It’s time to augment our collection of surveys that test political orientation. Here are the ones I’ve previously shared.
- The Political Compass test (I’m a “right 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”).
Today’s addition is a quiz called the “5-Dimensional Political Compass.”
It’s only 30 questions, covering everything from economic issues, international issues, and cultural issues. Your answers are limited to yes, no, and maybe, so there’s not much opportunity for nuance.
Even though I like the concept of a multi-dimensional test, I’m not completely thrilled with how I was graded.
I have no objection to being a “conservative” and “libertarian,” but I’m an avid proponent of free trade, so how can I be a “total-isolationist”?
It turns out that the quiz has nothing on trade and several questions related to international organizations and global governance. Given my views on such issues, that must explain how I’m classified.
I also don’t like being called a “nationalist,” but I’m guessing that’s because of my “yes” to the question about whether “my country is inherently better.”
It’s not that I think Americans are better, but I very much appreciate that I’m part of a nation founded on an ideal of freedom rather than shared nationality, race, or religion. In other words, I’m saying “my country’s organizational principles are inherently better.”
For what it’s worth, if I changed my answer to “maybe” on that question, the “nationalist” part would disappear and my results would change to “conservative libertarian total-isolationist traditionalist.”
Speaking of “traditionalist,” I’m mildly uncomfortable with that label. I think I got that outcome because I answered “yes” to the first question about the “decline of traditional families” being harmful and “maybe” to the second question about “moral decay of our society.”
I guess it all depends on what people think is implied by the questions. I answered “yes” to the first because I think it is unfortunate to have so many children from broken homes, whereas somebody else might answer “yes” because they are bothered by two men or two women getting married.
And when I think about “moral decay,” I’m focusing on the erosion of societal capital, not whether someone smokes pot or looks at a naked picture on the Internet.
[…] The 5-Dimensional quiz (I’m a “conservative libertarian total-isolationist nationalist traditionalist”). […]
[…] 5-dimensional quiz (I’m a “conservative libertarian total-isolationist nationalist […]
speaking of political orientation…
“Newly released Census Bureau data for 2017 shows nearly half (48.2 percent) of residents in America’s five largest cities now speak a language other than English at home. Overall, the number of U.S. residents speaking a foreign language at home reached a record of nearly 67 million. The total number is up seven million since 2010 and has increased by nearly 35 million since 1990.”
“Almost Half Speak a Foreign Language in America’s Largest Cities
Nationally, one in five spoke a language other than English in 2017”
By Karen Zeigler and Steven A. Camarota on September 19, 2018
https://cis.org/Report/Almost-Half-Speak-Foreign-Language-Americas-Largest-Cities?utm_source=E-mail+Updates&utm_campaign=652d8656ce-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_09_19_11_51&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_7dc4c5d977-652d8656ce-44168217
You are a: Objectivist Anarchist Total-Isolationist Liberal
Collectivism score: -100%
Authoritarianism score: -100%
Internationalism score: -100%
Tribalism score: 0%
Liberalism score: 17%
Apparently one is an isolationist if they don’t accept global government! ?
It is a homonym problem of the word “globalization” being used in a way that conflates two very different and quite opposed concepts when it comes to human prosperity.
The free movement of goods, capital and people across international borders (typically favored by libertarians and typically opposed by coercive collectivists) is usually conflated with the globalization of government (typically despised by libertarians and loved by coercive collectivists).
These two types of “globalization” have radically different opposed impacts on growth and thus human prosperity– so it is about time that these two very different types of globalization are alternatively given different names.
I think that the person who comes up with a successful lexical differentiation between these two very different concepts will make a significant contribution to human prosperity down the line.
BTW, this country, much loved by Dr Mitchell (and myself who I’m here by choice rather than birth) is abandoning freedom for coercive collectivism (obvious to me since I’ve seen this movie before played in several nations across the Atlantic) and thus, having little racial or religious cohesion is now coming apart at the seams. That may not be a bad outcome, so long as migration across the new fragments remains free. Hopefully it will happen peacefully through less federalism rather than revolution. I still think Europe is still first in line to disintegrate, but I think that a similar fate is also likely for the US in the not so distant future as once large nations segregate along ideological lines. This divorce is probably a good outcome. Everybody will have a chance to move to their respective paradise; at which point the relentless compounding of growth, or lack thereof, will take the fragments in radically different directions.
THE “FEDERAL” GOVERNMENT IS A SEPARATE NATION
https://www.newhumannewearthcommunities.com/united-states-vs-united-states-of-america/category/the-federal-government-is-a-separate-nation
LAZY MAN’S GUIDE TO THE LAST 150 YEARS IN AMERICA
https://www.newhumannewearthcommunities.com/united-states-vs-united-states-of-america
The Pillar and Post Revisited http://annavonreitz.com/pillarandpostrevisited.pdf