asks you whether you support mayonnaise?
And by the way, “support” to me, means “support”, not “love”. I could easily support someone or something without loving them. I may do it as a matter of principle.
To the OP: I ticked strongly disagree, it was a no-brainer for my values. I will not support any actions I disagree with.
It does occur to me though, that one could consider something to be wrong, but still agree with the action. I may recognise that killing my mother is wrong, but I may do it anyway. I may recognise that my country, committing an act of war against another, is wrong, but still agree with it.
Hmm, it appears that it is all too easy to decide that nothing is political. How should such a person approach a debate centered on a proposition on a website called “The Political Compass”?
Perhaps it would be similar to several theists debating the nature of God and an atheist wandering in to declare that he believes God doesn’t exist? That would be unfair, insensitive and even downright rude. I am guilty of doing this in the past, but now would not dream of doing so.
There are questions I find irrelevant, Lib. When we come to them, you will find I answer with a hefty caveat, and pay little attention to the rest of the debate between people who do think it worthwhile and relevant, preferring instead to skip to the next one. I gently suggest you try the same.
By taking a test designed to align one with labels. Sheesh. Do you decide for all people everywhere what is and is not a political answer? And by that I mean “an answer that will affect political actions.” Supporting one’s country, no matter how derived, deals with the political realm. Plain and simple.
Do you support John Kerry? Do you support George Bush? Do you support a libertarian candidate? “I can’t vote for them, because my support for them is aesthetical in nature, not political.” 
The test makers think it is a political question. They are the ones assigning the answer. You don’t have to like it. I remain completely flummoxed at your refusal to think the question deals with politics. The proposition has nothing to do with where you source your values from. It sets up a relationship between your values and the country you live in. Countries, by their governmental nature, are political. They aren’t interested in what country you live in, nor are they interested in how you get your values. Why would they be?
“Should we declare that pi is only legally equal to 3?” Lib: “But that’s a math problem, so I can’t answer that question!” :rolleyes:
Of course I don’t decide what is a political question for anyone else. I’ve made it crystal plain that it wasn’t for ME.
A: I support my country right or wrong
B: I do not support my country right or wrong
~A ^ ~B
Where is that answer on the test?
And the reason I’m posting here is because Sentient asked me to post here. If I’m not welcome to participate, then have at it yourselves. No skin off mine.
I think this debate has covered all the main points it can expect to cover. I’ll be posting #3 shortly.
(Since it covers similar ground, Lib, you might have to simply restate the caveat to your answer and wait a little longer. I look forward to one you can get your teeth into!)
So let me get this straight, Lib. Your support for your country has nothing to do with whether your country is doing what you think is right or wrong?
I took this Political Compass test some time back. Then as now, I seem to be Tony Blair (I wound up 5.00, 0.77), which makes me think the desigers are somewhat left of what would be the center in America.
FWIW, I answered “Agree” to the “My country right or wrong” question. As with every other question on the test, it is a question of how I interpret the question (and how they interpret my answers).
I interpreted “My country right or wrong” as meaning that I would always support my country, even if she implements policies with which I disagree. “Support” in this context means that I would always work for the good of my country, including trying to change those policies with which I disagree, and that I would also represent my country’s best interests in situations of moral neutrality. The US needs someone to speak out for her, and if other countries act on their own behalf and no one acts on the US’ behalf, justice is not served.
But I would never withdraw my support for the US. I retain my commitment to the ideals on which the country was founded, and always act so as to try to get the US to live up to those ideals. And to act as an advocate for the US insofar as she has done good in the world.
Suppose, for instance, that I opposed the war in Iraq. (I don’t.) I would act to try to bring an end to the war, but I would never act to support the Ba’athists, and I would never act to try to assist Iraq in fighting against the US and her allies there.
But my support for America is not conditional on good behavior. I support America when she is right by trying to get her to continue what is right, and I support America when she is wrong by trying to get her to return to what is right. For me, “America must change!” is a possible slogan. “Down with America!” never is.
But I knew the rest of the “My country right or wrong” quote before I took the test, so that may have skewed the results.
Regards,
Shodan
Great answer, Shodan. Your input will be highly valued.
Let me make it straighter. I neither support nor not support my country. I am neutral with respect to country support. Doing right does not earn my support. Doing right is what it ought to be doing. It gets no kudos merely for doing what it ought to do. The short of it is that “your support” is a meaningless phrase when talking about me.
And, similarly then, is never chastized when doing what it shouldn’t? That’s interesting.
Libertarian, you haven’t made it straighter at all. Your support (whatever that means) or lack thereof is a dichotomy. If you’re neutral then you don’t support it but you don’t oppose it either. However, the point remains that in your case you don’t support it.