Your political compass.

[Hekik]

To those who take issue with certain questions about their validity, whether or not they are baised, have no opinion on some, etc:

As the faq on the site would tell you, the test is more about your gut reaction to a question than the actual debate behind it. For example, the globalization serving humanity vs corporations question: if you have a tendency to feel that corporations are not ethical, you are bound to agree with the statement. If you have a tendency to feel that corporations do more good than harm, you are likely to take issue with the statement and say "it's not necessarily true."

I feel the political compass works to a point. The only time the test seems to lose its validity is when the person taking the test starts to think too much about what answering a question a certain way would make them. Using the globalization example again, my first instinct is to agree with the statement, as I feel that corporations have too many rights as it is. Then I start to think that viewpoint is a little extreme, and I feel that I should disagree with it because I don't want to make myself out to be a DOWN WITH THE MAN AND EVIL CORPORATIONS sort of guy. So I put down "Disagree" instead of my initial "Strongly agree." However, the test wasn't asking for the correction, it was asking for the initial feeling.

tl;dr The test isn't perfect, but it's about as good as a political orientation quiz can get (as long as it is taken correctly).

[Draconian Races]

Economic Left/Right: 5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 5.79

Damn, I came out sounding pretty moderate :|

[Natapoc]

C4S

25% Economic Leftist (Economic Leftist / Economic Rightist)
6% Statist (Anarchist / Statist)
46% Anti-Militarist (Anti-Militarist / Militarist)
85% Socio-Cultural Liberal (Socio-Cultural Liberal / Socio-Cultural Conservative)
73% Civil Libertarian (Civil Libertarian / Civil Authoritarian)

An economic leftist? Sigh, whatever.

Yeah I don't like this c4s test at all.

It interprets taking a position that is MORE anarchist than the test author as being authoritarian.

And it interprets positions that are further to the left of the author (ie money should be abolished totally) as being to the right.

(because I strongly disagree/agree but not for the reasons the test author thinks I do)

Still It did not get to far off.

86% Economic Leftist (Economic Leftist / Economic Rightist)
84% Anarchist (Anarchist / Statist)
100% Anti-Militarist (Anti-Militarist / Militarist)
91% Socio-Cultural Liberal (Socio-Cultural Liberal / Socio-Cultural Conservative)
93% Civil Libertarian (Civil Libertarian / Civil Authoritarian)

I still think political compass, despite it's problems, is better than this one.

Here is a map that someone put together of all the NSG users test scores:

http://b.armory.com/~pherq/polcomp/chart-large.svg (including mine look in the far left libertarian)

One of the big threads is here: viewtopic.php?f=20&t=32036

ps. The C4 test does not seem to have any place for communists.

[Mussoliniopoli]

In the C4SS I scored the following:
29% Economic Leftist
84% Statist
7% Militarist
15% Socio-Cultural Liberal
0% Civil Authoritarian

Makes more sense then most others I have taken.

[Dungeyland]

This is mine:



I'm surprised I'm not a bit more to the right, and a little more libertarian.

[Eine Heimat]

Terrible. A lot of questions like the 'astrology' one are largely irrelevant or not really indicative of anything. If anything in my experience the people that believe in astrology tend to be women, gays, new agers, hipsters, etc... You know, the people that tend to be less socially conservative. Of course assuming that people with secular, 'un-traditional' or 'cosmopolitan' social views are automatically libertarian while the opposite are always authoritarian is a fallacy too. And the economics questions have such an obvious socialistic bias in their framing I don't really know where to begin. So of course almost everyone who answers is going to get 'left libertarian' or 'centrist' as their result.

[Trotskylvania]

The only way I fit on a Cartesian coordinate grid for the political spectrum requires the use of imaginary numbers

in what way?

In mathematics, complex numbers (i.e, those of the form a + bi) can't be represented on an ordinary one-dimensional number line. Instead, they are represented on a complex plane, which is a two-dimensional graph displaying the series of infinite real numbers on the x-axis, and their complex cousins splayed out on the y-axis.

When you take two number-lines that form a cartesian grid, like the Political Compass, and at in complex numbers, you get a four-dimensional hypercube, called a tesseract.

I've adopted the complex number approach largely because while I might appear to show up in the same space on the political compass, I do so for very different reasons than others.

[Hekik]

By the way, my political compass:

Economic Left/Right: -6.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.15

Certainly doesn't stand out in this thread, lots of lower left quadranters around here...

[Natapoc]

in what way?

