Does this make me an anarcho-syndicalist?

[The Jay]

I just took that political compass test and it gave me what's in my signature. Does that put me in line with the anarchists? (I know that I can choose whatever I want, but I was just curious)

[Ocean Seal]

I just took that political compass test and it gave me what's in my signature. Does that put me in line with the anarchists? (I know that I can choose whatever I want, but I was just curious)
No, the political compass fails at the extremes to yield reliable results. You are whatever it is you want to be my friend.

[citizen of industry]

People need to stop taking the stupid political compass test. The questions are loaded. It puts you in line with whatever you want to be, which you already knew before you took the "test."

[Le Rouge]

This means your ideology is near Anarcho-Communism. Be careful : It don't means that you fully understand this ideology.

Also, be careful with that compass. It's not really accurate because we can answer differently each time we do the test.

[Die Rote Fahne]

You are in the general area that most revolutionary leftists score. The test can in no way tell you your tendency or whatever. There are anarcho-syndicalists, anarcho-communists, marxist-Lenninists, Luxemburgists, Trotsykists, etc. all with very very similar scores.

It is up to you what you believe in terms of theory.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Your guess is as good as mine.The compass is pretty useless.

[Rooster]

Do you consider yourself to be a an anarcho-syndicalist?

[Le Socialiste]

As Die Rote Fahne mentioned, most leftists with a revolutionary tilt wind up in that area. Regardless, the compass isn't exactly the most accurate of tests. At the end of the day it's up to you. Read up on theory and practice and see where it takes you (if possible, perhaps get involved in an organization that best reflects your views). If you're only beginning to enter the world of revolutionary leftism you'll find that there's plenty for you to look into. While it shouldn't be encouraged that you immediately find the tendency you most align with and choose it, if you find yourself clicking with any one (or more) particular leftist tendencies and/or movements you should look into it further. And keep an open mind (this is key). Don't shut yourself out from other tendencies based on what you've already come to. The worst thing you can do is take on a "prolier-than-thou" mentality (the belief that your ideological line is superior to all other forms of revolutionary leftism). For one thing it's obnoxious as hell; secondly, it gets you nowhere and serves only to alienate you from those you'd otherwise consider comrades. If anarcho-syndicalism appeals to you, research it. Read up on its theories and history amongst the international working-class. If you find yourself not really agreeing with it, that's fine too. It can be a process. :)

[Nox]

I just took that political compass test and it gave me what's in my signature. Does that put me in line with the anarchists? (I know that I can choose whatever I want, but I was just curious)

I'm a Marxist-Leninist, and I'm -10,-10.

Theoretically, every Communist, regardless of tendency, should be -10, -10.

[Искра]

I just took that political compass test and it gave me what's in my signature. Does that put me in line with the anarchists? (I know that I can choose whatever I want, but I was just curious)
You should check this thread: http://www.revleft.com/vb/anarcho-syndicalism-dummies-t121236/index.html?t=121236

It's little guid trough anarcho-syndicalism which will explain you better what do anarcho-syndicalists support. Maybe this will "tell you" if you are one.

[tir1944]

Pol. Compass is shit and you should disregard it completely.

[graymouser]

Yeah, more or less everybody here should be -10, -10 (or very very close) if they understand the political and class content of the questions. I'm actually curious why any revleft member would be less than -9, -9.

[Desperado]

It has a clear bias from their centre-liberal understanding, and as previously mentioned is unsuitable for the extremes. Besides this it's pretty shabbily made.

f.e


Those who are able to work, and refuse the opportunity, should not expect society's support.

They are obviously talking about typical conservative complaining of "benefit cheats", which any leftist would look on as nonsense - disagreeing here makes you more left. But in a more general sense, this isn't that far from the leftist criticism of the bourgeoisie (support is ambiguous), and in the realm of a classless society of free associations whether the idle should be provided for is not a consensus topic, even amongst leftists of the same tendency.

Other questions the authors obviously intend to reflect the liberal/authoritarian bias can be pretty irrelevant:


Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all.
...
It is a waste of time to try to rehabilitate some criminals.The abstract art one is just looking at stereotypes - aesthetic preferences (though correlating with politics) are hardly relevant. And as a strong opponent of punishment, even I agree with the latter question - with some being for me a very small minority, and the alternative not at all being punishment, but the highest possible quality of life (something I don't think the authors expect from a "strongly agree" answer).


"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is a fundamentally good idea.I think it's a good idea in practice, and on every level. But the "fundamentally good idea" suggests an acceptance that it's "utopian", and not at a possible living reality.



Protectionism is sometimes necessary in trade.
...
Sex outside marriage is usually immoral.
The former is pretty irrelevant to us radical leftists, but both these questions share the same problem of ambiguity. If I think protectionism is always necessary in trade, or never necessary in trade, I shall answer strongly disagree - although both positions are practically opposites. Same for never/always on marriage. To answer the test one has to think about where the author is coming from, which is often a mainstream liberal bias, but sometimes just one of ill-thought reasoning.

The compass is still pretty good as an introduction to politics, but pretty useless for us.

[anarcho-communist4]

Your guess is as good as mine.The compass is pretty useless.

its useless but its in your signature? ;)

[Kornilios Sunshine]

Guys,will a fuckin test tell you what you are?YOU decide which tendency you want to be,not this shitty test.Oh,I did it and I was expecting to be above -5 but I was about there.It said libertarian or something like that.So that means I will stop being a Marxist-Leninist-Stalinist because this test told me.Needless to say,that some of my answers were random because of my poor vocabulary.The point is,focus on the tendency YOU want to be.

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I'm a Marxist-Leninist, and I'm -10,-10.

Theoretically, every Communist, regardless of tendency, should be -10, -10.
Do we get purged if we're not? :D

[Wanted Man]

Moved to Learning.