The definition of fascism is complex and it seems that we have over simplified the meaning so as to insult or decry our political opponents. We know Hitler and his ilk were fascist of the worst kind and during the Bush era simply putting a Hitler mustache on George W. would rile the liberals in a frenzy of hatred and anger, and yet BO is getting his fair share of being called a fascist. So it seems that we need to educate ourselves on history once again and the terms and meanings behind it all. You can do that here if you like. This article is not about teaching you about fascism, but analyzing the test made over 50 years ago and how it relates to the Christian mind. You can take it yourself if you’d like.
Previously, I wrote about another kind of survey that determined how Conservative or Liberal you are, and how completely stupid it was in its conclusions. This one, however is a bit more accurate and a slightly bit disturbing in its assumptions. As a Christian, I see where these questions are leading and can’t but help to see its bent toward getting ignorant people to answer in such a way as to find out they are fascists. On the opposite side of fascist, in this test, is liberal, which I find offensive in itself because both political systems can get to a fascist ideal. One of the main ideas of fascism I see is the shutting down of the voice of your political opponent, be it through media, prisons, or violence. I see today that it is only the liberals in America that don’t want to allow the conservative, whether it be religious or political, to have their voice be heard.
The answers to all the questions are as follows: 1 Disagree Strongly, 2 Disagree Mostly, 3 Disagree Somewhat, 4 Agree Somewhat, 5 Agree Mostly, 6 Agree Strongly. So, we’ll look at these questions individually and see where they fall short.
There is also a “Variable” part of the test that will be revealed within each question:
- Conventionalism: Rigid adherence to conventional, middle-class values.
- Authoritarian Submission: Submissive, uncritical attitude toward idealized moral authorities of the ingroup.
- Authoritarian Aggression: Tendency to be on the lookout for, and to condemn, reject, and punish people who violate conventional values.
- Anti-intraception: Opposition to the subjective, the imaginative, the tender-minded.
- Superstition and Stereotypy: The belief in mystical determinants of the individual’s fate; the disposition to think in rigid categories.
- Power and “Toughness”: Preoccupation with the dominance-submission, strong-weak, leader-follower dimension; identification with power figures; overemphasis upon the conventionalized attributes of the ego; exaggerated assertion of strength and toughness.
- Destructiveness and Cynicism: Generalized hostility, vilification of the human.
- Projectivity: The disposition to believe that wild and dangerous things go on in the world; the projection outwards of unconscious emotional impulses.
- Sex: Exaggerated concern with sexual “goings-on.”
Onto the survey:
1. Obedience and respect for authority are the most important virtues children should learn.
Although obedience and respect for authority are important, I could think of some more important virtues: curiosity, morality, expression to some extent, determination, cooperation. I chose Disagree Somewhat. This has a variable of 1 and 2
2. A person who has bad manners, habits, and breeding can hardly expect to get along with decent people.
For me this question comes down to the opinionated term of “decent people”. Who is determining what is decent? I suppose if you are in the upper to mid class person, you look down your nose at “indecent” people, but being a Christian I would hope that you see the value in all persons and that hope is more valuable than decency. I Disagreed Mostly. Variables: 1 and 3
3. If people would talk less and work more, everybody would be better off.
In many instances talking allows people to work better. Communication is a very valuable commodity in the workplace. But, I see where this is leading and Somewhat Agree because talk could be work and work adds purpose and value to society. Variable: 1, 3 and 4
4. The business man and the manufacturer are much more important to society than the artist and the professor.
Now we start to get in to seeing the difference in a society and its culture. After watching Monuments Men, I am confirmed of the value art has in a culture. (Great show by the way.) Creativity, whether in business or the arts, should be a fine marriage of cultural value. Fascists see no value in art, in the beauty of itself, but only in the way it can propagate its agenda. Although government funding of either is a very fine balance. People can definitely see the goodness of a manufacturing plant bettering society, even though they disagree fundamentally, (look at today’s protester: hating the business but loving the results and benefits). Art holds more opinion in its value. Can a picture of Mary the mother of Jesus made out of excrement, be called art? Should the government fund this? Difficult questions, but I Disagreed Mostly. Variable: 1 and 4
5. Science has its place, but there are many important things that can never be understood by the human mind.
Variable: 2 and 5. So this question has to do with authority? I suppose if a scientist says it, it is to be held as a permanent, unmoving truth? I’m not exactly sure where the fascist would stand here, but I’m thinking getting away from any type of faith. That the only value is observable? I Agree Mostly only because I see the value of science in society, but the supernatural holds great purpose in life, in morality, in love and sacrifice.
