June 6, 2001
4:34 AM Subscribe
Find out where you stand with the political compass.
Incidentally, the link above is a bit confused - try this one
posted by Grangousier at 4:50 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by Grangousier at 4:50 AM on June 6, 2001
Good God! I'm only slightly to the left of Robin Cook! I'd kill myself if I didn't believe in this pseudo-scientific mumbo jumbo. It's just a lot of hogwash isn't it? Well, isn't it?
Oh rats...
posted by Bixby23 at 5:11 AM on June 6, 2001
Oh rats...
posted by Bixby23 at 5:11 AM on June 6, 2001
Interesting and of course totallyunscientific).
I don't think the questions are terribly well enough thought out either. It seems to boil down to whether or not you're willing to endorse a whole bunch of vacuous slogans or not. I kept wanting to answer "well, it depends..."
An example of a content free question:
"Thinking global and acting local is a good idea",
huh?
Anyway, apparently I'm mildly Left and largely Libertarian, whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.
posted by lagado at 5:20 AM on June 6, 2001
I don't think the questions are terribly well enough thought out either. It seems to boil down to whether or not you're willing to endorse a whole bunch of vacuous slogans or not. I kept wanting to answer "well, it depends..."
An example of a content free question:
"Thinking global and acting local is a good idea",
huh?
Anyway, apparently I'm mildly Left and largely Libertarian, whatever the fuck that's supposed to mean.
posted by lagado at 5:20 AM on June 6, 2001
I just landed on Tony Benn's head!
Maybe it's just me and my own political bias (it's not far wrong for me, btw) but the questions do seem a little loaded:
"We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than spending a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising."
Hands up who strongly disagreed with that. Anyone? Who really wants companies to spend a fortune on manipulation rather than information in their advertising?
posted by vbfg at 5:31 AM on June 6, 2001
Maybe it's just me and my own political bias (it's not far wrong for me, btw) but the questions do seem a little loaded:
"We'd be better off if companies simply told the truth, rather than spending a fortune on manipulative consumer advertising."
Hands up who strongly disagreed with that. Anyone? Who really wants companies to spend a fortune on manipulation rather than information in their advertising?
posted by vbfg at 5:31 AM on June 6, 2001
VBFG: The people who are reall entertained by those Budweiser frogs.
Incidentally, I'm so Libertarian left it's not funny. But I didn't realize this was a UK thing, so all I know is that I'm left of Tony Blair.
posted by solistrato at 6:22 AM on June 6, 2001
Incidentally, I'm so Libertarian left it's not funny. But I didn't realize this was a UK thing, so all I know is that I'm left of Tony Blair.
posted by solistrato at 6:22 AM on June 6, 2001
I think most of those questions I wanted to answer with "huh?" or "maybe" or "it depends." The questions are even more loaded than these (which at least have a "maybe")
posted by dagnyscott at 6:31 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by dagnyscott at 6:31 AM on June 6, 2001
Put me right next to good ol' Red Ken and Tony.
This would be a waste of time with American politicians, since every last one of them would be in the upper right quadrant (with the exception of Ralphie-boy, of course). There is no dimensionality to American politics anymore.
posted by briank at 6:35 AM on June 6, 2001
This would be a waste of time with American politicians, since every last one of them would be in the upper right quadrant (with the exception of Ralphie-boy, of course). There is no dimensionality to American politics anymore.
posted by briank at 6:35 AM on June 6, 2001
> A same sex couple in a stable...
I was afraid for just half a second that they were going to combine homosexuality and bestiality in one question, as if that would draw some fine distinction that couldn't otherwise be had.
Anyway, I consider Tony Benn, Ken Livingston, and Gandhi very good company indeed.
posted by pracowity at 6:49 AM on June 6, 2001
I was afraid for just half a second that they were going to combine homosexuality and bestiality in one question, as if that would draw some fine distinction that couldn't otherwise be had.
Anyway, I consider Tony Benn, Ken Livingston, and Gandhi very good company indeed.
posted by pracowity at 6:49 AM on June 6, 2001
Sorry about the dud link - wasn't thinking very clearly this morning. (Or this afternoon.)
posted by Mocata at 7:10 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by Mocata at 7:10 AM on June 6, 2001
Lib dead center!
Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -2.83
Up with Freedom! :)
posted by UncleFes at 8:17 AM on June 6, 2001
Economic Left/Right: 0.00
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -2.83
Up with Freedom! :)
posted by UncleFes at 8:17 AM on June 6, 2001
I realized this couldn't have been an American political spectrum questionaire because I made it through the entire thing without any questions about firearms. I think those would have moved me a bit to the right, but as it stands, I'm right on top of Ghandi (in a totally platonic sense, of course).
posted by OneBallJay at 9:20 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by OneBallJay at 9:20 AM on June 6, 2001
Although what a consenting adult and the corpse of a famed world leader do in their own bedroom is none of my, yours, or the state's business. :)
posted by OneBallJay at 9:22 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by OneBallJay at 9:22 AM on June 6, 2001
Economic Left/Right: 2.86
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -5.45
More or less where Charles Kennedy is. Being a Dumb
American, I feel safe asking, who is he?
Briank, I think Harry Browne would be below the horizontal axis, well away from the upper right. Strikes me Ralphyboy would be very high up the vertical (authoritarian) scale and a bit left of center.
posted by jammer at 9:52 AM on June 6, 2001
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -5.45
More or less where Charles Kennedy is. Being a Dumb
American, I feel safe asking, who is he?
Briank, I think Harry Browne would be below the horizontal axis, well away from the upper right. Strikes me Ralphyboy would be very high up the vertical (authoritarian) scale and a bit left of center.
posted by jammer at 9:52 AM on June 6, 2001
As suggested, this is simply a UK version of the World's Smallest Political Quiz ... which is a clever piece of political propaganda (I don't think it's quite as cynical as this faq suggests). This UK quiz put me closer to the economic right-left middle than the US quiz, but pretty much in the same as far as social libertarianism, which is why I describe myself as a liberal-libertarian. I think there is definitely something useful to the quadrangle approach. The pro-business, pro-growth, New Democrats come close in many ways to my thinking (though I'm alarmed by the anti-Hollywood streak that's suddenly arrived); clearly American orthodoxy has swung both parties way over to the Party of Greenspan in economic terms. The Republican party has (as discussed) narrowed the range of acceptable intraparty opinion to a smaller and smaller zone on this chart, somewhere near 2 o'clock, while the Democrats have migrated sort of counterclockwise, from around 8 to something closer to 5 o'clock. It's still considered reprehensible, perhaps more than ever, to be an economic leftist in America: to some conservatives, Clinton was an unreconstructed "socialist", whatever that means in this context anymore. The Green movement, which seems to me to be somewhere closer to 10 o'clock or 10:30, isn't a reasonable alternative for most people. It's troubling. So I do think this chart is illuminating whether or not you're a candidate for the big-L Libertarian Party.
posted by dhartung at 10:15 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by dhartung at 10:15 AM on June 6, 2001
Harry Browne was the Libertarian Party's presidential candidate for the past two election cycles .
posted by jammer at 11:12 AM on June 6, 2001
posted by jammer at 11:12 AM on June 6, 2001
Accountingboy: Move over, cuz I'm on top of Ghandi now!
But seriously, I agree with what dagnyscott wrote. Badly worded questions - and I wanted to say, well that depends ... on most of the questions. I wonder if that's part of the point, really. Political issues are complicated.
I have to say that this statement made my eyes bug out of my head:
"Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to reproduce."
Wha? Are there people who actually believe that?
posted by acridrabbit at 12:14 PM on June 6, 2001
But seriously, I agree with what dagnyscott wrote. Badly worded questions - and I wanted to say, well that depends ... on most of the questions. I wonder if that's part of the point, really. Political issues are complicated.
I have to say that this statement made my eyes bug out of my head:
"Significantly physically disabled people should not be allowed to reproduce."
Wha? Are there people who actually believe that?
posted by acridrabbit at 12:14 PM on June 6, 2001
Thanks, Jammer, that name just didn't stick with me. My reading of the Libertarian Party is that they would definitely fall south of the authoritarian axis, but generally on the right side of the economic axis.
posted by briank at 12:42 PM on June 6, 2001
posted by briank at 12:42 PM on June 6, 2001
Those questions are awfully loaded, and it would have been nice to have a "neither agree nor disagree" answer. Anyway, I'm there with Red Ken as an, um, "left libertarian", though I'd be quite happy to call myself "Old Labour".
How about this quiz, which feels a bit less manipulative? (I'm squarely with the Greens on this one: except there isn't a Green candidate in my constituency. And no Socialist Alliance option, either.)
posted by holgate at 1:02 PM on June 6, 2001
How about this quiz, which feels a bit less manipulative? (I'm squarely with the Greens on this one: except there isn't a Green candidate in my constituency. And no Socialist Alliance option, either.)
posted by holgate at 1:02 PM on June 6, 2001
I agree that it is heavily loaded towards the libertarian/left side, and on that basis could be judged as propaganda. Incidentally I landed somewhere between Gandhi and Ken Livingstone.
But on second thoughts having been viewing this site for a while, I think that much of the Metafilter userbase is itself weighted towards the libertarian left. We don't represent the whole spectrum of views. I'd love to see what the average results would be, say, for the whole of the AOL userbase. Because I think it would be possible for an extreme rightist to take the test and not feel that the questions were trying to push him/her towards the more left-wing answers.
posted by tobyslater at 1:22 PM on June 6, 2001
But on second thoughts having been viewing this site for a while, I think that much of the Metafilter userbase is itself weighted towards the libertarian left. We don't represent the whole spectrum of views. I'd love to see what the average results would be, say, for the whole of the AOL userbase. Because I think it would be possible for an extreme rightist to take the test and not feel that the questions were trying to push him/her towards the more left-wing answers.
posted by tobyslater at 1:22 PM on June 6, 2001
How about this quiz, which feels a bit less manipulative? (I'm squarely with the Greens on this one: except there isn't a Green candidate in my constituency. And no Socialist Alliance option, either.)
That one was sort of fun to take as a non-Briton, just to see where I fall into the UK's system. Of course, that one is biased as well - just look at the first question: are you better off than four years ago? Well, maybe I am, but that doesn't mean the current govt. had anything to do with it. Yet, if you answer yes it considers that a pro-Labour answer.
posted by ljromanoff at 1:34 PM on June 6, 2001
That one was sort of fun to take as a non-Briton, just to see where I fall into the UK's system. Of course, that one is biased as well - just look at the first question: are you better off than four years ago? Well, maybe I am, but that doesn't mean the current govt. had anything to do with it. Yet, if you answer yes it considers that a pro-Labour answer.
posted by ljromanoff at 1:34 PM on June 6, 2001
are you better off than four years ago? Well, maybe I am, but that doesn't mean the current govt. had anything to do with it.
True, true: and it's inaccurate, as well. If you have benefitted from the minimum wage, you'll most likely be better off because of govt. policy, whereas if you're a student, you'll be having to cough up for fees.
That said, the last century's electoral history dictates that it takes a monumental fuck-up (ie Heath's three-day week in 1974) for a ruling party not to be given a second term, and thus the benefit of the doubt, so "do you feel all right" is a question worth asking.
posted by holgate at 3:28 PM on June 6, 2001
True, true: and it's inaccurate, as well. If you have benefitted from the minimum wage, you'll most likely be better off because of govt. policy, whereas if you're a student, you'll be having to cough up for fees.
That said, the last century's electoral history dictates that it takes a monumental fuck-up (ie Heath's three-day week in 1974) for a ruling party not to be given a second term, and thus the benefit of the doubt, so "do you feel all right" is a question worth asking.
posted by holgate at 3:28 PM on June 6, 2001
L/R -3.06
Lib/Auth -3.46
Apparently I'm not quite the socialist I believed myself to be.
Actually acidrabbit, I'm going to reveal what a terrible person I am by admitting that I had to stop and think before disagreeing with the statement about the disabled. I really do think that eugenics has its uses. Obviously it would be impossible to try it today since the Nazis have indelibly sullied the concept, not to mention that I can't imagine a person or group honest enough to be able to administer such a program. Also, it depends on whether the disability is mental or physical, and even more on whether it is hereditary.
posted by Octaviuz at 4:09 PM on June 6, 2001
Lib/Auth -3.46
Apparently I'm not quite the socialist I believed myself to be.
Actually acidrabbit, I'm going to reveal what a terrible person I am by admitting that I had to stop and think before disagreeing with the statement about the disabled. I really do think that eugenics has its uses. Obviously it would be impossible to try it today since the Nazis have indelibly sullied the concept, not to mention that I can't imagine a person or group honest enough to be able to administer such a program. Also, it depends on whether the disability is mental or physical, and even more on whether it is hereditary.
posted by Octaviuz at 4:09 PM on June 6, 2001
Economic Left/Right: -4.49
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -0.05
One planet, one government, one people, one goal, one mind. plenty of off key voices shrieking out the dis-harmony of reduced masses.
Nerve staple the rioteers, genetically engineer a superleader, world peace abounds.
Ahh, I love the smell of the cloning tanks in the morning.
posted by Azaroth at 10:54 PM on June 7, 2001
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -0.05
One planet, one government, one people, one goal, one mind. plenty of off key voices shrieking out the dis-harmony of reduced masses.
Nerve staple the rioteers, genetically engineer a superleader, world peace abounds.
Ahh, I love the smell of the cloning tanks in the morning.
posted by Azaroth at 10:54 PM on June 7, 2001
« Older EEEEEEEEEEEEK. | 16 Pensioners: 1 Island : 2 Static Caravans Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by Grangousier at 4:49 AM on June 6, 2001