Radicalism 58.25
Socialism 37.5
Tenderness 34.375

These scores indicate that you are a tough-minded moderate; this is the political profile one might associate with a jaded materialist. It appears that you are skeptical towards religion, and have a pragmatic attitude towards humanity in general.

Your attitudes towards economics appear capitalist, and combined with your social attitudes this creates the picture of someone who would generally be described as a political centrist.

To round out the picture you appear to be, political preference aside, a centrist with few strong opinions.

Augh. I couldn't get behind this test. It weighs out your opinions on issues as polar as atheist/christian, pro-life/eugenicist, communist/greed-monger. There is no room for somebody that knows that things aren't black and white like that. As binary as some of these issues are the implications are far from simple. I'm against "blood sports, like fox hunting" but I'm for hunting as a sport. I'm for the "nationalization of industry" in some areas but against it in others. I don't like how they lumped jews and muslims into the same group due to the fact that being an antisemite is akin to being a nazi and the popular connection to muslims is terrorism (the two groups are polar oposites!).

I'm very opinionated and back up everything with understanding of the subject. If I have no opinion that means I don't know enough to make an informed opinion. "6) Investors and financers have been responsible for most of our economic difficulties." This question I find offensive. I'm sure everyone here has at least heard of the ill concieved and ill fated "occupy" demonstrations. These were thought up as a way to bring attention to the fact that a very small group of people (less than one-thousand people) control the financial world in its entirety. They have the financial clout to decide everything and that is exactly what they do. The non-rich (anybody that makes a net profit of less then $50 million annually) are the cogs of the system for which this test was designed. The rich are taught differently, they believe differently and they think differently.

Bluntly, I am a cruel and twisted mind. I believe in mass murder, forced labor, selective breeding, the abolishment of theistic religions, pro-choice but all children subject to harsh rules with deadly penalties and a level of government spending the likes of we have never seen; but only spending it on our people, foresaking all other nations. Contradictively I am for the actual helping of third world nations, not with money but with public works: running water, housing, education, energy distribution. I would nuke iraq, pave it, put up solar panels and windmills over the entire country and an air conditioned parking lot underneath the shade of the solar generator for that large portion of the world. If anybody messed with my country I would declare war, invade them, and name them new steve, a teritory of the great united states of america.

Most people think I should never be made leader of the free world, they might be right. But does anybody think those scores for radicalism are right?

I agree with you in many ways,, expecially that things aren't black and white

however, I am not for mass murder because who the fuck is going to do this right? I believe that the amount of people worth it in the world are relatively rare, but mass murder is going to fuck something up, someones going to kill the wrong people.

I put freedom and the ability to acheive freedom and abilitys as the highest good in the world, so murder becomes a great wrong, considering that it directly takes away all physical freedom of the person murdered. This is also highly fucking against harsh and deadly rules for children(the thing about you I disagree with most, honestly, remove that, and.. given the people you would go up against, I'd vote you for president).

Your plan for Iraq I agree with and thought up myself. I mean, look at the good It did for japan.

_________________

No doubt. I know my ideas are extreme. I won't go into details but my childhood sucked. I got out, fixed my life and here I am. I would require breeding licenses for any coupling, children born by one or both parents that don't have such a license would need to be dealt with. Preferably before birth but an unwanted child has no life to which he can look forward.

I understand that I would have been aborted under my own rules. This is for the betterment of all mankind and sacrafices have to be made. It's harsh, it's cold and I would welcome any alternative. I would mandate genetic profiling and eliminate undesirable hereditary flaws through a selective breeding program. This and much more but not as president. As president I would eliminate poverty, solve the energy crisis, fix our flawed government and make this country everything it was always meant to be. I would be a great president.

Now say we have a global catastrophe and I somehow take power. As a ruthless dictator taking point in remaking humanity I would strive to fix the things I saw wrong last time. I walk a strange line between what I would do if given power and what I want to do. Maybe as a mad scientist?

I was an unwanted child, and I have shitloads of potential. infact, it could be argued that my birth may be for the betterment of all mankind.

My mothers tubes were tied, I came out, a kind of meant to be thing. I shouldn't have had the mother I did, but there were no hereditary flaws, and infact, I have the long end of the genetic stick.

Would your plan in specifics stop me from being born?

Given that the government was good enough, I would rather impliment a well, large foster program for people like me.

_________________

Another great example of the flaws in my original plan. Way back when I thought this up my friends in highschool liked to point out I would have been executed under this harsh regime. Eventually I would learn the difference between idealism and pragmtism. The ideal is no unwanted children, or more specifically a world where all children grow up in loving, nuturing homes and have ready access to the levels of education they deserve.

My thoughts were bitter and vengeful, but pragmatically I would have to come up with a better solution. "Mass murder" is something of a gross simplification. From the limited perspective of the test I would be compared to a genicidal dictator but if I'm building a utopia then that won't fly. To fix the problems and still retain the american freedoms I decided the best solution is to fix the problem not the symptoms. I'm not trying to stop children from being unloved and uncared for, I'm trying to stop parents from ruining children's lives and depriving them of the opportunity to succede.

My breeding license slowly went from the cruel to the utopic end of the spectrum. There are a small set of factors we can all agree would provide a child a well adjusted life and here I get normal rockwell on the conversation. Specifically the four freedoms.

Freedom from want. Children shouldn't be spoiled and that's a subtle thing to teach but they should never know hunger. There is enough in this country and this world that no child should grow up in poverty, wanting for the basic neccessities.

Freedom from fear. The boogey man, sharks, skeleton harvesters, the normal childhood fears aren't what I'm talking about. When you're afraid to do something because you know you'll get beaten and you're afraid to report the beatings because you know you'll be taken away you are not free. You can't develop normally and you get a twisted sense of right and wrong.

I'm not trying to make this my soap box so back to the point. Yes, under my original ideas neither of us, maybe none of us would be alive. Under my pragmatic plan I actually intend to impliment, we would both be alive but our lives might be quite different. I might still talk to my mom, sisters or even have a dad (haven't talked in any way in many years) and I might have a much better education. Life still has its twists and turns, I can't deny who I am and in the end I could be the same person but with a ph.d. and good paying job. I'd be ok with that or the knowledge that I wasted that potential; not the knowledge that I was robbed of that opportunity.

(That would be a great point to end on but I want to get back to the topic of the quiz.)

The world is far from black and white and the discusion of even this one issue is worthy of further debate. I'm not sure my tenderness score is accurate either having outlined my "eugenics" program a little. Just mentioning abortion is a can-of-worms colliding with pandora's box in terms of the political and religious rage it incites. My thoughts on the creation of the universe are not a political point in any regard: if we're to separate religion and state, then it shouldn't matter what I believe only what I would vote.

The government is the people. We have to make decisions not on what we believe or what we would do but what's best for our country and its citizens. Freedom to make mistakes is what makes our country free and if we regulate away all our choices we're all slaves. I couldn't live as a slave and wouldn't suffer anybody else to do so.

And now, I'm pretty much inline with you.

_________________