6. Every person should have complete faith in some supernatural power whose decisions he obeys without question.
Variable: 2 and 5 again. Does this point out your fascism in submission? Or your bent away from fascism in its value of only what can be seen or felt. I think perhaps “without question” is the crux of the question. Agreeing with this is fascist. I Disagreed Somewhat exactly because of not questioning. I am raising my children to question what they believe, but we should have some faith that this is not all there is to life; there is greater meaning and purpose than eating, sleeping, laughing and dying.
7. Young people sometimes get rebellious ideas, but as they grow up they ought to get over them and settle down.
It is only through rebellious ideas that things change as they sometimes must do, not always for the better, but we must realize that rebellion is good for a society that has no diversity. Sameness is detrimental to society, and to be honest, just plain boring. It is true that most rebellion or revolution starts with the young seeing an injustice, and it may be traditional for those in power to try to sway them by assimilating them to society by marriage, family, job, and it is determinant for them to hold to their rebellion or not, whether it is still as valuable or worthy of their young rebellion in the first place. If the rebellion is truly necessary, we must never grow out of it. I Disagree Mostly. Variable: 2.
8. What this country needs most, more than laws and political programs, is a few courageous, tireless, devoted leaders in whom the people can put their faith.
Okay, this question comes down to “put their faith”. I completely agree that we need leaders who are completely devoted to their ideals and will not be swayed by personal gain, BUT we must never allow a cult of personality to take the place of faith. That is to completely believe in them no matter what their character may reveal, which in any human, will fail you. Agree Somewhat. Variable: 2 and 6.
9. No sane, normal, decent person could ever think of hurting a close friend or relative.
What does “hurting” mean? Like risk hurting their feelings for the betterment of themselves? Or turn them in for adverse thought to the authorities? Dark. Disagree Somewhat. Variable: 2
10. Nobody ever learned anything really important except through suffering.
Hmm… This question too, has a dark, hidden meaning. Do we make people suffer so that they will, or must learn? We are told this in a roundabout way in the Bible, that suffering or trials help us to grow, and I completely agree. But, this is not what this means, perhaps? Agree Somewhat. Variable: 2.
11. What the youth needs most is strict discipline, rugged determination, and the will to work and fight for family and country.
Eliminate “strict,” and change “family and country” to “the betterment of society and culture.” But then who decides what is the “betterment” so again, this is difficult, as all political opinions should be. Disagree Mostly. Variable 3 and 6.
12. An insult to our honor should always be punished.
“Always”? “Always”? Really? And for just and insult? No. Strongly Disagree. Variable: 3 and 6.
13. Sex crimes, such as rape and attacks on children, deserve more than mere imprisonment; such criminals ought to be publicly whipped, or worse.
Yes, I agree that these crimes stir up my blood more than most, even now my teeth are grinding at such an affront to goodness and purity that should be held up in society and held dearly. I think and re-think my answer on this and Mostly Agree, with reservations because of the fact that where does it stop. It is deviant behavior, but who decides what is deviant but a strong moral authority, and within the theocracy God established, there was public punishment, not necessarily beatings, but everyone knew of the punishment. So, thinking that humans within the government decides these things? No, I will Agree Somewhat. Variable: 3 and 9.
14. There is hardly anything lower than a person who does not feel a great love, gratitude, and respect for his parents.
Nope! There are things way worse than someone who does not feel these things. Strongly Disagree. Variable: 3
15. Most of our social problems would be solved if we could somehow get rid of the immoral, crooked, and feebleminded people.
Erm… “feebleminded”? Yes, society would be better if everyone believed the same and we were all mostly equal, but there has to be some who decides that there are some who are more equal than others. And that is what disturbs me. Disagree Mostly. Variable: 3
16, Homosexuals are hardly better than criminals and ought to be severely punished.
Again, Nope! There is so much wrong with this statement, but it was thought of in a different culture, 50 years ago. But, I am afraid that many people who call themselves Christians would agree with this. They do sin, as I do sin, and accepting Christ gives us freedom, even if that freedom is living in a manner against the Word, it should eventually turn us, but we should never be forcefully compelled and/or treated as criminals. Strongly Disagree. It is with love that the world is changed. Ugh, too much more to say, but this is a summary. Variable: 3 and 9.
17. When a person has a problem or worry, it is best for him not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things.
Replace “with more cheerful things” with “working” and I would strongly agree. Hopefully staying busy helps us to get over our worry. Does this statement imply a blind following? Yes, I believe it does. Somewhat Agree though. Variable: 4.
18. Nowadays more and more people are prying into matters that should remain personal and private.
This is a statement that should change with the times. “Prying” should be “involving.” This is true and false at the same time because of the Facebook culture we have created. Kind of lame question, but I feel compelled to Agree Somewhat because no one is really involving themselves in other peoples lives as they should sometimes. Variable: 4 and 8.
19. Some people are born with an urge to jump from high places.
What? It seems that the questions to this point leads to a fascist belief if you agree. So how does this tie with that? Are we to just allow those TO jump if they are just born with it? I think that is the implication here. So, I suppose I Disagree Somewhat if that is the case. Variable: 5
20. People can be divided into two distinct classes: the weak and the strong.
Okay, this sounds like the saying that has come about, with sometimes comedic effect, “There are two kinds of people in this world…” This is followed up with something like, Trekkers and non-Trekkers or those who like Thin Mints and those who like Samoas. Duh, there is weak people and there is strong, but in many different categories and characteristics. So I think this is wanting to make us place labels on those who are weak, so that they can be pointed out to those in authority. But, I Agree Somewhat anyway. Variable: 5 and 6.
21. Some day it will probably be shown that astrology can explain a lot of things.
Oh for crying in the mud. Disagree Strongly. Variable: 5 and 6
22. Wars and social troubles may someday be ended by an earthquake or flood that will destroy the whole world.
Wow, that escalated quickly! Um, sure… but what does that have to do with fascism? Is it more of a metaphorical destruction? Is it an implication of faith? I’m not sure of anything with this question… Agree Somewhat? Variable: 5 and 8
23. No weakness or difficulty can hold us back if we have enough will power.
Strongly Agree… but then again. Dark, hidden meanings. Variable: 6
24. It is best to use some prewar authorities in Germany to keep order and prevent chaos. [You’ll have to pretend it is 1946 when you answer this one.]
I can’t pretend this. Okay, I’ll try. Sure, I’ll Agree Somewhat. Variable: 6
25. Most people don’t realize how much our lives are controlled by plots hatched in secret places.
Now were getting down to the meat of darkness and hidden meanings. I would agree with this in my conspiratorial mind. But, God is ultimately in control, so… Disagree Somewhat? Yeah, that sounds right. 6 and 8.
26. Human nature being what it is, there will always be war and conflict.
Okay, yes this is biblical. Completely Agree. The thing we need though is to understand each other better and on an individual level, if you are open, we can minimize conflict. But on a global basis, totally. So, Agree Mostly. Variable: 6
27. Familiarity breeds contempt.
Living in Utah for 40 years I would have said, yes. But, I would change this to “breeds a lack of challenge and therefore growth.” But, I still Agree Mostly. Variable: 6
28. Nowadays when so many different kinds of people move around and mix together so much, a person has to protect himself especially carefully against catching an infection or disease from them.
Oof! That was a sock to the gut… I can hardly breathe from the force of this blow… Ouch, really? I guess for the most part, people might believe in the truth of this statement. Look at historically the diseases natives received from colonists. Sometimes it makes us stronger, sometimes it makes us weaker. But the sentiment behind the question is kind of distasteful. Disagree Mostly. Variable: 7
29. The wild sex life of the old Greeks and Romans was tame compared to some of the goings-on in this country, even in places where people might least expect it.
There is nothing new under the sun. People will sink down to the lowest of their society for their pure enjoyment and not look back or care about it at all. N/A is not an option so I guess I will Agree Somewhat with the advent of YouTube. Variable: 8 and 9
30. The true American way of life is disappearing so fast that force may be necessary to preserve it.
Dark and Hidden meanings. The American way of life is an incredible moment in history, but that is not my God nor is it my faith. We have a responsibility in this world, but if things are to change… they must, and God saw it through the whole way. Disagree Somewhat. Variable: 6.
I must admit, I took this test before and got a 2.93333, which was labeled a “Liberal Airhead”. This time as I looked at every question, I have a 3.2, and it tells me, “You are disciplined but tolerant; a true American.” I don’t know if these labels were used 50+ years ago, but Liberal Airhead might seem a bit insulting, not to mention incorrect in this time and age.
As for the variables, look at the ones you scored as Agree Mostly or Strongly. I didn’t agree with a lot of this survey, but some of the Mostly or Strongly led to the variables of 2, 5 and three times, 6. I have a slight bent toward Authoritarian Submission: Submissive, uncritical attitude toward idealized moral authorities of the ingroup, and Superstition and Stereotypy: The belief in mystical determinants of the individual’s fate; the disposition to think in rigid categories. I most strongly relate to this variable: Destructiveness and Cynicism: Generalized hostility, vilification of the human, which is correct I believe.
In general this survey is more complex than the other one I analyzed yet slightly dated. It seems that in the questions, they believe that fascist people might be more from the upper class, and disdains mixing of cultures and desire a violent silence of any opposition/rebellion. Hmm… something to think about as we see our government at work today.
I am disillusioned by politics and I wish more people would become as disillusioned as well. The opportunity is there, they just have to snatch it and hold it close. There is no shame in that. I’m not calling for people not to participate in the political system, but to just not expect that your particular party is doing what you voted and/or expected them to do. I have been disillusioned since the middle of George W Bush’s first term. I would have considered myself a liberal by the time I became politically aware; sometime in high school. Calling myself, at the time, politically aware is a misnomer. The only thing I was aware of was that Reagan was evil, at least that is what I heard, or thought, or understood. Come to think of it, I don’t know where I got that idea. I just somehow knew he hated the environment, women, poor people and peace: of course he was evil. Opinions change.
My political understanding eventually came under the influence of my new-found faith as well listening to talk radio. I regarded life, and accountability and responsibility above all things when it came to politics, and I saw liberals as having none of those qualities. I went from one political spectrum to the other in a matter of months. When on one side, I dismissed any ideals of the other. That all started to change after GWB began throwing money at stuff to try to fix it. I soon realized that Republicans were no champion of the nation, the state, the individual. They didn’t provide the hope or ideal that they were supposed to be propagating to their constituents. Now that I see such a perceived failure of the other side, I expect many who follow the personality in charge to fall away in droves, following the tact of a reasonable person to realize no political party can truly accomplish what the ideals are set apart to be. It seems, that this is not the case. Many are sticking like the stubborn symbol representative of their party. Come on people! Step away from the politicking mass and fight for reason! Alas, in my disillusion, I seem to be standing alone. Nothing really changes, just the names and whether or not there is a D or an R following.
I see though that a healthy dose of disillusionment is what sets a reasonable, accountable, responsible person apart from a fanatic. Democrats are, it seems for the most part, fanatics. Yes, there are some Republican fanatics, but they are not trying to shut down the voice of the other side. Liberals are viciously trying to shut down conversations on abortion, on creation, on rights, on health choice, on religious liberty. They are unwittingly shutting down our freedoms. They don’t see that forcing people to accept what they are offering, that they are shutting down choice, and freedom. They are amazingly proud of their president, but can’t really say why, but don’t ask them, for it is an attack and you’ll be deemed a racist. You think perhaps I may be exaggerating a bit? I visit many popular culture websites, ones that deal with science and science fiction, fantasy and the “Con” life, movies and television, discoveries and history, comedy and the drudgery of life. Some headlines of articles that deal with the political stance of a cultural issue have words like “Idiots,” “Evil,” “Hate,” “Stupid” forgoing to end an argument by calling the particular conservative names. If you are any type of conservative you know what I’m talking about.
I really try to stay out of the arguments. In fact, on that one site, I have chosen to stay out of politics altogether, except for this one last political blog that I will link to. I’ve had some rather unfortunate situations occur with relatives and friends that I never intended. That one site is not necessarily the forum for civil discussion. So, what I want to say, needs to be said, then I’ll try to keep my peace.
