Dear friends,
We would like to share with you a pretty decent test of political orientation which I recently took. Of course, the categories used are necessarily an over-simplification, yet this test is interesting, at least as a basis for discussion with friend. Anyway, you can check out the test for yourself and take it here:
FYI – here is my score:
Economic Left/Right: -7.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.56
Of course, the test is culturally biased, leaning as it does towards US political definitions. I consider myself more of a “religious traditionalist and political progressive” than a “left libertarian”, but that’s fine – I can live with the latter too (the big advantage of using vague terms is that they do easily overlap).
A definitve weakness of this test is that it is still very US-centric, and that necessarily pushes the rest of the planet out towards the extremes: most “liberal” or “progressive” US politicians are far, far to the right of most European right-wingers. Let’s take the example of Jean-Marie Le Pen, the (now ex-) leader of the French National Front. I happen to know his politics quite well and it always amazed me that by US political standards Le Pen would be far closer to, say, Ralph Nader than to any “conservative” politicians. You doubt that? Then try this though experiment:
Le Pen takes the podium at a meeting of the Front National, he begins his speech by suggesting that unions should be almost totally disbanded, that the 35 week hours should be abandoned, that the French social security should be abolished, that healthcare should be privatized, that the death penalty should be re-introduced, that the French President should be allowed to order the kidnapping or murder of any person on the planet, that Supermax prisons should be built all over France and that the amount of incarcerated people per capita should dramatically increase. He would then proceed to reduce the minimal legal holidays from 4 weeks down to zero (to be negotiated with your boss), he would allow torture of “enemy combatants”, he would declare the right to fight preventive wars without UNSC approval, he would declare that climate change is a myth, that France should pull out of the Kyoto protocol, that abortions should be made illegal, that France should build 700+ military bases on the planet, etc. etc. etc. (can can continue that list ad nauseam)
Anybody who knows anything about France will tell you that Le Pen would be dragged off the podium, sedated and shipped of to a mental clinic long before getting to the end of his speech. And that is true for any other West European politician who would try to openly defend such crazy stuff.
Thus, this test shows a typically US political grid, in particular in its “right libertarian” quadrant which arguably has no equivalent in European political culture (“Austrian School” notwithstanding, being against the state per se and being pro capitalist is, I submit, a uniquely US psychiatric disorder).
Anyway, the point of this post it not to peach “Science Po 101” but to share with you an entertaining test.
I would be grateful if you shared your scores with me and the rest of us. Let us compare notes and have a good laugh, ok?
Cheers,
The Saker
Interesting test. I ended up in the purple about two blocks from the bottom and two from the middle line. Which they numbered:
Economic Left/Right: 2.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.23
I tend to be very close to where Ron Paul is on most issues, though I do have a few disagreements.
Lysander: ah, Ron Paul.. the only politician to whom I ever send money (a modest 100 bucks was the best I could do).
To be honest, I think his social/economic ideas are nonsense, but that could be my “Euro-trash” roots looking at a red, white and blue and red blooded American, pull yourself up by your bootstraps, etc.
Guess I am a Leftie, LOL, but I do respect Ron Paul tremendously. I would have him as a President and Ralph Nader as Secretary of Labor/Finance/Social programs. etc…
Kind regards and have a great week end!
I was on the left a block from the bottom and up against the most leftward left line.
Economic Left/Right: -9.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.95
Guess I’m one of those Catalonian/Spanish Civil War/anarchists. Lol.
But good company I think.
Economic Left/Right: -8.12
Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.56
Hi,
here is my score:
Economic Left/Right: -4.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -1.79
I am exactly in company with Gandy. Strange because i am not as a peacenik as Gandy. I agree with most of his political orientations, but on one point no: and it is the right to of (armed) resistance, but only a la Hezbollah.
@Anonymous: actually, Gandhi was not against violent resistance, that is a misconception. he preferred non-violence, but he also preferred violent resistance to submission. Try to find Professor Norman Finkelstein’s fascinating discussion on this topic which he places in the context of the Palestinian resistance.
I also consider myself a pacifist, but that does not prevent me from realizing that Hezbollah simply has no other option than armed resistance. This said, I agree with Finkenstein that for the Palestinians under Israeli occupation non-violent resistance a la Gandhi would be the best.
If you cannot find Prof. Finkelstein’s speech on this topic, let me know, and I will find it for you.
Kind regards,
The Saker
Economic Left/Right: -9.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.33
Being an anarchist, I am surprised I’m even that far up on the authoritarian scale, but I guess it’s the nature of the quiz.
The immigration question was interesting. It said something like “First generation immigrants have trouble integrating” which seems to me a statement of fact, rather than a judgment on the character of immigrants. I imagine a European might answer that question the same as me but for the reason he thinks immigrants are unwilling to integrate, rather than the reason I would give that integration into a foreign culture is inherently difficult particularly if there is native resistance to immigrants.