In mathematics, complex numbers (i.e, those of the form a + bi) can't be represented on an ordinary one-dimensional number line. Instead, they are represented on a complex plane, which is a two-dimensional graph displaying the series of infinite real numbers on the x-axis, and their complex cousins splayed out on the y-axis.

When you take two number-lines that form a cartesian grid, like the Political Compass, and at in complex numbers, you get a four-dimensional hypercube, called a tesseract.

I've adopted the complex number approach largely because while I might appear to show up in the same space on the political compass, I do so for very different reasons than others.

I ,of course, know what complex numbers are. Thanks for answering but I was more interested in the specifics of how your viewpoints are any less well represented than anyone else?

How exactly would your hypercube account for the different types of philosophies for example?

[Eine Heimat]

To those who take issue with certain questions about their validity, whether or not they are baised, have no opinion on some, etc:

As the faq on the site would tell you, the test is more about your gut reaction to a question than the actual debate behind it. For example, the globalization serving humanity vs corporations question: if you have a tendency to feel that corporations are not ethical, you are bound to agree with the statement. If you have a tendency to feel that corporations do more good than harm, you are likely to take issue with the statement and say "it's not necessarily true."

I feel the political compass works to a point. The only time the test seems to lose its validity is when the person taking the test starts to think too much about what answering a question a certain way would make them. Using the globalization example again, my first instinct is to agree with the statement, as I feel that corporations have too many rights as it is. Then I start to think that viewpoint is a little extreme, and I feel that I should disagree with it because I don't want to make myself out to be a DOWN WITH THE MAN AND EVIL CORPORATIONS sort of guy. So I put down "Disagree" instead of my initial "Strongly agree." However, the test wasn't asking for the correction, it was asking for the initial feeling.

tl;dr The test isn't perfect, but it's about as good as a political orientation quiz can get (as long as it is taken correctly).

I'm actually anti-free trade but the question is still nonsensically worded. 'If globalization is inevitable, then it should serve people not corporations' makes no sense legally or philosophically because:

1) Corporations are literally people, under the law.
2) Regardless of what you think of the above, Corporations are comprised of people.
3) Globalization is just a phenomena. It's not a person or government or business or anything. It's like saying 'water should serve people' or 'air should serve people.'

That's not even the worst one though IMO. The question on inflation vs. employment is a false dichotomy because it assumes that the answerer believes such things can actually be centrally planned or should be planned. If you're a conservative or 'right-libertarian' against central banking or even a more anti-government type of leftist (like say, a syndicalist) there's really no way to answer that one accurately. You're forced to accept two options that fundamentally reflect a world view based around some variation of central planning.

[Trotskylvania]

Tried the C4SS quiz, couldn't finish.

Way too many loaded questions

In mathematics, complex numbers (i.e, those of the form a + bi) can't be represented on an ordinary one-dimensional number line. Instead, they are represented on a complex plane, which is a two-dimensional graph displaying the series of infinite real numbers on the x-axis, and their complex cousins splayed out on the y-axis.

When you take two number-lines that form a cartesian grid, like the Political Compass, and at in complex numbers, you get a four-dimensional hypercube, called a tesseract.

I've adopted the complex number approach largely because while I might appear to show up in the same space on the political compass, I do so for very different reasons than others.

I ,of course, know what complex numbers are. Thanks for answering but I was more interested in the specifics of how your viewpoints are any less well represented than anyone else?

How exactly would your hypercube account for the different types of philosophies for example?

Well, for one, I'm extremely collectivist in my social, political and economic views. I'm all highly skeptical of authoritarian institutions and the state as it exists today. On the political compass, this puts me in the bottom left quadrant. But in other circumstances, I have absolutely no problem with compulsion and authority provided it is exercised virtuously and in the proper form. For example, in a post-capitalist, post-statist society, I think those who choose not to participate in social and political life should be mildly ostracized.

I also tend to believe that the whole way we tend to view government in modernity is fundamentally flawed. We think of the state and other institutions of power as the being the fundamental actors in the realm of choice, and the citizenry as just passive subjects who are acted upon and moved about. On the contrary, I would argue there should be at least as much political wisdom being exercised in being governed as being the governor.

How exactly would your hypercube account for the different types of philosophies for example?

See, the thing is I don't think that it could, as complex as it is. I think, by and large, attempts to graph political opinions into a graph are a bit ridiculous. Using complex numbers to express my political compass score (say, -9 - 7i, -8 - 8i), is my personal deconstruction of the idea.

I don't think there's a single methodology that is really better than others at expressing political opinions in an easily digestible form. Whether it's the Pournelle Chart, the Political Compass, the C4SS quiz, the Moral Politics Quiz or others, they all measure politics by different methodologies, and naturally come up with widely varied results. As a political scientist and philosopher by training, I can't see any reason to like one over the other. They all provide a different way of describing the variations in political philosophy. And they all are pretty bad at corresponding to real life.

[Natapoc]

To those who take issue with certain questions about their validity, whether or not they are baised, have no opinion on some, etc:

As the faq on the site would tell you, the test is more about your gut reaction to a question than the actual debate behind it. For example, the globalization serving humanity vs corporations question: if you have a tendency to feel that corporations are not ethical, you are bound to agree with the statement. If you have a tendency to feel that corporations do more good than harm, you are likely to take issue with the statement and say "it's not necessarily true."

I feel the political compass works to a point. The only time the test seems to lose its validity is when the person taking the test starts to think too much about what answering a question a certain way would make them. Using the globalization example again, my first instinct is to agree with the statement, as I feel that corporations have too many rights as it is. Then I start to think that viewpoint is a little extreme, and I feel that I should disagree with it because I don't want to make myself out to be a DOWN WITH THE MAN AND EVIL CORPORATIONS sort of guy. So I put down "Disagree" instead of my initial "Strongly agree." However, the test wasn't asking for the correction, it was asking for the initial feeling.

tl;dr The test isn't perfect, but it's about as good as a political orientation quiz can get (as long as it is taken correctly).

I'm actually anti-free trade but the question is still nonsensically worded. 'If globalization is inevitable, then it should serve people not corporations' makes no sense legally or philosophically because:

1) Corporations are literally people, under the law.
2) Regardless of what you think of the above, Corporations are comprised of people.
3) Globalization is just a phenomena. It's not a person or government or business or anything. It's like saying 'water should serve people' or 'air should serve people.'

That's not even the worst one though IMO. The question on inflation vs. employment is a false dichotomy because it assumes that the answerer believes such things can actually be centrally planned or should be planned. If you're someone that's sympathetic to free market ideas or even a more anti-government type of leftist (syndicalist) there's really no way to answer that one accurately.

It makes total sense. You are over thinking it.

1. Corporations are not literally people under the law. They are treated as legal persons for some laws but not all.
2. This in no way effects the question. Just because a corporation is comprised of people does not mean that the interests of the corporation are the same as that of the people.
3. Actually globalization can be ignored in this case. the whole "If globalization is inevitable" has no real meaning to the important part of the question. It's linguistic fluff.

The answer for a syndicalist is: Strongly agree.
If you are a free marketer than your answer could be anything. It really depends on how you feel.

[Shadow25]

[Natapoc]

Tried the C4SS quiz, couldn't finish.

Way too many loaded questions

I ,of course, know what complex numbers are. Thanks for answering but I was more interested in the specifics of how your viewpoints are any less well represented than anyone else?

How exactly would your hypercube account for the different types of philosophies for example?

Well, for one, I'm extremely collectivist in my social, political and economic views. I'm all highly skeptical of authoritarian institutions and the state as it exists today. On the political compass, this puts me in the bottom left quadrant. But in other circumstances, I have absolutely no problem with compulsion and authority provided it is exercised virtuously and in the proper form. For example, in a post-capitalist, post-statist society, I think those who choose not to participate in social and political life should be mildly ostracized.

I also tend to believe that the whole way we tend to view government in modernity is fundamentally flawed. We think of the state and other institutions of power as the being the fundamental actors in the realm of choice, and the citizenry as just passive subjects who are acted upon and moved about. On the contrary, I would argue there should be at least as much political wisdom being exercised in being governed as being the governor.

I think that's not so much a problem with the test because it is putting you where you should be (anti authoritarian left) it's that most of us who are in that lower left square all have very different ideas on how things should be run. The variates in that far lower left square are more extreme in their diversity than people in a 3.5 square radius around the center.

The test seems more for the "average person" A specialized left-libertarian test could be produced that would put you and I in very different places I suspect whereas political compass likely puts us in the same square.

[Eine Heimat]

1. Corporations are not literally people under the law. They are treated as legal persons for some laws but not all.

That's true, under incorporation they may even have more privileges especially in terms of liability. But I think it's close enough, especially in the context of the US.

2. This in no way effects the question. Just because a corporation is comprised of people does not mean that the interests of the corporation are the same as that of the people.

Well, I'm not implying the interests of business are always the same as those of the general public. But the phrasing implies a dichotomy between corporations and people.

3. Actually globalization can be ignored in this case. the whole "If globalization is inevitable" has no real meaning to the important part of the question. It's linguistic fluff.

Right, which is what I'm saying. It's actually somewhat incoherent. It would be one thing to say 'practices like outsourcing should be regulated or managed to protect workers rights/environment/whatever' or "high tariffs are better than free trade/a consumer centered policy'' but that's not what's being asked.

The answer for a syndicalist is: Strongly agree.

I actually know quite a few anarcho-socialists, distributists, etc. who disliked the question. Then again, admittedly it's hard to convey that sort of viewpoint(s) on tests for obvious reasons.

[Eine Heimat]

http://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/POLMTX/thetest.php

I thought this one was better done, even if it has its flaws like being US-centric:

Social Score: +1.30
Economic Score: +5.35

Admittedly the abortion question skews my Social score upwards.

[Meridiani Planum]

[Natapoc]

http://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/POLMTX/thetest.php

I thought this one was better done, even if US centric and a bit vague at times.

Social Score: +1.30
Economic Score: +5.35

More or less.

It's at least as confusing I think. For example I have no idea what this is supposed to mean:

"3. Giving faith-based charities the same government resources as secular organizations is a good idea."

What is this talking about?

[CTALNH]

Here is my political compass
Economic Left/Right: -9.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 3.64

[Eine Heimat]

http://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/POLMTX/thetest.php

I thought this one was better done, even if US centric and a bit vague at times.



More or less.

It's at least as confusing I think. For example I have no idea what this is supposed to mean:

"3. Giving faith-based charities the same government resources as secular organizations is a good idea."

What is this talking about?

Bush and Obama's funding of faith based initiatives. Basically should the US fund religious charities or programs the same way it does secular ones. Again, US centric.

[Trotskylvania]

Tried the C4SS quiz, couldn't finish.

Way too many loaded questions

Well, for one, I'm extremely collectivist in my social, political and economic views. I'm all highly skeptical of authoritarian institutions and the state as it exists today. On the political compass, this puts me in the bottom left quadrant. But in other circumstances, I have absolutely no problem with compulsion and authority provided it is exercised virtuously and in the proper form. For example, in a post-capitalist, post-statist society, I think those who choose not to participate in social and political life should be mildly ostracized.

I also tend to believe that the whole way we tend to view government in modernity is fundamentally flawed. We think of the state and other institutions of power as the being the fundamental actors in the realm of choice, and the citizenry as just passive subjects who are acted upon and moved about. On the contrary, I would argue there should be at least as much political wisdom being exercised in being governed as being the governor.

I think that's not so much a problem with the test because it is putting you where you should be (anti authoritarian left) it's that most of us who are in that lower left square all have very different ideas on how things should be run. The variates in that far lower left square are more extreme in their diversity than people in a 3.5 square radius around the center.

The test seems more for the "average person" A specialized left-libertarian test could be produced that would put you and I in very different places I suspect whereas political compass likely puts us in the same square.

While that's certainly true, that just speaks to another problem to the idea of a "political spectrum", at least one that we try to graph out.

Also, I edited the previous post in response to your edit.

[Meryuma]

Well, for one, I'm extremely collectivist in my social, political and economic views. I'm all highly skeptical of authoritarian institutions and the state as it exists today. On the political compass, this puts me in the bottom left quadrant. But in other circumstances, I have absolutely no problem with compulsion and authority provided it is exercised virtuously and in the proper form. For example, in a post-capitalist, post-statist society, I think those who choose not to participate in social and political life should be mildly ostracized.

I don't think anarchists generally see that as authoritarian or coercive.

http://uselectionatlas.org/TOOLS/POLMTX/thetest.php

I thought this one was better done, even if it has its flaws like being US-centric:

Social Score: +1.30
Economic Score: +5.35

Admittedly the abortion question skews my Social score upwards.

That quiz utterly sucked. Apparently I'm moderately capitalist, libertarian socialists all support state economic regulation and politics consists entirely of disconnected policy issues.

[Diseased Imaginings]

hmm, I get closer to the center (on the horizontal axis) every time I take this. Oh NSG, what hath thou done to me? I used to almost be an ancap

[Meryuma]

(Image)


hmm, I get closer to the center (on the horizontal axis) every time I take this. Oh NSG, what hath thou done to me? I used to almost be an ancap

Pretty soon, you're going to be Marx 2.

[Natapoc]

(Image)


hmm, I get closer to the center (on the horizontal axis) every time I take this. Oh NSG, what hath thou done to me? I used to almost be an ancap

Come join us on the left where you don't need to make excuses for monarchists disguising themselves as anarchists who think they should have full sovereignty over "their land" and everyone on it just like a king.

Looks like you are starting to drift into mutualist land. It seems like there are more mutualists on NSG lately.