It only shows how weak a multiple choice quiz with some poorly worded questions is for analyzing something as complex as political believe so it can be summarized as an ordered pair. My political beliefs are all over the place. Depending on the question I might be to the right of Atila the Hun or be called a pinko by Abbie Hoffman.
I had the same objection to a survey I was given for a couples care seminar my wife and I took before we got married. One question in particular rubbed me as implying something different than I meant. The question was do you or your spouse cry often. Cripes a mighty! TheLadyLion cries at the drop of a hat because she’s a big emotional mush. If I answer yet I feel it implies I’m slapping her around all the time. I gave the interviewer my 2¢ about the crudeness of the survey and ask that it be included in my response. I also considered telling her about a census taker whose liver I ate with fava beans and a big amarone but she may not have gotten the joke and I don’t like liver anyway.
The issue of whether paying money for bottled water is a SMART choice is not what the proposition states. I personally think it’s dumb to buy bottled water, too; to me, it tastes pretty much the same as what you get out of the tap in most places if you just go to the trouble of chilling the tap water.
That said, I also think it’s dumb to buy a BMW. There’s no “Sad reflection” on society that people make different consumer choices than I do. Different choices is how the economy works. If I decide that any consumer choice I find silly - buying BMWs, listening to Diana Krall records, drinking Dasani, watching NASCAR - is a “Sad reflection on society,” then society will always be sadly reflected upon. It comes a meaningless, trite phrase. There would always be a million sad reflections on society. T
Proposition #12 is picking on what is essentially a silly little fad and trying to imply it’s proof something’s wrong with consumer economics. The bottled water craze is just a fad; people seem obligated to always have a bottle of water in arms’ reach. I actually see people filling up empty bottles from the tap to use in their offices and cubicles, as if it’s somehow too much of a chore to get up and go get a drink of water twenty feet away when you need it. To a large extent I believe this fad is driven not by pure consumerism, but by the still-popular urban myth that you need to drink water non-stop or you’ll wither up like a forgotten houseplant. This trend will pass, just like afros and pet rocks and Baby Duck wine. Who gives a crap?
As to the proposition’s implication that there’s something holy about drinking water, as Fear Itself points out, you just have to rephrase this to get a very different view of what it means: Isn’t it a sign of the health of our society that we have enough wealth to choose between competing brands of drinking water? I don’t feel there’s anything about water that’s more special than, say, wheat or rice or some other staple food, and nobody complains about the ongoing rice war between Ben’s and Minute Rice.
Fair enough: As fruitbat implies, my grouchiness might label me “authoritarian” and as Shodan says, this is but a trifle, and so I’ll change my answer to Disagree next time I take the test. (I’m waiting until the very end to see how all of this rigorous examination moves my needle).
Padeye, as I said in the introduction, I’d appreciate it if we kept criticism of the entire test in the dedicated thread.
Brutus, I can tell you that nobody else here is anywhere near you on the Political Compass plot, and so your input in these threads will be highly valued.
(Incidentally, I’m not sure from your sig whether you admire or despise Stalin, but the test ranks you as having similar authoritarian tendencies!)
Economic Left/Right: -5.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.64
Disagree. Most of the people I know don’t buy bottled water for the water, but for the bottle. It’s not an issue of water being inadequate, or bovine consumerism, it’s the difference between having water right next to you when you need it, and walking to a drinking fountain/faucet.
When you’re a student, and you’re sometimes not allowed to leave class for a drink, having bottled water, or at least a water bottle, is important.
I believe there are legitimate/smart reasons for buying bottled water. The question to me, asks if it’s a sad reflection about marketing and branding such a basic need as water.
I don’t think it’s dumb to buy a BMW, or sad people make different choices. I think there’s a difference here. I’m not going to die if I don’t have a BMW.
I don’t see it as a fad at this point. I was probably 12 to 14 when Perrier started becoming cool to drink. I don’t see it with the same status today, as it held back then. Maybe the Perrier brand was a fad, but there’s quite a few different brands out now, it’s 19 - 21 years since I was that age, and a lot of the marketing concept has remained the same.
I agree it’s nice to have the money for a bottled water purchase, if that’s what I choose. I’m not going to think it’s something wonderful though or a reflection on my wealth, when I can go to my bathroom or kitchen and get something of similar quality. What I’m seeing is a case of The Emperor’s New Clothes. I think your rice comparison would work better for me, if I had rice on demand as a standard feature of just about any type of dwelling I might choose. Also, if it were available at most parks, campgrounds, and other public venues, etc.
Bottled water fills a demand, even if it’s only people who find it convienient rather than healthy. I only wish safe, nice tasting tap water were something that people could buy as easily.
Stalin is a left wing authoritarian. Brutus falls into the Right Wing Authoritarian quadrant, which he incidently shares with such beloved figures as George W. Bush, Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Makes you proud, doesn’t it Brutus?
Economic Left/Right: -4.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.38
I don’t regard it as sad or disturbing that drinking water is branded. America’s always been about entrepreneurship at best, iron-balled capitalism at worst.
If it can be packaged and sold, some sharp fellow will attempt to do so. After that, it becomes a matter of “buy or do not buy.”
Alternatively, upon taking the Political Compass test, I thought it was interesting that there was no middle ground in the questions. You either agree or disagree. Your only options are whether you STRONGLY agree/disagree… or mildly.
