Posts by BenWilson
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Polity: In defence of the centre, in reply to Rich Lock,
Or a war…
Or other meaningful change...for the worse.
I'm definitely not excited by the prospect of another Depression. Like a war, it's one of those times we're likely to romanticize after the fact (so long as we win), but at the time it's a real fuck. And there's no guarantee of a "win". It's as likely to lead to regressive austerity as a rethink of capitalism and a new left wing direction. At least, that's what's currently happening, and I don't see any promising signs on the horizon.
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Steve Barnes,
By which I gather you mean mine.
Well yours and everyone with an opinion. My own arse was the one I was worried about the smell of, TBH :-)
It’s not that pundits aren’t probably more likely to have an informed opinion about the classic definitions of left and right. It’s just that pundits aren’t the only voters, or the only users of the words. Without even committing to agreeing with Rob’s view that moving to the center is worthwhile, it’s still valuable to understand what is even meant by the center. Otherwise it’s a discussion about which way we should steer our ship in a dense fog. Under those conditions, the only safe choice is to stop.
ETA: And that's not really a choice, if there is not long term prospect that the fog will ever lift.
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Brent Jackson,
It is interesting to note that a significant number of people (~80) put National at 0, and a similar number of people put Labour at 10. Were they the same people ?
Interesting question...we've got the data. Any thoughts about how to answer that question? You want to know specifically about those 160-odd people?
It’s also interesting that the shapes are different, with Labour’s mode at 4, and National’s at 8.
Yes, I forgot about the mode! Labour's way closer on that score to the population self-assessment mode of 5 (again, and for all of my graphs, excluding the missing and don't knows, which were a pretty big number too).
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Steve Barnes,
So you end up with what you think they mean and end up with what? Something that has no basis in reality. Sure, it gets you a statistically transparent measure but means nothing.
I don't think it means nothing. It just doesn't mean the same as what you mean.
Do you care about others? Yes = Left, No = Right.
and it definitely doesn't mean that. Well, unless you insist on it. Then it means that to you. But the aggregation tells us what it means to the larger group, how the word operates in the public consciousness. That's at least something that comes from the data, rather than out of someone's arse. Or perhaps I should say "If it must come from the arse, it should be from everyone's arse".
But I'm not defending it as the "truth" about what "left" means. It's just another thing we can add to the discussion - some evidence about what more than just loud voices think it means.
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Danielle,
Thank god *something* in this thread made me laugh.
Ditto :-)
-
Polity: In defence of the centre, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Perhaps the old Empire Building strategy comes into play here
First thing that jumped out at me. There's a lot of departments in organizations that are cost centers in the first place, with negative bottom lines at all times. Excellent places for bullshit jobs. Thinking back, the whole Y2K team in one business I was in was like that.
-
Without approving of this twist, I can think of one advantage to it - it will serve as a windbreak.
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Steve Barnes,
Well if you are talking purely about yourself then that’s fine but I feel that self-identification can be misleading if the person making that decision is making that decision from an uninformed or even misinformed position.
Been meaning to answer this. So we've got 2 ways of deciding if someone is "left". The first is that we ask them. Then we capture where they think they are, based on what they think "left" means.. The second is that we decide what "left" means for them, and find a way to measure it, based on their other opinions. And never the twain shall meet.
The second way is also not just one way. It's one way for every definition of "left" that we care to come up with. So the analysis will just rage around that point - it will never get past a definitional debate.
The first way has the advantage that that is not going to happen. We're aggregating everyone's definitions, essentially. We can study their other opinions to find out what "left" means to the average person. Which is one way of getting past the definition phase, just by averaging opinions on what it means.
That's if we're particularly interested in that. I accept it's not universally interesting - many people will stick with their opinion on the matter until they croak. They have been doing so for a long time now. I'm interested in it, personally, although mostly because I think the term "left" is not the principal point of political distinction for the general population.
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Sacha,
. Is it possible to show similar distributions for other parties, or is the dataset too small?
No there’s plenty of data.
ETA: Please note the red and blue are Mana and Maori parties...couldn't think of a color for them.
-
Polity: Meet the middle, in reply to Sacha,
And I see Maori Party, NZ First, and United Future inhabit the ‘space’ between Lab and Nat.
At least in this particular dimension. Auckland is between Sydney and Melbourne, if you take only latitude into account.
Last ←Newer Page 1 … 138 139 140 141 142 … 1066 Older→ First