Eupedia Forums
Site NavigationEupedia Top > Eupedia Forum & Japan Forum
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 34 of 34

Thread: Tests on Authoritarian Personality and Fascism

  1. #26
    Advisor Achievements:
    Three FriendsVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsRecommendation First Class
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    LeBrok's Avatar
    Join Date
    18-11-09
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    10,331
    Points
    113,888
    Level
    100
    Points: 113,888, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b Z2109
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1c

    Ethnic group
    Citizen of the world
    Country: Canada-Alberta





    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    First test:

    I am surprised. I got 43% Fascist (highest score so far) at the 2nd test, even though I am economically and socially (ultra-)liberal, atheist, anti-war, and generally favour the individual over the state, and I am definitely against military-style schools (I am more of a Montessori advocate). I scored 56% conventional when there is nothing conventional about me. I am a future-oriented reformist that doesn't mind getting rid of most traditional systems and beliefs. I should also score lower than 22% on superstitions. That makes one wonder about the accuracy of these tests. The only things that are compatible in my personality with fascism is toughness (e.g. against crime and corruption), and maybe dislike of abstract art (but I hate Art Deco too and that was the Nazi's official style).
    This is what I represent too in all aspects you described. Plus, I'm much tougher on myself than other people (except my kids, to a degree). My conventionalism should be close to 0. There are too few questions in this survey to avoid statistical fallacy.
    Come on, I love art deco, lol. It just happened that it was popular during high of fascism. I guess, this is my low productivity and stereotyping talking.
    Be wary of people who tend to glorify the past, underestimate the present, and demonize the future.

  2. #27
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,738
    Points
    720,177
    Level
    100
    Points: 720,177, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 67.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    3 members found this post helpful.
    Quote Originally Posted by Salento View Post
    It can’t be that the main reason to get married in ...... is to have a party.
    Theoretically, how about: Stability, sense of Family, Love.
    Sharing exclusivity between 2 people.
    Absolutely not! Statistically couple who get married are more likely to split (divorce) than those who live together and have kids together without getting married. Perhaps that's because on some unconscious level people think that once they are married they don't have to try as hard anymore.

    I know plenty of people who live together just under a civil partnership and have just as much (or more) stability, sense of family and love as married people. Marriage is mostly a religious thing. Once religion becomes irrelevant, you don't need that label any more.
    My book selection---Follow me on Facebook and Twitter --- My profile on Academia.edu and on ResearchGate ----Check Wa-pedia's Japan Guide
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble causes and to make this muddled world a better place for those who will live in it after we are gone?", Winston Churchill.

  3. #28
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-11-16
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,106
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,106, Level: 8
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 78.0%


    Ethnic group
    United Kingdom and Baltic
    Country: United States



    Quote Originally Posted by Maciamo View Post
    Absolutely not! Statistically couple who get married are more likely to split (divorce) than those who live together and have kids together without getting married. Perhaps that's because on some unconscious level people think that once they are married they don't have to try as hard anymore.

    I know plenty of people who live together just under a civil partnership and have just as much (or more) stability, sense of family and love as married people. Marriage is mostly a religious thing. Once religion becomes irrelevant, you don't need that label any more.
    Wife and I considered ourselves married before we were married. Getting legally married had to do with guaranteeing her rights and granting my surname which she loves. I see no reason why it can’t be contract based enforceable through government but not necessarily managed by them.

    Personally I take monogamy very seriously and found a woman capable as me in fostering a deep and enjoyable bond. I don’t believe I’m capable of another lifestyle and I can honestly say I couldn’t ever see myself with another woman in my life.

    I’m not religious at all.

  4. #29
    Satyavrata Achievements:
    Three FriendsRecommendation First ClassVeteran50000 Experience PointsTagger First Class
    Maciamo's Avatar
    Join Date
    17-07-02
    Location
    Lothier
    Posts
    8,738
    Points
    720,177
    Level
    100
    Points: 720,177, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 67.0%


    Ethnic group
    Italo-celto-germanic
    Country: Belgium - Brussels



    Quote Originally Posted by Mark View Post
    Wife and I considered ourselves married before we were married. Getting legally married had to do with guaranteeing her rights and granting my surname which she loves. I see no reason why it can’t be contract based enforceable through government but not necessarily managed by them.

    Personally I take monogamy very seriously and found a woman capable as me in fostering a deep and enjoyable bond. I don’t believe I’m capable of another lifestyle and I can honestly say I couldn’t ever see myself with another woman in my life.

    I’m not religious at all.
    I also consider myself monogamous. The way I see it is that if a couple is strictly monogamous, they don't need marriage to "consolidate" or officialise their union. After all, most birds mate for life and they don't get married. Players for whom monogamy isn't suited definitely should not get married either. So the question is, for whom is marriage designed? Is it for people who aren't too sure about their partner and need reassurance from the community (family, friends, state) that their union is stable? It doesn't work otherwise half of marriages wouldn't end up in divorce.

    The reason why people marry is mostly cultural and religious. According to OECD stats, Americans have the highest marriage rate of any Western country after Russia (if it is considered 'Western') and Lithuania. The US marriage rate is almost twice higher than the EU average, and more similar to what it used to be in Western Europe in the 1960's and 70s. This table from Eurostat shows how the marriage rate in almost all European countries (except the most eastern ones) has fallen by half over the last 4 decades.



    The disparities between countries already existed in the 70's. Germans used to have a higher marriage rate than the French or Brits, and they still do, even though all fell by half.

    But the marriage rate doesn't take into account the discrepancy between people who never marry and never have kids, and those who do have children but without ever marrying. In Southern Europe the birth rate has dropped a lot along the marriage rate because fewer people get into long-term relationships with children. But that's not true of France, Britain or Scandinavia.

    We see more clearly on this map that the countries with the highest percentages of children living with unmarried parents come from countries with a high percentage of atheists or non-religious people, such as France, Britain and Scandinavia.




    In the USA having children out-of-wedlock has a bad rep because the vast majority of these children end up living in single-parent homes. Only 2% of American children live in a family with two cohabiting parents (as opposed to two married parents or a single parent), against 31% in Estonia, 26% in Sweden, 25% in France, 18% in Belgium and 14% in the UK. Even traditional minded (and relatively religious) Germans and Spaniards have 8% of them (four times more than in the US !).




    So it looks like religion, or traditions influenced by religion, is still a determinant factor in whether parents feel the need to get married or not.

  5. #30
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Mark's Avatar
    Join Date
    26-11-16
    Posts
    115
    Points
    1,106
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,106, Level: 8
    Level completed: 78%, Points required for next Level: 44
    Overall activity: 78.0%


    Ethnic group
    United Kingdom and Baltic
    Country: United States



    Tests on Authoritarian Personality and Fascism

    Maciamo, I have moved my response to your thread on marriage:

    https://www.eupedia.com/forum/showpost.php?p=538668

  6. #31
    Elite member Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree FriendsVeteran10000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    23-02-15
    Location
    Groningen
    Posts
    656
    Points
    11,268
    Level
    32
    Points: 11,268, Level: 32
    Level completed: 3%, Points required for next Level: 682
    Overall activity: 0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    E1b1b/ E-V22

    Ethnic group
    North Sea Germanic
    Country: Netherlands



    IMO the fascism test is ridiculous, even a slightest and modest leftist play for state intervention and/or less consumer addict opinions gets a score of 41% and second time 35%.....(= fellow traveler). So a strange view on fascism behind this all.

    Especially in relationship with my f-scale: This makes you 22.4% less authoritarian than the average person.

    IMO I had to be at least more than average authoritarian to be potential affiliated with fascism.


  7. #32
    Moderator Achievements:
    Tagger Second ClassThree Friends25000 Experience PointsVeteran

    Join Date
    21-10-16
    Posts
    1,750
    Points
    29,016
    Level
    52
    Points: 29,016, Level: 52
    Level completed: 34%, Points required for next Level: 734
    Overall activity: 7.0%


    Ethnic group
    Multiracial Brazilian
    Country: Brazil



    Quote Originally Posted by Northener View Post
    IMO the fascism test is ridiculous, even a slightest and modest leftist play for state intervention and/or less consumer addict opinions gets a score of 41% and second time 35%.....(= fellow traveler). So a strange view on fascism behind this all.

    Especially in relationship with my f-scale: This makes you 22.4% less authoritarian than the average person.

    IMO I had to be at least more than average authoritarian to be potential affiliated with fascism.

    I agree with you. It seems like that first test basically equates "favors higher state intervention" and "is not completely liberal [in the European/classic sense of liberalism]" with "flirts with fascism". A bit one-dimensional.

  8. #33
    Junior Member Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    13-07-18
    Location
    Tennessee, U.S.
    Posts
    2
    Points
    1,119
    Level
    8
    Points: 1,119, Level: 8
    Level completed: 85%, Points required for next Level: 31
    Overall activity: 1.0%

    Y-DNA haplogroup
    R1b-L1065
    MtDNA haplogroup
    H1a3a

    Ethnic group
    Anglo-American/Southerner ( colonial West Country-English+Scotch-Irish)
    Country: USA - Tennessee



    0.6 More Authoritarian than the average person.
    28% Fascist "which means you're not really fascist."

  9. #34
    Regular Member Achievements:
    1 year registered5000 Experience Points

    Join Date
    09-06-18
    Posts
    160
    Points
    5,716
    Level
    22
    Points: 5,716, Level: 22
    Level completed: 34%, Points required for next Level: 334
    Overall activity: 32.0%


    Ethnic group
    Catalan
    Country: Spain - Catalonia



    My results:

    Fascism Test

    You are 18% Fascist, which makes you Not Fascist.



    While your political outlook may share a few (or even quite a few) of fascism's fundamental doctrines, it is overall safe to say that your political orientation is *not* a fascist one. Now, you may find this result unsurprising, but in reality, most people have at least some points of agreement with fascism since fascism is really a mix of communism, socialism, conservatism, and liberalism, with a few innovations of its own thrown in. Hence, adjusting for these factors, even though your fascism percentage might seem quite high, there is really nothing surprising about these agreements, when viewed in their proper historical context, so rest assured: Your political beliefs are definitely not fascist.



Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •