Political Compass scores.

[Muravyets]

Economic Left/Right: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.79



I have no idea what that means, but it puts me in the same quadrant as Gandhi, Mandela, and the Dalai Lama, so I'll take it.

[Khithali]

First of all, sorry for the thread hijack. But this is NSG, so where would we be without it, eh?

Outflanking the Maginot Line through the Ardennes was certainly an act of genius when you consider the original proposal by General Halder that Hitler turned down after a briefing. The result of this maneuver trapped the allied forces in the region at Dunkirk where they suffered huge economic and military losses.

Going through the Ardennes is generally considered Hitler's greatest military move. However, it was still not genius. All he did was look at the situation from a new perspective. Instead of thinking "how can we break France's defenses?" he thought "how can we avoid France's defenses?" Good thinking, yes. Genius, no.

Once Hitler had conquered a majority of Africa and mainland Europe he was in an incredible position to destroy the British by means of attrition as his forces had no efficient means of crossing the English Channel at that time. Beyond the geographic divide the one thing the English had going for them was the hope that the Soviets would join the allies and betray the non-aggression pact with the reich. In order to destroy this hope and to hasten the attrition to the British Isles Hitler ordered Operation Barbarossa.

Are you seriously arguing that the invasion of the USSR was a rational decision? This is universally accepted as the most stupid war time decision in history. That someone can even attempt to justify it boggles the mind. Let's look at this rationally. You have specifically made peace with the USSR in order to avoid a two front war that destroyed Germany during the last world war. You are cuttently still dealing with the British, very much a threat. At this point, the US joining in is not forseeable. To the east you have a ginormous country with a huge army with great natural defenses (ie. winter) that you are currently in an alliance with. An uneasy alliance, yes, but still an alliance. You're still in the process of pacifying your occupied territories. You say invading the USSR was in order to stop it from joining the war against Hitler to help Britain. How exactly does invading an allied a country stop it from fighting you?

The ultimate failure of Barbarossa stemmed from three things timing, supply, and division. Timing in that they did not complete the operation before the winter, supply in that they were not prepared for the winter and their lines had to stretch hundreds of miles, and division in the splitting of forces with one half going south towards the oil rich Urals and the other half diverted towards Stalingrad.

Timing in that they invaded during late summer/autumn in order to invade a country the size of the USSR? A small detail, yes. Supplies in that they didn't prepare for winter? Because of course they didn't see that coming. Divison in that they were spread out over the whole of Russia? Again, a small detail.

The smaller, physically unprepared and under supplied force is what caused operations on the Eastern Front to come to a screeching halt. With no pivotal use for the Kriegsmarine on the Eastern Front they could be fully devoted to a blockade of the British Isles while the Luftwaffe would be split between the fronts. With proper supply lines established, an influx in cold weather equipped troops, and the eventual change in seasons the Nazi forces would have had the chance to break through the stalemate and push on through the Soviet Union. These supply lines were never established and poor administration on the battlefield, not in Berlin, led to the ultimate continuation of the stalemate for some time.

All of these could easily have been avoided. He could have waited until spring. He could have equipped his troops for winter in the beginning. He could have given them proper supplies instead of relying on foraging, easily defeated by the USSR's slash and burn policy. Hell, he could not have invaded. There was no way Stalin would have declared war on Germany given a choice, whithout heavy backup. (ie, the US)

The ultimate blunder that Hitler made that did result in losing the whole shindig was the deceleration of war on the United States following the Japanese attacks on Pearl Harbor. With American supplies, fresh soldiers, and equipment the British were no longer feeling the pressure of attrition and could being large scale operations in North Africa and then Italy. With Italy out of the picture Germany had one more area to occupy spreading her already divided forces even further. All in all, Hitler was an incredible strategist as whole, there was just minute blunders that ended up costing him the war.

Because declaring war on the US, with Britain and the USSR still major threats was a "minute blunder." I agree with you on the effects of the US joining the war, but they could have so easily been avoided. The other major threat, the USSR could also have been avoided, as I pointed out before. All in all, Hitler was a godawful strategist as a whole, there were just several major blunders that ended up costing him the war.

[Waterlow]

5.00 left
7.90 down

Tangentially, the website's positioning of certain individuals and political parties seems to me to be arrant nonsense. I don't think, for instance, that the UK Liberal Democrats can reasonably be placed at pretty much zero on the libertarian scale; they're not anarchists but should be a couple of points negative at least. Also, you'd think that all mainstream politicians were rampantly right-wing judging by their plots but this simply isn't the case.