Say what you will about America, but we do a far better job of integrating immigrants than Europe does, and even the typical “America–love it or leave it” bigot is arguably more comfortable with immigrants than the average European.
Seemingly left-wing social and political values combined with near hysterical xenophobia is Europe’s particular psychiatric disorder.
@Sean: Say what you will about America, but we do a far better job of integrating immigrants than Europe does
Actually – I fully agree. But the circumstances are dramatically different. Very often, the USA does better for the ‘wrong’ reasons and Western Europe does worse for the ‘right’ reasons. This is a very complex and interesting topic and, if I find the energy, I would love to discuss it (my family emigrated to Europe – after immigrating to *and* emigrating from Argentina – and I myself emigrated to the USA). But yes, there is no doubt in my mind that the USA does a vastly superior job to Europe in this respect. You are totally correct.
And yes, the quiz lacks nuance and subtlety being based on only two scales.
Thanks for replying!
I generally regard myself as a pacifist by preference, but at the end of the day, it is just a strategy like any other. It works in some circumstances while in others, it may need to be abandoned. Passive resistance isn’t an option for the people of Lebanon, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else under foreign attack, but domestically, here in the States, I believe it is the way to go.
The Achilles heel of the capitalist system is that it relies on our participation for its success. Short of rounding us up and sending us to forced labor camps, they can’t force us to work for them or buy their crap beyond what we need to survive. We don’t have to watch their TV or read their newspapers.
The American system could be destroyed from within overnight by mass non-participation, but if would require the cooperation of millions of people.
“Can the hungry go on a hunger strike? Non-violence is a piece of theatre. You need an audience. What can you do when you have no audience? People have the right to resist annihilation.”
–Arundhati Roy
@Sean: The Achilles heel of the capitalist system is that it relies on our participation for its success
YES!
And that was also the case of the Soviet Union. Have you already read this:
http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2007/05/ussr-1974-usa-2007-back-to-future.html
I strongly believe that the best strategy to fight the US Empire for those inside (like us) is by non-participation. It worked in the USSR and it can work here.
Economic Left/Right: -9.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.18
@anticapitalista:
just *beautiful* my friend! That is, so far, the ‘purest’ score ;-)
Thanks for the link, Saker. I completely agree with Solzhenitsyn on this. For the most part the elite control the American public with lies, though they are not above the use of brute force to show who’s boss.
Not everybody is suckered by the lies, but everyone falls prey to propaganda at some point or another. It amazes me that there are so many people who are pro-Palestinian in this country, despite the relentless campaign against Muslims we have seen over the past four decades. Clearly, there are people who resist the lies and do not surrender their basic humanity to them, a fact which leads me to believe that with education, we can reach a lot of the rest.
This is why elitist Leftists piss me off. They are quick to shout “conspiracy theorist” at anyone who uses their critical thinking skills to question the system and arrive at conclusions that haven’t been vetted by the media, government or celebrity intellectuals. Do we not have a duty to disbelieve the government and media and encourage others to do the same?
I can think of no action that is more liberating and risk-free than to simply reject the lies. It’s the start of any new beginning. Actively fighting the liars may be dangerous, and unlike Solzhenitsyn I am sympathetic to those who are unwilling to risk the wellbeing of their families to do so–those scraps of bread being all some people have. But simple rejectionism to the extent your circumstances will allow will go a long way in defeating the system. Certainly, a mass boycott of the media involves no risk whatsoever.
@Sean: actually, the technique suggested by Solzhenitsyn has the triple advantage of being moral/ethical, safe (at least compared to violent resistance) and flexible as every person can decide for himself/herself what the “lies” are without having to wait for some party, political organization, ideological guru or anybody else to give him/her instructions. In other words, it is the kind of resistance we ALL can engage in, regardless of our personal circumstances and ideas.
As for the Left being condescending towards what it calls “conspiracy theories” I completely agree with you. But that is the problem of a supposed “Left” which is in reality what the French call “La Gauche Caviar” or “the Caviar Left”. It is a left of the rich, of the elites, no a real, popular, egalitarian left.
That type of “Caviar Left” is so ideological that it cannot think straight even with the facts of the matter are quite clear. David Ray Griffin gave a devastating critique of that kind of blindness in his wonderful piece “Left-Leaning Despisers of the 9/11 Truth Movement: Do You Really Believe in Miracles?” (http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20039).
I would just add that a good part of the Right is just as blind. For every wannabe Leftie who parrots Chomsky on 9-11 I can show you a wannabe Rightie who will parrot Ron Paul on the same topic. These guys need a “guru” to think for them (and I have the utmost respect for Noam Chomsky and Ron Paul – its their followers which sometimes really piss me off).
As for my view of the corporate media, it is best expressed here: http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2010/02/take-revenge-on-these-bastards-now.html
Kind regards,
The Saker