Take the Test Here

Was shown this political social/economic test that places you on a four-way axis, opposites being Libertarianism/Authoritarianism and Left and Right.

Although clearly not completely accurate, it's interesting.

Just thought I'd share this, I found it quite interesting, where do you lie?

My result showed me to be Centre-Right Libertarian: 6.75,-2.41

Views: 1166

Replies to This Discussion

fairly surprised at this


There is a fruitful discussion to be had about the questions themselves. For example, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." I assume that agreeing indicates a preference for a certain strain of foreign policy (realpolitik?). What scale am I moving along with that question? And which direction does it move me in?

The racism and nationalism questions raise similar issues. I assume agreeing with either will slide one further towards the right, as I've most often heard Naziism categorized as "far-right". Is this justified by the principles of "right-wing" ideology (which I suddenly am at a loss to define)? And if so, is there a question about eugenics (a favored policy until Hitler made it ugly) to balance things out? It seems to me that the right-left dichotomy is either arbitrary or the creation of academics of a certain persuasion.

And what about the very first one, which places the welfare of trans-national companies in opposition to the interests of humanity regarding who should benefit from globalization? What if I believe that the increased specialization this trend has enabled can benefit both parties? Where do I go now?

And I'm only on page one. I think I'll do the first one for real, and then try and manipulate it into putting me into a target group to see what the authors believe about different ideologies.

"from each according to his ability, to each according to his need" is a fundamentally good idea.


The only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders.

I suspect that personal beliefs (as in, what should people do?) and political beliefs (what should be enforced by law?) are being conflated here. Is this appropriate on a political compass?

Those with the ability to pay should have the right to higher standards of medical care .

There's a vital assumption about the nature of a right being made here.

Governments should penalise businesses that mislead the public. 

Penalize how? By direct regulation of advertising and labeling, or by writing laws allowing those who have been victimized by fraud (also, defining fraud) to bring suit against these businesses?

I've finished page two. I believe the authors are European. I also feel like I'm trapped in a "choose your own adventure" story where the only options are to drop a nuke or hug a puppy, and I don't even have context.

Why not "From each according to his ability, to each according to his deeds"?

I mean, really, if a man is only able to be a janitor and his needs are the same as the CEOs should they each 'get' the same compensation?  If we go by Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and meet each one of the physiological needs for all individuals then by the def. of the highlighted statement in your post would be met by any individual working and all working individuals should have their physiological needs met and no more would be required.

The ideology described in the first sentence is socialism (Right, Shane?).

That doesn't answer the question, which wasn't rhetorical.  I really meant to ask the question and expected an answer.

I'll admit I've read your post, and his, a couple of times, and I'm having trouble following the conversation.


Assuming I've figured out what you're asking -- which may be assuming too much -- the base problem is that it requires an external determination of "needs".  Or "ability".  Or "deeds".  That's an awful lot of power over your life to just quit claim to somebody else.


Capitalism is the economic system that emerges when people are left alone.  Anything else requires command-and-control of some sort.



He appears to be ranting about the context of the questions, without any context.

I thought Bouchard was ranting about the questions ... though most seem to be responding as if his question-restatements were his personal beliefs (which may be what Rick did).


I'm still not clear on what Rick was asking, though.  The CEO/janitor example didn't help, so I ignored it and answered the top-line question as if he hadn't elaborated.


It looks as if Rick is responding to Bouchard as if Bouchard was presenting his own ideas, rather than a rant against the questionnaire.  Rick's out of context retort is standard anti-communist fare.  In order to create a classless society, all of society must be drug down to the level of the lowest common denominator; those who do not produce enough even for their own basic needs.  He fails in that there wouldn't be any CEO's under Marxism, but, eh.

I was not responding as though Bouchard was presenting his own ideas, I am much more well read than that.  I was offering an alternative phrase using 'deeds' (as in what one does in respect to importance to the company), which rhymes with 'need', in place of 'needs'.  Here I am hoping you understand my logic but that may be asking too much.  I used the CEO and janitor as examples of 'deeds' (again the work done for the company ranked by importance of that work to the company).  I used Maslow's 'needs' as the starting point and the phyisical needs as the bare minimum that would be met by the system.

That's fine.  You should limit your rants to non imaginary adversaries.  It will keep us onlookers from chiming in.


Latest Activity

R. Max Blease replied to certified male's discussion Walking around the house naked
"Does not compute. Especially that last part. "
12 minutes ago
DM replied to Jimmy Morang's discussion Introducing Myself
"Welcome aboard! Good luck with your studies, and I'll see you around."
12 minutes ago
DM replied to Regular Joe's discussion World's Best Whisky Officially Declared
"I never give these lists much weight. I am sure, just like special interest groups influence politics, someone is lining these guy's pockets, or padding their liquor cabinets with complimentary libations. Crown Royal was always the best at…"
16 minutes ago
DM replied to Johnny Luka's discussion Not sure how to handle situation
"I don't think it is advisable to dip your pen in the company ink. Period."
38 minutes ago
Johnny Luka replied to Johnny Luka's discussion Not sure how to handle situation
"Thanks, all, for the advice. I did ask her. She didn't say 'no', more like could be possible. It's been a month so I consider it a lesson learned. "
1 hour ago
DM replied to DM's discussion Happy Turkey Day! in the group Remembering Dad
"My dad always cut the turkey, nobody else. Last year, when the turkey came out, nobody knew how to carve except me. So, I took over the tradition, and did it for Christmas as well. However, I moved away from where my family lives, and now someone…"
1 hour ago
brainwise replied to DM's discussion Happy Turkey Day! in the group Remembering Dad
"This marks my third Thanksgiving without Dad. He loved preparing this holiday meal so much. "
1 hour ago
Regular Joe replied to Specs's discussion Thanksgiving 2015. What are your plans?
1 hour ago

© 2015   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service