[Whereyouthinkyougoing]

Economic Left/Right: -8.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.62

[Yootopia]

Going through the Ardennes is generally considered Hitler's greatest military move.

Proposed by Manstein.

[Smunkeeville]

3.50 right
10 down



I'm moving further left and I've been as far down as I can go for a while.

[Khithali]

Going through the Ardennes is generally considered Hitler's greatest military move.

Proposed by Manstein.

Ah. You learn something new everyday. And this one even makes my argument one step better. Thankyou.

[Dread Lady Nathicana]

Odd. I hadn't even thought about all this in years. Well, for whatever its worth, this seems to be mine.



Economic Left/Right: -4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.26

And for my own personal jollies, this is my nation's main character's results:



Economic Left/Right: 0.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 2.21

[Jingoist Hippostan]

I haven't taken this thing for like two years. Let's see...

economic left/right: -4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.38

[Linker Niederrhein]

I've actually forgotten which axis was social, and which was economics. Meh.

[Brunnhildar]

A little more polarised than usual. Iirc, last time I got ~-3,-3.

[Behaved]

Economic Left/Right: -0.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.26 Centrist

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Setting aside the question of the accuracy or usefulness of this test (not to mention the naseuating fawning over Hitler hijack), here are my results:

Economic Left/Right: -7.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.90

Hippie.

[Conserative Morality]

I personally prefer the Okcupid Political Test.

[North Wiedna]

Economic Left/Right 7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian 5.23


Hooray for capitalism!

[Natapoc]

Any political party or government or any system of hierarchy that would represent me would have to dissolve itself on formation.

Economic Left/Right: -9.6
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.8

[Parthenon]

It wasn't the invasion of Russia that was the blunder, it was the execution of it. General Franz Halder, as well as countless historians, all recognized the fact that through destroying the Soviet Union, Germany would destroy Britain's hope of defeating Germany. If Barbarossa was successfully it would ultimately be the climax of the war.

[Yootopia]

It wasn't the invasion of Russia that was the blunder, it was the execution of it

Name me a post-Mongol state that has ever invaded the entirety of Russia and won.

[Allemonde]

I would say pretty far left. I consider myself a libertarian socialist.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/printablegraph?ec=-8.88&soc=-8.51

[Iron Chariots]

Even though my last results are quite recent, I retook it:
Economic Left/Right: -5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.79


However, depending on how strongly I'm feeling at the time, I can occasionally be as far right as -3.5 or so. My social axis typically is a bit more constant.

Also:
85% Social
18% Economic

[Konakimo]

Even if you implement communism perfectly, it will never work. It is contrary to human nature.

From a post of mine in the "Communism, why try?" topic:

"'Human nature'" in the sense that advocates of capitalism use the term, must refer to something characteristic of all humans at all times. For example, the "stalk and pounce" impulse is characteristic of all felines at all times. The insatiable greed of humans, however, is quite apparently not characteristic of all humans at all times, and even when it is characteristic of us, it evinces in many diverging ways - not all of them being entirely materialistic. Under capitalism, there is unceasing uncertainty about the future, and thus one is forced to continually strive to accumulate more due to the risk of losing what he/she has. As follows, under capitalism, it's quite rational to be greedy. In an egalitarian society, the same rules do not apply. Additionally, from an evolutionary viewpoint: if the instincts and physicality of a species are shaped by its environment, and humanity's primary environment is society, we are not insatiably greedy HENCE capitalism, we live in a capitalist world HENCE our insatiable greed. As humans we are quite obviously capable of compassion and selflessness, we've simply been thrust into a situation where competitiveness, aggression and greed are rewarded. This is why Marxists propose the idea of the "transitional" phase of socialism before moving on to full-fledged communism."

[Forsakia]

Economic Left/Right: -1.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.10

[Soheran]

Economic Left/Right: -9.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.72



Glad I haven't slid too far to the right lately... these scores are around where I was a year or two ago.

[Derscon]

Economic Left/Right: 5.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.23

Fair enough description of me, I suppose.

Economic Left/Right: 9.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.59



Seems I have some company.

Some of those questions suck, though. If it was a more accurate test, I'd probably be 10, -10

[DrunkenDove]

Economic Left/Right: -2.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.79

I've slipped to the right by about three points since the last time I took the test.