I’ve taken several tests and quizzes on political philosophy. Not surprisingly, I usually wind up being some type of libertarian.
- The Definitive Political Orientation test (I’m a “right libertarian”).
- The Circle test (I’m a “minarchist”).
- The Libertarian Purity test (I’m a “hard-core libertarian”).
- The 8 Values test (I’m a “libertarian capitalist”).
- The world’s smallest political quiz (I’m a “100-percent libertarian”).
But sometimes I get odd results. For instance, the Political Left/Right Test, put me exactly in the middle, and another political quiz pegged me as a “moderate.”
The former might be reasonable since libertarians have some right-wing views and some left-wing views. But the latter quiz concluded that I had “few strong opinions,” which is a nonsensical result.
Anyhow, I found another test. This new survey is called the Political Compass Test, and it’s based on the theory that the traditional left-right economic spectrum is insufficient.
…the social dimension is also important in politics. That’s the one that the mere left-right scale doesn’t adequately address. So we’ve added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian.
And here’s the four quadrants that are created by their two lines.
While no system will capture everything, I have no objection to their theoretical construct.
But I think two of the examples they provide are somewhat crazy.
First, Hitler was the head of the National Socialist Workers Party and he belongs on the left side of the horizontal axis. Second, it’s absurd to have Thatcher anywhere near Stalin and Hitler on the vertical axis.
I also think Friedman should be moved more in the libertarian direction, but at least they have him in the correct quadrant.
Now let’s look at my results. I’m somewhat disappointed because I’m not way on the right for economic issues. And I’m even more irked that I’m barely on the libertarian side for social issues.
For what it’s worth, some of the questions were more about attitude and outlook rather than policy. And since I’m the boring kind of libertarian, perhaps that’s why I don’t get a strong score.
Let’s close by looking at my score compared to various famous people. I’m closest to Gary Johnson, which strikes me as a reasonable result.
But some of the other results are very bizarre. First of all, Milton Friedman magically moved. Now he’s very libertarian on social issues, but squishy on economics. Needless to say, that’s nonsense.
But not nearly as nonsensical as Benito Mussolini being on the far right for economic policy. That’s crazy. He was a strident opponent of capitalism.
Likewise, they have Hillary Clinton on the right side of the spectrum for economic policy. The person who did that must have been on some crazy drugs at the time.
And I’m not a Trump fan, but I think it’s laughable to have him ranked as more authoritarian than Mugabe, Mao, and Castro.
[…] There’s a “Political Compass Test” that does a good job of determining one’s philosophical orientation, but it completely botches […]
[…] There’s a “Political Compass Test” that does a good job of determining one’s philosophical orientation, but it completely […]
[…] The Political Compass test (I’m a “right libertarian”). […]
[…] I’m a “right libertarian” according to the political compass test, it’s no surprise that I’m generally sympathetic to cops (notwithstanding my undesired […]
[…] The Political Compass test (I’m a “right libertarian”). […]
[…] can view this debate – if you peruse this “political compass test” – as being a battle over whether it is best for conservatism to be represented by […]
[…] Political Compass test (I’m a “right […]
[…] often share quizzes and tests to help people determine whether they are libertarian. Though I wonder if these two sentences are […]
what happened to my comment?
They put Mandela as an economic moderate and social libertarian? Someone was high. The man was far more intrusive in economic matters than the Apartheid regime he replaced. And this doesn’t even touch on his radical transformation of education, expansion of his own personal spoil system bureaucracy, or even his destruction of basic law enforcement via cronyism.
I just took the definitive libertarian test, and it put me on the exact same point on the graph (I linked from your 2015 post, which had a screen shot) even though I am a devout Catholic and while fairly libertarian also have many traditional and social order values. I think it is rigged– or at least too few and too stark questions to be useful.
Churchill, who ran on a post-war platform (“Set the People Free”) of removing the rationing maintained and extended by the Atlee government, is more authoritarian than Castro, who jailed and killed his political opponents? And Teresa May, for all her faults, more so than Mao? Of course Pinochet is the most authoritarian politician who ever drew breath, worse even than Stalin. Of course he is.
Bloody hell, I’ve just noticed Nicola Sturgeon’s on there. As a Libertarian. A llbertarian who is hell-bent on creating state guardians for children with more rights than their own parents, despite it being ruled illegal. A libertarian whose administration, just this month, introduced a minimum legal price for alcohol.
This “test” is utter junk.
Hello Dan:Regarding your latest on the political compass test. I want to blog about this test for LRC, but I don’t see the last chart with all of the famous people on the political compass website. Where did you get that? Did you make it yourself? If so, where did you get the data?Thanks,Laurence Vance
This entire political quiz thing is a complete turnoff to me. I used to call myself a “Conservative Libertarian” for many years. But in the mid-90s I finally learned all about the word “Liberal” and how it was bastardized by FDR in the early 30s.. I have been so angry with all sides of the isle that I began calling myself a “Classic Liberal”, but that still doesn’t settle things.
So now I simply throw all caution to the wind and call myself a “Liberal”. A REAL Liberal. And when the listener scratches his/her head, or makes some dumb statement, I clue them in on the truth, and why this came about. Also, I know that there may be up to a million people trying to get the word rehabilitated, so it makes me think more positive about its reinstatement.
Everyone needs to start calling all those Progressives what they really are. I call them “Progs” because it conjures up something distasteful. Why can’t we start getting back to calling a spade a spade?
I think I know what I am going to do. I’m going to have a bunch of calling cards made up and have an explanation and a couple of links where it explains the facts to all intellectually uninformed, and lazy. At least I am doing my part here.