Linux&Gun Guy
Member
Your political compass
Economic Left/Right: 5.38
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.51
Yay! Im a Right wing Libertarian
Economic Left/Right: 5.38
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.51
Yay! Im a Right wing Libertarian
Where Do You Stand?
- Thread starter clubsoda22
- Start date
- Status
ReadyontheRight
Member
I'm just inder the "R" in the Libertarian camp. Right next to Uncle Milty Friedman.
There are a lot of complains about the phrasing of the questions, but is there anyone who thinks this test does NOT come pretty close to their politics? Especially if you consider the examples of the political figures on the chart.
There are a lot of complains about the phrasing of the questions, but is there anyone who thinks this test does NOT come pretty close to their politics? Especially if you consider the examples of the political figures on the chart.
ReadyontheRight
Member
This is a very good point. Why would a Libertarian WANT to be in politics?
atek3
Member
mercedes, we anarchists aren't against government, we are simply for self-government, right (as well as protection compacts, private insurance/defense, mutual defence co-ops, etc. etc.)
atek3
(as well as protection compacts, private insurance/defense, mutual defence co-ops, etc. etc.)atek3
Economic Left/Right: 2.12
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.38
Hmmm....
Last time I took a test like this (about 2 weeks ago, and my politics haven't changed since then that I know of), I came out as centre-left, and a lot more libertarian.
Just goes to show it depends on what questions they're asking.
And on a lot of these ones, I'd want to have an intermediate answer, or say ...under these circumstances..., or get them to rephrase the question.
Also, I think that on some of the "morality" questions, the options don't cater for those who think "you shouldn't do that, but its your choice".
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.38
Hmmm....
Last time I took a test like this (about 2 weeks ago, and my politics haven't changed since then that I know of), I came out as centre-left, and a lot more libertarian.
Just goes to show it depends on what questions they're asking.
And on a lot of these ones, I'd want to have an intermediate answer, or say ...under these circumstances..., or get them to rephrase the question.
Also, I think that on some of the "morality" questions, the options don't cater for those who think "you shouldn't do that, but its your choice".
mercedesrules
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2003
- Messages
- 1,010
Right! *sobs uncontrollably, babbling, "I'm not alone...etc."*
MR
clubsoda22
member
All the questions about bias are addressed in the FAQ.
cracked butt
Member
6.25
1.13
1.13
nico
Member
I took it a while ago.
left/right 0.00
authoritarian/libertarian -1.95
Just took it again:
left/right 1.88
authoritarian/libertarian -.41
I took it about six months ago, and I'm almost certain that some of the questions have been changed.
left/right 0.00
authoritarian/libertarian -1.95
Just took it again:
left/right 1.88
authoritarian/libertarian -.41
I took it about six months ago, and I'm almost certain that some of the questions have been changed.
Cool Hand Luke 22:36
member
How does a far-left socialist like Adolph Hitler wind up in the right hand column in this test.
That casts a huge amount of doubt on the test's validity.
That casts a huge amount of doubt on the test's validity.
clubsoda22
member
guess what luke, that also happens to be in the FAQ
boltaction
Member
baloney
Anybody can put together a "test". We all know that any pollster can skew results based on the phrasing of the questions, and this test is an excellent example. (Atek3 makes some good points - see esp. his comment re: false dichotomies: these abound). Further, it is a judgement call to decide where your answers place you; and what gives about not having a "pass" or a "moderate" answer? I would have been more than satisfied with that answer on a few of them.
If you look at where Bush winds up, you can paint him as an extremist...gee, wonder who made up this test? oh, a journalist and an academic. Boy am I surprised (and I speak as someone who has worked in academics for that past 26 years). So many of the questions are "loaded" in this test. I think it is a bunch of bull. And as far as filling it out for politicians, they say: "How can you tell where they're honestly at by asking them? Especially around election time. We've relied on reports, parliamentary records, ... and actions that spoke louder than words. " Totally bogus. Maybe you could guess their answers for the following test:
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
but not for a six pager full of complexly phrased questions, unless you designed the questions and the scoring implications of their answers to give you a particular outcome. This is just more pseudo-academic baloney (sorry for the strong language!).
Personally, I think the short one at "self-gov.org" is better; try both.
Boltaction
Anybody can put together a "test". We all know that any pollster can skew results based on the phrasing of the questions, and this test is an excellent example. (Atek3 makes some good points - see esp. his comment re: false dichotomies: these abound). Further, it is a judgement call to decide where your answers place you; and what gives about not having a "pass" or a "moderate" answer? I would have been more than satisfied with that answer on a few of them.
