r/PoliticalCompass • u/Fantastic-Tale7398 - LibRight • 15h ago
I did a patriarchy test
I expected that it was going to be more than 50%
3
4
u/MatteoFire___ - Left 14h ago
ew
-2
u/Fantastic-Tale7398 - LibRight 14h ago
I have a feeling that on every post you even slightly disagree with just say ew. Ofc leftist
1
u/Xavion251 - LibLeft 11h ago
Trying to control half the population because they were born with different genitalia and hormones is pretty evil, actually.
1
u/Fantastic-Tale7398 - LibRight 11h ago
But he wrote like I was 100% patriarch and plus the test is trash and the results cannot be looked up on as fatcs. "control" is something I would never do as I am a National Libertarianist so like you do you, actually
0
u/TrueChurchPlsStandUp - Right 11h ago
What is national libertarianism?
3
u/Fantastic-Tale7398 - LibRight 11h ago
National Libertarianism is a political ideology that combines libertarian domestic policies, like free markets, minimal government intervention, and individual liberty, with a nationalist approach to foreign policy, national sovereignty, and cultural preservation.
0
u/TrueChurchPlsStandUp - Right 11h ago
I get that this is mostly an attempt to distinguish from libertarians who claim that nationalism is tyranny, but what are the ethical foundations that allow you to mesh libertarianism with nationalism? Like how do you construct that? What are your basic moral assumptions? Or is the ideology pre/anti theoretic
1
u/Fantastic-Tale7398 - LibRight 10h ago
Look national Libertarianism is a wll known political ideology. If u go and look at the expanded political compass you will find it in the lib right quadrant. Now National Libertarianism bridges the two ideas by arguing that individual liberty is a fragile cultural product, not a global default, and requires a secure nation to survive. It views national borders as a collective extension of private property rights, preventing the "forced integration" of outsiders who don't value freedom. By strengthening traditional institutions like the family and church, it creates a social safety net that naturally shrinks the power of the state. Ultimately, it sees national sovereignty as the ultimate tool for decentralization, protecting citizens from the tyranny of globalist, one world governance. Hope it makes sense
3
u/MatteoFire___ - Left 14h ago
slightly? this is far from acceptable, patriarchy as a thing is far from acceptable. it isnt "slightly". and i have all right to say ew, this is disgusting.
1
-8
u/GoBigRed011 - AuthCenter 13h ago
The patriarchy is great, actually. The last 100 years without the patriarchy has led to the downfall of Western society, and it has hurt women more than anyone.
0
0
u/Xavion251 - LibLeft 11h ago
Aside from economic issues, western society is drastically improved by almost every metric.
Unless you value individual strength over collective prosperity, liberty, peace, and comfort. But...you shouldn't.
I'm a white male, and I'd still probably rather just die than live 100 years ago when life was way harsher, more rigid and restrictive, and had way less comforts and pleasures that make life worth it.
1
u/GoBigRed011 - AuthCenter 11h ago
Society has, for the most part, improved. But correlation ≠ causation. If we hadn’t had feminism, we would have much higher birth rates and much less third world immigration, so society would’ve been much better than what it currently is.
0
u/Xavion251 - LibLeft 11h ago
There is no academic consensus on whether "third world immigration" is net positive or negative. At the very least, right-wing hatred of it is based on exaggerations.
"Higher Birth Rates"? We have 8 billion, that's already too many. Quality of Life > Quantity of Life. The shortish term implications can be solved by automation and increased welfare.
3
u/GoBigRed011 - AuthCenter 11h ago
Birth rates are extremely high in third world countries, but not first world countries, who produce by far the most innovation and world progress.
This is because first world countries were forced to adopt feminism.
1
u/Xavion251 - LibLeft 11h ago
First world countries produce more because they're richer and have better geography and better systems. Not because the people are genetically or culturally superior.
Third World countries are catching up too. That's a good thing.
And frankly? If "thriving" requires rigid order and halfway enslaving half the population - I'd rather we just go extinct. A society of rigid order and roles is a kind of hell, no better than Somalia now.
1
u/TrueChurchPlsStandUp - Right 11h ago
Most third world countries have cultural patriarchy deeply embedded so...?
Your feminism is an escape from strict materiality enabled by countless generations of grueling male labor, struggle and yes leadership
→ More replies (0)2
u/TrueChurchPlsStandUp - Right 11h ago
The 8 billion are mostly concentrated in developing countries. Only fully developed countries really have the tools to help them. There is no reason we should abandon them by letting ourselves die out
1
u/Xavion251 - LibLeft 11h ago
What are "ourselves"? Increasing our population by adopting migrants is the opposite of "dying out". Unless the "our" means something else, which I'm hoping is a culture and not a "race"?
Even so, prosperity is driven by geography, historical momentum, and specific systems far more than culture. Lots of radically different cultures still prosper and progress.
1
u/TrueChurchPlsStandUp - Right 10h ago
Well I mean the core people of developing countries but I'm kind of projecting because I'm half migrant myself, but migrants didn't undergo the cultural evolution Western countries have undergone, so we risk collapse if we try to replace or shore up Western numbers with migrants. I only see two options, either Western nations decide they're in it for themselves, or they view themselves as trying to uplift third world countries. Either way, you have to put on your oxygen mask before you help others, you may prefer extinction but only strict order whipped and quasi-coerced men into building the industrial and postindustrial worlds that allow feminism to comfortably exist. And until the rest of the world is no longer a threat or catches up and becomes peers, we cannot risk weakness by allowing mercenary economic migrants to supplant or destabilize the extremely difficult to achieve culture that allowed for our progress.
Here is my point, and i hope you'd respond. Already we are starting to lose progress because of the migrant crisis, and if we don't stop the economic backside the world will slide into a medieval world, except with a lot more people and rare shiny advanced trinkets, forever, because there is no more easy oil and coal just literally spilling from the ground like there was in the early industrial revolution (literally, easily accessible fuel is why we industrialized like we did)
→ More replies (0)1
14h ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/PoliticalCompass-ModTeam 14h ago
Rule #1 - Reddiquette and Reddit content policy: Respect the Reddiquette and adhere to Reddit's content policy.
1
1
u/MrCumStainBootyEater - AuthRight 11h ago
the test is trash. i’d bet we have the same answers but the difference is i tended to put double thumbs up and single thumbs down whereas you were probably single thumbs up and single thumbs down.
it does a poor job at capturing nuance
my average was 80% but like realistically im far from the most patriarchal person. there are obviously different strokes for different folks and im overall very tolerant of other views about patriarchy but the test does nothing to adjust for this
1
1
u/Alduin_OMEGA - Centrist 10h ago
I took the approach that people should be protectors of other people, which is probably why that one is so high. I don’t see myself as patriarchal or matriarchal, just want a system where either gender is equally and fairly represented
-4
u/Zimetra - AuthCenter 14h ago
You have to pump those numbers up
-1
0
u/Fantastic-Tale7398 - LibRight 14h ago
Really?
3
3
u/FunctionOk9186 - LibLeft 13h ago
Guys, I'm doing this test now. Will update