It doesn't focus on localized politics, but instead tries to gauge general ideological leanings to arrive at a conclusion (libertarian/authoritarian, liberal/conservative).
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey
It doesn't focus on localized politics, but instead tries to gauge general ideological leanings to arrive at a conclusion (libertarian/authoritarian, liberal/conservative).
Economic Left/Right: -4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.97
My dot lines up almost perfectly with Gandhi and the Dalai Lama.
Last edited by Fairweather Pure on May 27, 2009, 2:20 pm, edited 2 times in total.
Economic Left/Right: -9.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.82
The last time I took this was a few years ago. Since then I've drifted further into the 3rd quadrant by about a point in each direction. I'm a good 5 points to the left of where I was the first time I took this about 5 years ago. I've spent a lot of time reading since then, and many of my economic beliefs have evolved quite a bit.
Last edited by Xatrei on May 27, 2009, 2:31 pm, edited 2 times in total.
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey
Economic Left/Right: -4.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.62
To be fair there were a few questions where I felt I did not agree or disagree with the question that would have put me a little more to the right. And of course there were zero 2nd Amendment questions.....
Because where we differ, we differ greatly. And as I said before, they do not have any 2nd Amendment questions on that thing...which would definitely adjust me over to the right on that axis by about the amount it shows me left now. And I have little patience because of the tendency for certain people to dogpile. And you have an extremly high percentage of Cartalas style posters now. And you have Nick. And I get lumped in as an ultra right wing wack job redneck, when I truly am not and it kind of sets me off a bit.
Sylvus wrote:Economic Left/Right: -1.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.92
Kilmoll leans to the left of me!
Well I don;t think the test is entirely an accurate guage. I think the authoritarian/libertarian line would be accurate, but I believe with a larger sample that included 2A questions and the option for "neither agree or disagree" answers I would be slightly right of center.
That's about right. On the macro level I'm sort of a socialist, in that I want universal health care and other broad reaching social programs enacted by our federal government (the cheapest way to do it). Socially I'm more towards the center left. Yes to death penalty, moderately for gun rights (no need for assault rifles IMO), and pro-choice, pro-gay marriage.
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Because where we differ, we differ greatly. And as I said before, they do not have any 2nd Amendment questions on that thing...which would definitely adjust me over to the right on that axis by about the amount it shows me left now. And I have little patience because of the tendency for certain people to dogpile. And you have an extremly high percentage of Cartalas style posters now. And you have Nick. And I get lumped in as an ultra right wing wack job redneck, when I truly am not and it kind of sets me off a bit.
To be honest I didn't know how to answer some of those questions as there was no middle ground. I always thought I'd be a little bit more towards the center.
on the Y axis, I think we are mostly in the same realm. It does appear to bias left on the x axis due to no middle ground answers and the abscence of some other questions that would push people to the right. I blame xatrei.
It's really difficult to get even slightly into the right.
You have to strongy agree/disagree on quite a few questions.
I gave centrist answers on most of the questions and strongly agree/disagree (to the right) on the religion based questions and it still put me down the middle.
I've got 99 problems and I'm not dealing with any of them - Lay-Z
Economic Left/Right: -1.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.00
I took this a couple months ago and was a little closer to center... must be just my mood today. I do find that my ambivalence with some of the questions could move me around a bit more, both on the left-right scale and the authoritarian-libertarian one.
Some questions are a little screwy to me too. Statements like "A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system." I put agree, because yes that's an advantage of the system but by the same token I don't think that makes the system desirable. Same with " 'From each according to his ability, to each according to his need' is afundamentally a good idea". Sure I can agree with that in theory but there are definate limits to me. The one about multinationals abusing plants in developing countries I look at and go "huh?".
Wulfran Moondancer
Stupid Sidekick of the Lambent Dorf
Petitioner to Club Bok Bok
Founding Member of the Barbarian Nation Movement
miir wrote:It's really difficult to get even slightly into the right.
You have to strongy agree/disagree on quite a few questions.
I gave centrist answers on most of the questions and strongly agree/disagree (to the right) on the religion based questions and it still put me down the middle.
I went and answered it from what I imagined Rush Limbaugh might put as answers and came up with this:
Economic Left/Right: -4.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.21
Some of the questions were kind of poor, but nothing seemed to blatantly have an agenda.
War is an option whose time has passed. Peace is the only option for the future. At present we occupy a treacherous no-man's-land between peace and war, a time of growing fear that our military might has expanded beyond our capacity to control it and our political differences widened beyond our ability to bridge them. . . .
Short of changing human nature, therefore, the only way to achieve a practical, livable peace in a world of competing nations is to take the profit out of war.
--RICHARD M. NIXON, "REAL PEACE" (1983)
"Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired, represents, in the final analysis, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, who are cold and are not clothed. This world in arms is not spending money alone. It is spending the sweat of its laborers, the genius of its scientists, the hopes of its children."
Kilmoll the Sexy wrote:Because where we differ, we differ greatly. And as I said before, they do not have any 2nd Amendment questions on that thing...which would definitely adjust me over to the right on that axis by about the amount it shows me left now. And I have little patience because of the tendency for certain people to dogpile. And you have an extremly high percentage of Cartalas style posters now. And you have Nick. And I get lumped in as an ultra right wing wack job redneck, when I truly am not and it kind of sets me off a bit.
I never would have guessed Kilmoll was even right wing from our EQ days, but now reflecting back I see a similar tinfoil hat like reaction to gun issues as he had with FoH.
All posts are personal opinion.
My opinion may == || != my guild's.
"All spelling mistakes were not on purpose as I dont know shit ." - Torrkir
I know this is a "liberal" leaning forum but anyone else find it ironic that the Canadian posters (Miir, Forthe, myself) are further right than most of the Americans?
Where's Winnow's? Closer to Rush Limbaugh or Kilmoll?
Wulfran Moondancer
Stupid Sidekick of the Lambent Dorf
Petitioner to Club Bok Bok
Founding Member of the Barbarian Nation Movement
The candidates' positions on the plane relative to my own line up almost perfectly with my candidate preferences in last year's elections. Nader and Kucinich were my idealistic favorites, but I never got behind either of them because they were non-viable. John Edwards, prior to his scandal, was the next closest ideologically who had a viable chance at success. I was behind Edwards until it became apparent that Obama would win the nomination. The chart also serves to remind me how unrepresentative our government is when gap between the most liberal viable candidate last year (Edwards) and myself is roughly +12,+8.
I found a similar questionnaire called The Political Matrix. It adds another dimension to the questioning by providing a checkbox for you to indicate whether a given issue is important to you. For me it produced similar results to the questionnaire at Political Compass.
Economic score: -8.39
Social score: -7.83
Your score pegs you as economically socialist and socially far-leftist.
Socialists typically support heavily regulated industry and programs to aid the poor and impoverished. They often also support significant raises in taxes and minimum wage to attempt to decrease the gap between the wealthy and poor, and to ensure social equality.
Social far-leftists generally believe that the government has no business enforcing morality on most matters, instead favouring a government that intervenes only when absolutely necessary to avoid direct harm. Many social far-leftists also look negatively on the government's past attitudes toward groups they view as persecuted, although some simply oppose government intervention on utilitarianist grounds.
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey
I placed around where Kucinich is on that chart, but I have to say that many of the questions were idiotic when coupled with the limited answer possibilities.
Wow, I think economically I have been more right than any of you.. and yet still quite in the middle. The libertarian weight doesn't surprise me, although I'm not "that" deep on that side either.
Economic Left/Right: .25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.83
I will try the other test later and see what how it compares.
When I was younger, I used to think that the world was doing it to me and that the world owes me some thing…When you're a teeny bopper, that's what you think. I'm 40 now, I don't think that anymore, because I found out it doesn't f--king work. One has to go through that. For the people who even bother to go through that, most assholes just accept what it is anyway and get on with it." - John Lennon
There were probably 10 questions that I flat-out disagreed with the entire premise of. Worse than "loaded questions," they basically made a statement that couldn't be answered. Like yes or no: "will you stop beating your wife?"
I think a lot of people are misunderstanding the intent of the statements on this test. You either agree with them or not, to varying degrees. There's no "right" answer, your opinion and how strongly you feel about it merely helps to build an ideological profile.
Most of them are slanted ! Some right-wingers accuse us of a leftward slant. Some left-wingers accuse us of a rightward slant. But it's important to realise that this isn't a survey, and these aren't questions. They're propositions - an altogether different proposition. To question the logic of individual ones that irritate you is to miss the point. Some propositions are extreme, and some are more moderate. That's how we can show you whether you lean towards extremism or moderation on the Compass.
Some of the propositions are intentionally vague. Their purpose is to trigger buzzwords in the mind of the user, measuring feelings and prejudices rather than detailed opinions on policy.
Incidentally, our test is not another internet personality classification tool. The essence of our site is the model for political analysis. The test is simply a demonstration of it.
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey
Your score pegs you as economically leftist and socially far-leftist.
Economic leftists mostly support strict economic controls and programs to assure that the poor are elevated to a higher position in society.
Social far-leftists generally believe that the government has no business enforcing morality on most matters, instead favouring a government that intervenes only when absolutely necessary to avoid direct harm. Many social far-leftists also look negatively on the government's past attitudes toward groups they view as persecuted, although some simply oppose government intervention on utilitarianist grounds.
Xatrei wrote:I think a lot of people are misunderstanding the intent of the statements on this test. You either agree with them or not, to varying degrees. There's no "right" answer, your opinion and how strongly you feel about it merely helps to build an ideological profile.
Most of them are slanted ! Some right-wingers accuse us of a leftward slant. Some left-wingers accuse us of a rightward slant. But it's important to realise that this isn't a survey, and these aren't questions. They're propositions - an altogether different proposition. To question the logic of individual ones that irritate you is to miss the point. Some propositions are extreme, and some are more moderate. That's how we can show you whether you lean towards extremism or moderation on the Compass.
Some of the propositions are intentionally vague. Their purpose is to trigger buzzwords in the mind of the user, measuring feelings and prejudices rather than detailed opinions on policy.
Incidentally, our test is not another internet personality classification tool. The essence of our site is the model for political analysis. The test is simply a demonstration of it.
I may have missed people's claims that the questions were slanted. I just said some were stupid. There were a few that too many other questions could come up on, but there were still only the four options. If this is the type of analytical tool used today, it is no fucking wonder why nobody can get anything right.
Ok, first of all, my response wasn't directed to anyone in particular, so I'm not sure why you're being so defensive, bordering on hostile. Secondly, regardless of whether someone thinks the question is silly or slanted isn't really the point. I chose to quote their response to the "slanted" accusation because I thought it went a ways towards providing an explanation of their methodology and why they chose to use these specific positions in the manner which they did. In that regard, I think it's totally relevant. I'm not saying it's a perfect test. I'm sure that there are any number of legitimate questions or issues that can be raised with it by persons with a sociological, political science or statistical analysis background, I just thought that the most common criticism that I've seen leveled here seems to be misplaced and is explained rather well in the FAQ that I linked, and in the response that I quoted in particular.
"When I was a kid, my father told me, 'Never hit anyone in anger, unless you're absolutely sure you can get away with it.'" - Russel Ziskey