If you look at where Bush winds up, you can paint him as an extremist...gee, wonder who made up this test? oh, a journalist and an academic. Boy am I surprised (and I speak as someone who has worked in academics for that past 26 years). So many of the questions are "loaded" in this test. I think it is a bunch of bull. And as far as filling it out for politicians, they say: "How can you tell where they're honestly at by asking them? Especially around election time. We've relied on reports, parliamentary records, ... and actions that spoke louder than words. " Totally bogus. Maybe you could guess their answers for the following test:
http://www.self-gov.org/quiz.html
but not for a six pager full of complexly phrased questions, unless you designed the questions and the scoring implications of their answers to give you a particular outcome. This is just more pseudo-academic baloney (sorry for the strong language!).
Personally, I think the short one at "self-gov.org" is better; try both.
Boltaction
Cool Hand Luke 22:36
member
clubsoda22
I'm afraid thier answer doesn't stand up to scrutiny and casts even more doubt on this mapping quiz. They are using a very ad hoc and historically innacurate characterization of the Nazi regime as right wing.
The first point in their FAQ for example is contradicted by their second.
Nazisim and Fascism, they say in thier first point, are characterized by promotion of violence against minorities.
The Nazi economic policy, they say in their second point, was far to the right of Stalin's. They never define what they mean by "to the right of."
So in other words, Stalinism is characteristic of Socialism, and Nazism isn't.
First off, Stalin's regime was characterized by extreme violence against ethnic minorities, more so than the Nazis or any Fascist regime.
And secondly, the Nazi economic policy was very similar to Stalins in it's central planning, emphasis on military spending, etc. In other words, Socialist.
The authors don't seem to have any clear understanding of the differences between Communism, Socialism, and Fascism. Or the fact that all three had their roots in the European political left.
I could go on for a page or two.
I'd seriously like to see a FAQ from them explaining how they wind up with Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime in the far left, even though the Baathist party and economic policies were modeled directly on the German Nazi party and economic policies, which they place to the right. Makes no sense at all.
This mapping quiz is poorly thought out and biased. It seems to be designed to make everyone who takes it say to themselves, "Dang, I should have been a Libertarian."
I'm afraid thier answer doesn't stand up to scrutiny and casts even more doubt on this mapping quiz. They are using a very ad hoc and historically innacurate characterization of the Nazi regime as right wing.
The first point in their FAQ for example is contradicted by their second.
Nazisim and Fascism, they say in thier first point, are characterized by promotion of violence against minorities.
The Nazi economic policy, they say in their second point, was far to the right of Stalin's. They never define what they mean by "to the right of."
So in other words, Stalinism is characteristic of Socialism, and Nazism isn't.
First off, Stalin's regime was characterized by extreme violence against ethnic minorities, more so than the Nazis or any Fascist regime.
And secondly, the Nazi economic policy was very similar to Stalins in it's central planning, emphasis on military spending, etc. In other words, Socialist.
The authors don't seem to have any clear understanding of the differences between Communism, Socialism, and Fascism. Or the fact that all three had their roots in the European political left.
I could go on for a page or two.
I'd seriously like to see a FAQ from them explaining how they wind up with Saddam Hussein's Baathist regime in the far left, even though the Baathist party and economic policies were modeled directly on the German Nazi party and economic policies, which they place to the right. Makes no sense at all.
This mapping quiz is poorly thought out and biased. It seems to be designed to make everyone who takes it say to themselves, "Dang, I should have been a Libertarian."
Last edited:
Sean Smith
Member
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2002
- Messages
- 4,925
Economic Left/Right: 3.62
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.95
As usual.
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.95
As usual.
71Commander
Member
Lower left.
Econ -3.75
Lib/Aut -3.28
Econ -3.75
Lib/Aut -3.28
Yep. Nowhere close. I haven't seen one of those yet that is worth the time it takes to answer the questions.
For example, the question about what should be regarded as art: A much better question is, "what does art have to do with politics?"
Their question is designed to find out how you stand on the National Endowment for the Arts, and is a lousy way to get that awnser.
MicroBalrog
member
Economic Right/Left: -0.38
Authoritarian/Libertarian:-5.95
Authoritarian/Libertarian:-5.95
DigitalWarrior
Member
Chart of Idiots
Oh right, the greens don't want to have the government tell me everything that I can do or cant do. Or tell the government to protect the people from profit.
http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalcompass/images/enParties.gif
Oh right, the greens don't want to have the government tell me everything that I can do or cant do. Or tell the government to protect the people from profit.
http://www.digitalronin.f2s.com/politicalcompass/images/enParties.gif
Stalin was more racist than the Nazis?