First off let me say that I don’t hate anyone. I may get furious at the driver who is intent on not following any rules of spacing between cars at any miles per hour, but I don’t hate them. Nor do I hate your lifestyle choices. I don’t hate the person who believes life is less important than casual sex. In the same way I don’t hate the person who finds my belief in God and His creation, insane, and at the same time insults and degrades Him. No one is trying to stop you in your lifestyle or beliefs, at least no one who is reasonable. I want to encourage healthy debates. For me those choices are meted out on a personal and individual level. If you ask me what I think or feel or believe, I’ll tell you, and I’d like to know more about why you have chosen the way you think, feel and believe. If there is one thing I am, it is open, to hearing about you. I find it the most interesting thing, to find out why people believe what they believe; it is a part of our heritage, our culture.
Setting the healthcare issue aside, as well as foreign policy, wealth redistribution, immigration, non bi-partisanship, education, and Constitutional issues, this current president has done a fine job. I’d commend him on something specific that was worth standing up and cheering for, but one alludes me right now. The actions taken on the issue of marriage, of the current government, is what has brought me out of my political bomb shelter.
A conservative such as myself, may be seen by history as such a one as the KKK is seen now, if we do not bring the argument to a reasonable transcendence as to why we understand marriage in the way it was created. Within that statement lies the main problem: “created”. “One man, one woman,” we shout from the trenches. Others are more calm and willing to reason, but are rarely heard. For me, marriage is a sacred word. God gave it as a gift for mankind, as a symbol of what our individual relationship to Him is to be like as well as to propagate the species of man. If two women or two men are born or develop a strong sense of oneness between each other, and feel that someone of the same-sex will fulfill a purpose or completeness within them, then I am happy for them. I will not disparage or fight against what they deem fulfilling. Let us set aside why they may have come to be this way, for this conversation is about the term: marriage. Call their relationship what you will, make a new term, for marriage has already been taken. Yes, I understand the desire for acceptance of society and co-opting the word will hasten the day. The abuse that many have suffered in the name of religion, morality and normality is shameful, within all aspects of race, culture or creed. We should be just as loving and forgiving as our heavenly Father. Yes, I believe that actions and thoughts regarding what many a couple do behind closed doors or sometimes even out in the open is sin. I, am a sinner. A sinner who has been given Life and Life abundantly. God has and is still dealing with me in many areas of my life marred by my choice to sin, whether in action or thought. He deals with me on an individual level. What may be something I accept as good in my life may be seen as sinful to someone else. I fully expect God to deal with me or the person who sees me as sinning, to change our hearts and attitudes to His right and true way of thinking. If He does not do it here, than He will definitely in the life to come, when we will finally face Him. Many of my fellow Christians would never see a homosexual having the ability to truly come to Him, but I do not. God draws whom He will and those will have a choice, and God will accept them into His family, as they are. If God sees it necessary to change people after they come to Him, He will do so, or they will be in rebellion against Him. He is accepting and willing that all will come to Him and He has made it ultimately possible because of Him coming as a man and facing all temptation as man faces. It is on an individual basis that God changes, not corporately. He will never force you to come to Him, for that is not love.
Speaking of forcing, it seems that is what is happening to us conservatives. We are being forced to accept that what God has given as sacred is being used as political fodder to force an acceptance of what is sin. I hope I am not the only one speaking in such a way, trying to reason, to present our side. What I do think is happening is that some may see an article on homosexual marriage, find out the author’s perspective is conservative than dismiss it out of hand. I saw a video the other day of a conservative group on a college campus trying to interview participants of a Feminist conference. Someone found out the interviewer was from a conservative group and started telling everyone not to talk to her because of her background. She was followed around and as soon as she found someone to talk to, participants would tell the interviewees and mouths would close. Was that reasonable? It was a disgrace is what it was. That is what is happening today. Civil dialogue is being thrown out the window for shouting down your opponent. Battles are being won by insults. It makes me sad, very sad to what our freedoms has brought us: bondage. There is coming a day that what I say here will be marked as hate speech. It is already in some progressive European countries. Woe to us who have for so long given ground in the culture war, because of apathy and poor arguments, yet this is the way it was dictated to go. We have suffered too long contemplating self. This country was so great our only opportunity was self-examination. Let us look to the opportunities of not staring at our own navels. Go into the world and see what we so take for granted. Show the love God has poured out to us, if not for God than whatever you are thankful for and put it toward… not focusing so much on ourselves.
This started out as a statement I just needed to say regarding the horrifying political climate of today, but has grown into something I did not expect. I pray for this country and the relationship we have with each other, that we can talk again, share ideas and thoughts and why we do what we do or believe what we believe. It hurts me to think that so many relationships have been severed because of who is elected or what laws have been passed, but it doesn’t surprise me because even within the Christian community divorcing each other over the color of the carpet. I look toward the day when all will be made right. I look to the day where I am shown the error in my thoughts and deeds. I look to the day when all nations and cultures will gather at His feet praising Him and His works and His justice and His righteousness, in true unity and true diversity. I pray that we Christians will look beyond our own personal preferences and just desire to share the love that God wants us all to display, because He made us and loves us just as He intended us to be. Thank You God, thank You!
I came across this article the other day. If you take this “quiz” you may find yourself surprised at where you fall in the conservative/liberal scale: because, this is the stupidest survey. Here are the questions with the answers being: StronglyDisagree, ModeratelyDisagree, SlightlyDisagree, SlightlyAgree, ModeratelyAgree, StronglyAgree, unless otherwise noted.
- I prefer cats to dogs.
- I prefer watching documentaries to action/adventure movies.
- Respect for authority is something all children need to learn.
- I keep my desk and other workspaces very neat and organized.
- I believe that self-expression is more important than self-control.
- If I heard that a new restaurant in my neighborhood blended the cuisines of two very different cultures, that would make me want to try it.
- My government should treat lives of its citizens as being much more valuable than lives in other countries.
- If I were married or in a serious dating relationship, I would think it is perfectly OK for my partner to look at erotic or pornographic pictures or videos, by himself/herself.
- The Internet browser I most often use is (Chrome, Firefox, InternetExplorer, Safari, Other/ Don’t know)
- I wish the world did not have nations or borders and we were all part of one big group.
- If I were to visit New York City, I would rather go to Times Square than the Metropolitan Museum of Art.
- I am proud of my country’s history.
My results were: You’re 37% conservative, 63% liberal. I don’t know specifically how it reached these numbers, but I suppose some questions were more weighted than others and it depended on your slight or strong feelings on the matter.
Here are the reasons it put me in the liberal side of things:
- You prefer documentaries over action movies
- You like fusion cuisine
- You use a modern browser
- You wish there were no countries
- You prefer the Met to Times Square
And here are the conservative reasons:
- You like dogs more than cats
- You think kids should respect authority
- You like a neat desk
- You think self-control trumps self-expression
- You think the government should treat the lives of its citizens as much more valuable than those of other countries
- You don’t think your partner should be looking at porn alone
- You’re proud of your country’s history
I am going to address my liberal qualities first:
I slightly agreed that I would prefer watching documentaries than action movies, because I suppose I like to learn about nature, science and some social/cultural things than shutting off my mind. Now I’m assuming since almost all documentaries are made from a liberal point of view that they would think liberals prefer this, and that is true, especially lately with nature shows. It always ends up that man is destroying everything beautiful and natural. Making action movie the conservative option is just ridiculous. They could have just said fictional film. But, I suppose conservatives are just knuckle dragging idiots who don’t like learning or being open-minded. (By the way, I hate the phrase, “be more open-minded”. Like the person who is closed-minded haven’t considered other options.)
I moderately agreed that I would try fusion cuisine, and that is a liberal quality. Of course conservatives hate trying new things, especially when it comes to food. Living where I am right now, in a desert of good eating, has made me truly appreciate good food and if a fusion restaurant had a great reputation and reviews for good food, as well as being affordable, obviously I would try it. I also assume “fusion” restaurants to be more on the expensive side, which of course liberals like to spend more at restaurants than a conservative.
I am using Chrome right now, so of course that makes me more liberal… What!? I just don’t get this one, so no real commentary.
I strongly agreed that I wish there were no countries. If we got right down to the heart of this question, don’t we all wish we could get along? Now if they stated, “I see a possibility of all the countries of the world becoming one in the future,” I would have strongly disagreed, and that would have made me more of a conservative, I assume. It seems this statement is designed to make the liberals feel good about the fact that they are the only ones who want world peace, and that conservatives thrive on war. There is a different between wanting world peace and knowing there is no chance of it ever occurring! I rarely comment on these types of things, but I did here, and of course I cracked myself up. Here is what I said: “Wow, I didn’t know liking documentaries, enjoying fusion cuisine, and desiring world peace were only qualities of a liberal! I’m so glad I know that now, so I can protest those restaurants that have one type of ethnic food as war mongering drool beasts!”
My final liberal quality was based on whether I wanted to visit Times Square or the Metropolitan Museum of Art; I said I Strongly Agreed to want to go to the Met. I can’t understand how this separates the liberals and conservatives, but here is what someone commented about this: “Why on earth would Times Square be considered conservative!?! It has a million flashing lights, the naked cowboy, MTV, and a history of being a place where strippers worked?” I probably wouldn’t mind seeing Times Square, but after seeing this guy’s comments I might not want to, and keep my kids away. Obviously, only liberals truly appreciate fine art.
Now for the conservative qualities:
I slightly agreed to liking dogs because they poop outside. I suppose the reason liberals like cats more is the study that people who like cats need to be less controlling. Okay… I kind of see that, maybe. Not!
I strongly agreed that kids should respect authority. So, is it true that liberals teach their kids to be snotty to those more experienced? Or is it the fact that conservatives teach their kids to never question authority. I believe this one is semantics too. The difference between respecting authority or never questioning it, and this one is in the conservatives favor! This should be whether or not kids should question authority. Of course liberals would believe that they are the only ones who teach their children to question what they are told and taught, and conservatives are hard-line, egotistical jerks that should never be questioned.
I slightly agreed to a neat and organized workspace… again, I don’t get it. Liberals are messy and have no need for structure and organization? Hmmmm….. seems fishy to me.
I slightly agreed to self-control over self-expression. I think that self-expression is best expressed when a person has enough sense and control to be able to say it well. The obvious statement is that conservatives are against people expressing themselves, that we should all be non-questioning conformists. I pray that I am raising my kids to question what they are taught and that they can express themselves in any way they can, in legal and modest ways. I believe that liberals might see conservatives as closing down all self-expression because that just leads to chaos, and I agree that there needs to be limits in self-expression. The world, if let alone without laws or morals, would become a confusing, chaotic mess of people expressing themselves in lots of filthy and depraved ways, and self-control is a great way to express one-self. This to me is one of the most controversial points of the whole “quiz”. This is such a complex issue that it should not be simplified to such a statement.
I slightly agreed that a government should be more concerned for its citizens rather than those of other countries. This is a no-brainer to me. I mean, really? Liberals would truly say that their own government should look out for citizens of other countries? I believe that if a country is strong enough, and had enough positive influence in the world, that it should concern itself with those of the world’s citizens as well, but not beyond those of its own. That is why I slightly agreed. Citizen’s safety is/should be of utmost importance to a governments’ concerns, but not other things that liberals believe a government should provide, which makes it confusing, especially in light of recent laws being enacted. To a liberal some of these things become a right that a government should enforce, but they never speak of it being forced on other worldly citizens. Very confusing option here.
I strongly believe your partner should not look at erotic things alone. I’m amazed that this is a question. Sure, maybe liberals are a bit more… liberal with their eroticism and what it has to do with their partners, but does that really separate us? If it does, than thank God. What in the world do liberals think about commitment, purity, faithfulness…? Oh, maybe I’m wrong in thinking that they may hold to a higher view of this. Okay, they can have it. Whatever. Woe to the world and where this question will/is leading us.
I am slightly proud of my country’s history. “What?” you say. Why am I not strongly proud of my country? I am, in the way that we have such freedom, thank God for that. But it is only these freedoms that is leading us back to what some of these questions have referenced: expressions in any way we want! Also, there is a lot to be ashamed of in this world. A friend recommended I read, “A People’s History of the United States” by Howard Zinn, and I didn’t finish it because it did look at the corruption of the history of many of those in authority, and it made me sick at how horrible we can be as a human race. But I, as a Christian, understand that more than other people understand. This world is sick and corrupt with sin. I can’t be “proud” of what horrors have been accomplished for freedom, but I am humbled that I have an opportunity to live in such freedom. Thank you God for the opportunities we have here in this country and the freedoms. I pray for those nations who do not. But at the same time, I know your people are thankful for the trials they suffer, and are more the stronger because of it. Thank you for both.
(Author’s note: Many statements in the preceding article are made in a sarcastic way. Please read with care.)