Hi, Guys - Just a quick post today. For me, one of the most fun and actually educational things I've done over the last year politically is complete the survey that will place you on the "Political Compass." Basically, the theory is that politics is not a simple line, but much more of a spectrum - so, this particular website has developed a survey (pretty indepth) that "charts" where you lie. 
The four extremes are Left (Communist), Right (Super Conservative), Authoritarian (Fascist) and Libertarian ( Anarchist). Obviously nobody will be extreme either way, but you will find yourself a mix of two of these groups. It's a pretty good self evaluation. I recommend it for a few reasons:
Second, you can ask yourselves questions honestly and privately.
Where do you REALLY stand on the political spectrum?
First, you might be surprised about where you really line up.
It's a good self reflection. So what are you waiting for? Go here and see where you lie. And then come back here and tell us where you line up. I'd like to see where each one of you are on the spectrum. And then, come back here and tell us where - who were you between, what quadrant were you in, and, were you surprised by the results, and do you agree with the results. Even if you have never commented, we still want to hear from you.
I'm particularly interested if there is a greater average of LDS people in one particular quadrant or leaning one particular direction. please leave feedback saying where you line up. Have fun - peace - Rick
oh, BTW - here is mine - and here are some other international famous political figures.
Posted by Anonymous on 3/19/2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
23 comments:
I'm about where you are...
are you David?
We can't post pictures in the comments, so this is kinda difficult, but we can use math, the universal language, to communicate! Woo-hoo! It lists your coordinates right above your graph; the first number means go that far to the right (or left, if it's negative), the second number means go that far up (or down, if it's negative). So Rick's at about a (-7,-5.5).
I come in at (-2.5, -5.85), meaning that I'm just about as socially libertarian as Rick, but more toward the left/right economic center... sounds about right.
Here's my answers to some of the more interesting questions:
"Those with the ability to pay should have a right to higher standards of medical care." Agree - though I'd like to see a basic minimum standard for everybody.
"Those who are able to work, and refuse the opportunity, should not expect society's support." Agree.
"Our civil liberties are being excessively curbed in the name of counter-terrorism." Strongly Agree!
"You cannot be moral without being religious." Strongly Disagree.
Fun test, Rick! :)
No big surprise here - I come in at (2.75, 1.33). To be honest, I am more moderate than I expected on the economic aspect. I'm not terribly surprised on the social aspect because I lean libertarian, but I am not all the way there. :) Who is Jose Zapatero? I am closest to him.
Yikes - that seems wierd to me. Jose Zapatero "is the Prime Minister of Spain. The party he leads, the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party (PSOE), won one general election on March 14, 2004 and another on March 9, 2008. Actions of his first government have included withdrawing Spanish troops from Iraq, a controversial negotiation with the armed separatist group ETA, the creation of Spanish Courts for Violence against Women, legalizing same-sex marriages and a program of amnesty for illegal immigrants."
I don't think those would have been my first actions in office. Not sure how accurate this is . . . (or am I just more liberal than I thought?!?!?)
3.88 to the right. social libertarian at -2.87. Exactly what I would have thought.
Are YOU David?
Stephanie, you are definitely NOT a Socialist! That's whacked out...
Thanks for the test Rick.
My score is Eco left/right 3.25 & soc. lib -.56
I thought some of the questions needed a "depending on the circumstance" choice. For instance, "It is better to rehabilitate than to punish", for me it would depend on the crime committed.
"You cannot be moral without being religious" I disagreed, however a religious nation in general will be far more moral than a nation without religion. The founding fathers put a huge emphasis on the role of religion in America.
"The rich people in America pay too much taxes" Strongly agree.
Stephanie, I personally think you're more liberal than you though--it's not a flaw in the test. I don't know if you are Mormon, but a lot of Mormons are fairly liberal in a lot of respects. I personally think that's because, conservative social policy stances aside, Mormons identify with a strong sense of individuality and value each individual in the community. I attribute that characteristic, in part, to historical discrimination against Mormons throughout the US--Mormons identify with the underdog.
Also, because of the law of consecration and and early Mormon separatism, I think Mormons are generally inclined to value the community needs over corporations and the free market.
For various reasons (mostly abortion and equal marriage rights), many LDS people have been tricked into thinking they buy whole-heartedly into Bush and the neo-cons' plan for America.
At least that's my take on the matter from my experience growing up Mormon.
Anyway, I'm located at -7.75, -4.56. That's about as far left as I expected, but a little north of what I thought.
Oh, and the people at Political Compass have placed the current prominent politicians on the chart. Unsurprisingly, most of them (even the dems) are clustered in the upper-right quadrant. Of course, my man Kucinich is in the lower left.