You sure?
I know Stalin (and other Commies) persecuted ethnic minorities (despite it going against the idea of "international solidarity", but you can't expect tyrants not to be hypocrites).
But a fundamental part of Nazism was the belief that the German/Nordic People was inherently genetically superior to all others (and especially superior to certain races, like the Jews and Slavs). And they took this to mean that the "inferior" races should surrender their lands to the Germans (and preferably be exterminated where possible).
Which, to my mind, is as about the most "extreme violence against ethnic minorities" you can get.
Didn't Stalin want complete equalization of wealth (except for his chums)? Which would make him (hypocritical) extreme left-wing.
Whereas Hitler and the Nazis, while being somewhat anti-big-business (except when owned by their chums), weren't inherently against people owning their own business and making a profit (unless them were Jews/etc). Which would make them "less left-wing than Stalin". (I can't say exactly how much, because I don't know enough detail about either them or the left-right scale).
I've often heard (from UK media) that Saddam idolised and was inspired by Stalin. (Don't know if they were talking about economics, though, or just general method of government).
Still, I agree this “compass†is not perfect.
But I think it’s a heck of a lot better than the traditional “condense everything into a one-dimensional ‘left-right’ scaleâ€.
(And if all sides of the political spectrum think its biased against them, it probably balances out (mostly)).
tcdrennen
Member
Economic Left/Right: 8.25
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.23
I thought I'd be further down into the bottom, but that's pretty close to what I expected.
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.23
I thought I'd be further down into the bottom, but that's pretty close to what I expected.
Cool Hand Luke 22:36
member
iapetus wrote:
I don't think I said that Stalin was more of a racist than Hitler, only that he persecuted ethnic minorities to greater extent. The mass starvation of Ukranians for example.
However you're right about racisim not being an official part of Soviet Communist doctrine.
My point is that the author's of the quiz do not have a rational explaination for characterizing the Nazi regime as rightist. Using racisim as a marker doesn't work.
In terms of Economic policy, most socialist regimes permit private enterprize while mandating government control of the economy or ownership of heavy industry, and high level of military or public works spending (eg. Japan). The authors don't seem to recognize the difference between communist regimes which typically prohibit private enterprize and socialist regimes which typically don't.
The authors make the point that self description as Socialist isn't a fair way to judge whether a regime is truly socialist. They make the point that the GDR shouldn't be taken as representative of a democracy for example. While that's true, it misses the point that the Nazi regime did practice most aspects of a socialist economic and political system.
If Saddam Husseins regime permitted private enterprize, which it did, and was clearly racist, as it was, why is he way to the left on the chart and not closer to Hitler's position?
The authors seem to equate racisim with Fascism, with no examples to back up this contention. Mussilini, Franco, Strossener, and Pinochet (pardon the spelling) weren't rabid racists that I can recall.
I don't think I said that Stalin was more of a racist than Hitler, only that he persecuted ethnic minorities to greater extent. The mass starvation of Ukranians for example.
However you're right about racisim not being an official part of Soviet Communist doctrine.
My point is that the author's of the quiz do not have a rational explaination for characterizing the Nazi regime as rightist. Using racisim as a marker doesn't work.
In terms of Economic policy, most socialist regimes permit private enterprize while mandating government control of the economy or ownership of heavy industry, and high level of military or public works spending (eg. Japan). The authors don't seem to recognize the difference between communist regimes which typically prohibit private enterprize and socialist regimes which typically don't.
The authors make the point that self description as Socialist isn't a fair way to judge whether a regime is truly socialist. They make the point that the GDR shouldn't be taken as representative of a democracy for example. While that's true, it misses the point that the Nazi regime did practice most aspects of a socialist economic and political system.
If Saddam Husseins regime permitted private enterprize, which it did, and was clearly racist, as it was, why is he way to the left on the chart and not closer to Hitler's position?
The authors seem to equate racisim with Fascism, with no examples to back up this contention. Mussilini, Franco, Strossener, and Pinochet (pardon the spelling) weren't rabid racists that I can recall.
Ryder
Member
I'm a Canadian
Bad test.
Bad test.
Dog
Member
Economic Left/Right: 0.38
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.33
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.33
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked