What's your political compass?

This has probably been done before, but I haven't seen it lately. I'm curious about where other people stand.

Go here for the test of where you fall on the Political Compass.

Mine:
Economic Left/Right: 3.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.08

Yeah, I'm pretty libertarian. I haven't yet decided whether I want to join the Libertarian Party or not. It's tempting, though.

Economic Left/Right: -8.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.00

I ended up right by the "Dalai Lama".

Nice compass, although I've seen better.

Have to wonder how you scored higher on social liberty than me perhaps because I chose to restrict a few things.

politicalcompass.org...

Try this one www.theadvocates.org...

[edit on 17/2/07 by SteveR]

My political compass is
* Economic Left/Right: -6.00
* Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.41

I suppose the devil is always in the details.

[edit on 18-2-2007 by df1]

No devil with that high a liberty. Just slightly more capitalistic

Economic Left/Right: 4.63
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.38

It put me in the same quadrant as Friedman. I dont know who that is.

I never fill in questionaires or any thing like it. It just seems like profiling to me, they find out how exactly you think just by asking you, what you think may be simple and honest questions.

these things are like data mining, and people opposed to invasions of privasy should not fill in any of them.

OH MY!

Economic Left/Right is - 1.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: - 0.21

I'm almost dead center. I'm on the line and just two boxes to the left of the center. Next time someone calls me a neo-con I'll have to show them these stats.

Heh, funny you mention this.
My stats are right in my sig, but just in case I change the sig...


Economic Left/Right: 0.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.85

Originally posted by andy1033
It just seems like profiling to me, they find out how exactly you think just by asking you...

It seems that quite a few of us ATS members state exactly what we think on a regular basis, so letting these political compass folks know does not present any additional risk. I'm curious. Why is it not a problem for you to spout off on ATS, while answering this survey is a problem for you?

i think i'm the furthest left and down so far

Economic Left/Right: -8.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.26

i'm as left as mandela and as far down as the dalai lama

Economic left/right- 4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.64.

Which might surprise some people I think. I'm roundabout where Ghandi was. Spoke a lot of good sense that bloke.



[edit on 19-2-2007 by ubermunche]

i see i'm gonna be almost alone on this one.

Economic left/right 7.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian 2.36

sort of by Thatcher but not as high up the authoritarian ladder.

Economic Left/Right: -7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.72

Well, I guess that puts me firmly in the commie camp. Though, in theory, I prefer libertarianism, I just don't feel we've evolved enough to make it work. Yet.

Originally posted by befoiled
Economic Left/Right: -7.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.72

Well, I guess that puts me firmly in the commie camp. Though, in theory, I prefer libertarianism, I just don't feel we've evolved enough to make it work. Yet.

This is something I despise about the one dimensional view of American politics. There's an ocean's wide difference between American liberals and communists. I don't much care for current American liberal politics, especially their economic views, but I like them much more than communists.

On top of having a centralized economy, communism is staunchly authoritarian. While American liberals like the redistribution of money to the poor, they don't advocate for a completely centralized economy, and they're anything except authoritarian.

SuperCheetah,

If you agree with the system, it's no longer authoriatarian. Mutually beneficial. Simply because communism is an economic doctrine, not a social one. Looking at failed implementations doesn't count.

Originally posted by SteveR
SuperCheetah,

If you agree with the system, it's no longer authoriatarian. Mutually beneficial. Simply because communism is an economic doctrine, not a social one. Looking at failed implementations doesn't count.

Communism is great for very small groups like hunter/gatherers, but it simply doesn't scale. All implementations of communism at a national level have been failures. I would say that such is a good hint that it doesn't work at that level.

PS Isn't being able to disagree with a system a fundamental asset to freedom? I'm fairly certain that Mao Zedong would have said something similar.

PPS If we can't look at the failed implementations, then what do we look at? The hypothetical ones of fiction? That's not scientific, much less objective. In science, one doesn't exclude evidence just because it doesn't support a hypothesis.

[edit on 2/21/2007 by supercheetah]

[edit on 2/21/2007 by supercheetah]

Originally posted by supercheetah
Isn't being able to disagree with a system a fundamental asset to freedom? I'm fairly certain that Mao Zedong would have said something similar.

Gee, thanks.

The point was communism is compatible with democracy. It just has never been in a democratic country. An economic doctrine logically cannot be authoritarian to those who agree with it. There are plenty of communists who are willing to agree to its system.

What made the failed implementations authoritarian is not communism, but an oppressive social doctrine.

Think carefully..

The questionaires first page of questions is bogus.

What do any of them, except maybe the first, have anything to do with politics?

Those of you who filled it out, can probably expect some political spam in your mail boxes in the short future.

Originally posted by nextguyinline
The questionaires first page of questions is bogus.

What do any of them, except maybe the first, have anything to do with politics?

Those of you who filled it out, can probably expect some political spam in your mail boxes in the short future.

It never asked you for your email address, so how can it spam you without that necessary piece of information?

I've never given them my email address, and have never had to do so.

And those questions have everything to do with politics. Politics is largely about achieving certain ends based upon certain views of the world, and that first page is about figuring out your views on the world. If you think that every guy is a potential rapist, then that's going to affect how you vote on legislation regarding sex offenders.

Originally posted by SteveR

Originally posted by supercheetah
Isn't being able to disagree with a system a fundamental asset to freedom? I'm fairly certain that Mao Zedong would have said something similar.

Gee, thanks.

The point was communism is compatible with democracy. It just has never been in a democratic country. An economic doctrine logically cannot be authoritarian to those who agree with it. There are plenty of communists who are willing to agree to its system.

What made the failed implementations authoritarian is not communism, but an oppressive social doctrine.

Think carefully..

What about the people that don't agree with the communist system?

Economic control is not that different from social control. What if a person wishes to do something expensive like create a space research lab, but can't obtain the resources under the centralized economy? Is that any better than simply outlawing space research?

Government should only prevent people from denying each other rights and freedoms--not to create equality. Life is unfair, and will continue to be unfair for many generations. Our only savior will be in technology when some invents an actual-factual replicator, but technological advancement happens best in capitalist economies.

It comes back to the problem that communism inherently depends upon the benevolence and generosity of all individuals under the system. I believe that most people are benevolent for the most part, but few are generous. At least capitalism allows for a trickle down economy, which doesn't necessitate the generosity of individuals. However, individuals who actually are generous flourish under capitalism through their charities, which more often than not do a far better job than governments.