Interesting.
I sence the potential for a contradiction. Especially concerning meritocracy and the scientificity of sociology (logically, if you consider one as legitimate, you can't consider the other as rationnal). But I think it might simply boils down to a lack of knowledge about the subject.
You recognize the systematism of certain form of oppressions (like Police violences or systemic racism) which is a very good thing but you are not sure about patriarchy, which is ..meh. Once again, this might be related to a lack of knowledge about sociological datas. So nothing really alarming for me.
I sence a problem regarding the agentivity of women however : Your position on abortion is very soft and doesn't really take the choices of women into account, and you consider the choice of women to use their body as they like (with sex work) as disgusting and "not real work". This could create a radicalization toward a lesser vision of women over time. So I recommend caution.
There is also the problem of the agentivity of trans kids, but I think that it is also only due to a lack of knowledge about the subject. If you had the facts and the number of victim of gender disphoria and its consequences on mental health and potential suicidal rate, I think you could change your mind.
----
So overall for now:
I can't put you into the leftist side of the political scale. Your lack of care for politics is simply showing that the realities of oppressions are not really enough - for the moment - to make you wish for a change in the system. Which is literally what leftism is : A movement toward change and social progress.
I can't put you into the conservative side or the reactionnary side either. Your perception of systemic violences and sociology is something that is incompatible with the ideas of those movements.
On the other hand, you believe in meritocracy. Which gives us a clue. You might think you are apolitical, but in reality you support a belief in a system of inequalities (meritocracy) and it aligns with your idealism. Those two notions goes hand in hands.
NOW...
There is something interesting here.
Someone who believes that sociology is a science should be aware and accepting the sociological tool that is the notion of "capitals". This is something that we can't go around when we talk about the sociology of a person's life. And yet... you believe in meritocracy.
This is a contradiction. The notion of "capitals" negates completely the reality and pertinency of the belief that is meritocracy. Worst, it shows that it is dangerous and has never existed.
This means that at one point or another, if you push your knowledge of sociology forward.. you will be going against a contradiction. You will have the choice to either keep believing in the pertinency of meritocracy or stop believing in it.
In other word, it means that you are halfway through a process of radicalization toward leftism.
As of right now, I put you in the liberal rightist side with a tendancy toward both sides.
You have a potential to radicalize toward conservatism if you surround yourself only with conservative informations because of your vision of women and their agentivity.
BUT
You also have the potential to radicalize toward leftism... if you keep yourself informed about scientific datas, especially about the structures of society, the rights of women, patriarchy and the notion of capitals.
My guess is that, with the state of this current thread, chances of you getting closer and closer to conservative ideas are very high.
So I highly suggest for you to take a closer look to the leftist library that you will find : HERE and check all the subjects I talked about:
- Notions regarding the rights of women and sex work
- Patriarchy
- Meritocracy and the notions of capitals.
And ONCE you have done that (and not before), we might have a discussion about materialism and idealism.
IN SHORT
I would place you toward Liberalism/rightism with an big oscillation between conservatism and socialism
I sence the potential for a contradiction. Especially concerning meritocracy and the scientificity of sociology (logically, if you consider one as legitimate, you can't consider the other as rationnal). But I think it might simply boils down to a lack of knowledge about the subject.
You recognize the systematism of certain form of oppressions (like Police violences or systemic racism) which is a very good thing but you are not sure about patriarchy, which is ..meh. Once again, this might be related to a lack of knowledge about sociological datas. So nothing really alarming for me.
I sence a problem regarding the agentivity of women however : Your position on abortion is very soft and doesn't really take the choices of women into account, and you consider the choice of women to use their body as they like (with sex work) as disgusting and "not real work". This could create a radicalization toward a lesser vision of women over time. So I recommend caution.
There is also the problem of the agentivity of trans kids, but I think that it is also only due to a lack of knowledge about the subject. If you had the facts and the number of victim of gender disphoria and its consequences on mental health and potential suicidal rate, I think you could change your mind.
----
So overall for now:
I can't put you into the leftist side of the political scale. Your lack of care for politics is simply showing that the realities of oppressions are not really enough - for the moment - to make you wish for a change in the system. Which is literally what leftism is : A movement toward change and social progress.
I can't put you into the conservative side or the reactionnary side either. Your perception of systemic violences and sociology is something that is incompatible with the ideas of those movements.
On the other hand, you believe in meritocracy. Which gives us a clue. You might think you are apolitical, but in reality you support a belief in a system of inequalities (meritocracy) and it aligns with your idealism. Those two notions goes hand in hands.
NOW...
There is something interesting here.
Someone who believes that sociology is a science should be aware and accepting the sociological tool that is the notion of "capitals". This is something that we can't go around when we talk about the sociology of a person's life. And yet... you believe in meritocracy.
This is a contradiction. The notion of "capitals" negates completely the reality and pertinency of the belief that is meritocracy. Worst, it shows that it is dangerous and has never existed.
This means that at one point or another, if you push your knowledge of sociology forward.. you will be going against a contradiction. You will have the choice to either keep believing in the pertinency of meritocracy or stop believing in it.
In other word, it means that you are halfway through a process of radicalization toward leftism.
As of right now, I put you in the liberal rightist side with a tendancy toward both sides.
You have a potential to radicalize toward conservatism if you surround yourself only with conservative informations because of your vision of women and their agentivity.
BUT
You also have the potential to radicalize toward leftism... if you keep yourself informed about scientific datas, especially about the structures of society, the rights of women, patriarchy and the notion of capitals.
My guess is that, with the state of this current thread, chances of you getting closer and closer to conservative ideas are very high.
So I highly suggest for you to take a closer look to the leftist library that you will find : HERE and check all the subjects I talked about:
- Notions regarding the rights of women and sex work
- Patriarchy
- Meritocracy and the notions of capitals.
And ONCE you have done that (and not before), we might have a discussion about materialism and idealism.
IN SHORT
I would place you toward Liberalism/rightism with an big oscillation between conservatism and socialism