Oh my gosh! (Yeah, I'm Mormon :)) That puts me more moderate than a lot of Democrats! Including both Obama and Clinton. Yikes . . .
I imagine that chart (of the politicians) is as accurate as possible given the information available, but I wonder if it truly is as accurate as it would be if the politicians HONESTLY answered the questions themselves. Because a lot of time politicians say what they think others want to hear.
I agree that the Politicians on the chart are probably not exactly where they claim to be. At very least I'd move Obama down a smidge, and Clinton up a bit, if we were guessing at true opinions.
Then again, consider how different Kuninich, Gravel, and Nader's policy preferences are from Obama and Clinton's.
Hi all--no, I'm not the anonymous commenter above.
As for taking the test--who says one has to follow the test-maker's rules to take the test? I'm opting for short-answer format instead of multiple-choice.
"If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations." False dichotomy. If you're a genuine free-marketeer, wouldn't you believe that the interests of corporations and those of humanity coincide?
"I'd always support my country, whether it was right or wrong." Ask Brigham Young in 1857. (Isn't it considered treason to raise up an armed force against the United States?)
"There is now a worrying fusion of information and entertainment." Ask William Randolph Hearst in 1898. (Something like 600,000 Filipinos dead, but even more papers sold.)
"Controlling inflation is more important than controlling unemployment." Should the state be "controlling" the economy at all? Isn't ANY effort to do so a step toward socialism?
"A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies." A genuine free market cannot exist in the first place, as is evident from this question's notion of a "free market" that is "restricted."
Just having some fun testing the testers, looking for the assumptions embedded into the questions. The questions themselves are almost always more interesting than the answers.
--David
I come in at -4.75 economic (further left than I expected) and -3.49 social (more libertarian than I expected). I consider myself relatively moderate on most issues, but several that I feel strongly about (universal health care, regulation of large corporations) push me down and left, I suppose.
Haha! My coordinates: (0.00, 2.97)
However, I think tests like these are limited. For example, I took a similar test about 6 months ago to see which presidential candidate I mostly aligned with, and the choices ended up being decided by statements made by the candidates.
It didn't take into consideration what might be future statements, or positions by the actual party platforms.
In many cases, the decision is dependent on the situation and is not a black-and-white, yes-or-no answer. So I think this test is interesting, but not necessarily accurate.
oh yeah, and a bunch of the questions I felt needed clarification:
is religious defined as attending church every sunday, or simply believing in a higher power? Or simply believing there is more out there than what science currently postulates?
Tough question, Amy. Most people I know define being religious as going to church and being spiritual as believing in a higher power... me, I know a bunch of folks who go to church but aren't really religious... so who knows. Either way I'm a "strongly disagree"...
Interesting. I have taken this test before, and scored pretty deep in the lower-left quadrant (round about the Dalai Lama). This time, I scored Economic -1.5, Social -3.79. I don't know which is more "accurate" - I did test this time with my kids crawling all over me, and for example I don't even remember answering the question regarding "those who are able to work, and refuse to do so"! I remember starting to think of what my answer would be, but then I got sidetracked...my problem is I can always think of an exception to every situation, usually within my personal frame of reference, so it's really really hard for me to pick an answer.
And I'm with Anonymous Dave - some of those questions were really "interesting". It's hard for me to believe that *all* the major US Candidates fall solidly into the upper right quadrant (they did in 2004 too, I took this test way back then) but maybe I'm just being optimistic.
Anyway, this time I ended up right cozy with Kucinich (who I wrote a little blog about, back in the day!) so I guess that's probably reasonably accurate.
OK, I went back and retook the darn thing during naptime! Bwahahaha.
My strategy this time was to answer more of the questions with "strongly agree" or "strongly disagree" to counteract the leading/ambiguous nature of some of them. I answered "strong" whatever to any question with which I felt I agreed or disagreed unequivocally. If there was any doubt, or room for me to say "well, what about this?" or if I felt the question was intentionally worded in a leading way, I answered with the more moderate responses.
This time, I got Economic: -2.88 and Social: -5.69. So a little further down and to the left, but still not as much so as I have scored in the past. Interesting.
Wizzle, maybe you are more conservative than you thought! :)
I've just been *trying* to learn more about economics, etc, so that when someone asks what I think about such and such strategy, I can at least make a stab at a coherent answer! I said right from the beginning I was socially quite liberal and fiscally (more) conservative. Now I have proof, I guess. :)
I have an issue with where you placed Hitler, on the right! He was elected into power representing the United Socialist German Workers Party. As far as I've seen the Socialists are on the left next to Communism, since Communism is just Socialism in a hurry.
Post a Comment