It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: jacobe001
I found their quiz absolutely stupid.
The options presented were full of loaded language, black and white and had no nuance whatsoever.
I quit the quiz at question 10. Like you, the quiz was presenting questions in a black in white context with no shades of grey in between. The questions all seemed to be based on the status quo as if there are no other alternatives.
Government Regulation of Business is necessary to protect the public interests.
Government Regulation of Business usually does more harm than good.
I believe in regulations such as keep business in check from pissing in my rivers or skies, or keep Wall Street contained, but the majority of the regulations we have are actually harmful to the citizens that favor Big Business against Small Business competition.
That does not mean I want to throw the baby out with the bath water and get rid of all regulations.
Why not expand it to not just regulations pertaining to business but to everyone.
Get rid of the regulatory bodies and policies of police, military and so on and see how well that goes.
I definitely came in as a hard-pressed skeptic and I'm glad that makes up only 13% of the population because to the extent that group grows, the problems in this country will only get worse.
My prediction? Hard-Pressed skeptics will become and ever larger part of the population.
originally posted by: solomons path
a reply to: BO XIAN
Bo . . . it's not you. You have explained the goals and methodology just fine. The issue here lies in the respondents.
You should know from your background in psychology that while we don't like to be "separated" from the group and have deep seeded needs for acceptance, belonging, etc.; we also refuse to admit that the group has influence on us. It's why people get mad at stereotypes. You see it on the boards in every religion thread. As soon as someone uses "Christian" and points out a negative about the ideology . . . every poster that defends or self-identifies themselves as "Christian" quickly asserts their individuality and claim "that's not me, though".
Asch's studies in the 50's show very clearly that the individual will fight to retain individuality within a small majority. In this case, the respondents are being asked to complete this survey on-line . . . providing no confederates or group dynamic. It also presents a very simple task (almost too simple), which makes it easier to reject the options presented.
You are also seeing a good exercise in an individual's desire to maintain control, too much time to think about resistance, time to think about the legitimacy of the authority. I also think it's very telling that this thread is almost a case study in reactance . . . in fact, many have even stated that they "refused" or "could not" even complete the survey, in order to preserve their independence.
I'm not sure of your geographic background, but this seems all too common for a site populated by "westerners", especially Americans.
Ask a predominantly Asian audience to "take the survey" and I bet you get very few, if any, of the reactions seen here.
(Should be noted . . . I'm talking about culture, not "ethnicity" above)
originally posted by: solomons path
a reply to: BO XIAN
Oh . . . And as I forgot to state it in the previous post . . .
The issue arises from the start, as before the respondents were even shown the sample questions, they know the objective is to place them in ideological groups. So, even if not consciously, they are critical of the options from the get go, in order cling to their individuality. Thus, influencing how they view the choices presented.
originally posted by: TheJourney
I can never even finish those sorts of quizzes...I absolutely cannot choose one or the other polar opposites on most questions, so whatever I answer I feel mis-represented by, and so stop taking it.
originally posted by: pavil
reply to: BO XIAN
I hear that but how does a steadfast conservative be for same sex marriage and other "non conservative" positions in that survey? It was an attempt to show how polarization of politics is occurring by asking polarizing questions. Like many other surveys, they found the answer they wanted by asking the "right" questions.
The new typology has eight groups: Three are strongly ideological, highly politically engaged and overwhelmingly partisan – two on the right and one on the left. Steadfast Conservatives are staunch critics of government and the social safety net and are very socially conservative.
. . .
. . .
Ideological Consistency vs. the Political Typology
The polarization study found that more Americans today hold consistently liberal or consistently conservative values across a wide range of issues, that Democrats and Republicans are further apart ideologically and that more partisans express deeply negative views of the other political party, with many going so far as to see the other side as a “threat to the nation’s well-being.”
Even so, most Americans do not view politics through uniformly liberal or conservative lenses, and more tend to stand apart from partisan antipathy than engage in it. But the typology shows that the center is hardly unified. Rather, it is a combination of groups, each with their own mix of political values, often held just as strongly as those on the left and the right, but just not organized in consistently liberal or conservative terms. Taken together, this “center” looks like it is halfway between the partisan wings. But when disaggregated, it becomes clear that there are many distinct voices in the center, often with as little in common with each other as with those who are on the left and the right.
The Pew Research Center’s Political Typology, launched 27 years ago, is an effort to look beyond “Red vs. Blue” in American politics, understanding that there are multiple dimensions to American political thinking, and that many people hold different combinations of values than the predominantly liberal and conservative platforms offered by the two political parties.
originally posted by: BO XIAN
I don't think the study shows that "steadfast conservatives" are for same sex marriage etc. It noted that they were socially very conservative.