The Political Compass.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

We recently had a test which showed us ( in the words of those who published the results) that "Self proclaimed Liberals/ leftists were ignorant of economic theory.

And that, i think, is the problem. "Self proclaimed" anybodies should not be taken too seriously till they show some sort of credentials.

And of course, the other thing is that Copnsevative types are depicted as 'smart'. As if money were everything , or could sort everything out.

The fact is that one can be socially consevative and still believe in economic liberalism. Or believe in strict monetarist policies but still find time to smoke pot, use porn and and be outrageously gay!

So, where do we, where do you stand on the political compass? Dare you take the test and find out?

For the record , I am in the same quadrant as Ghandi, Nelson Mandela and the Dalai Lama. You?

http://www.politicalcompass.org/index

there are no right and wrong answers - it's about what you truly believe. Go read the homepage and the into stuff firs and you will see what it's about.

But, the point is that it's not just left/ right. There are two axes that generate 4 basic political positions. which one is yours?

Comments

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

But this is the whole point - more or less govt control of what? Our money or our private lives? or both? or neither?

Hence the twin axes of social control and fiscal controls.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Government control, end statement.

It doesn't matter if it's fiscal or social - the more control you're looking for, the further left you're going. That's why so many people really belong in the center - they may vote reliably for lefties or righties, but that's more because they have issues of importance, etc.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

And up and down ? no difference between Labour and tories in the UK?
Lib Dems just like the rest?

No - in fact, look at the differences in Policy as far as social attitudes goes.

like I said, Money isn't everything , but maybe you disagree there.
To me , though , there is a world of difference between Pro Life and Pro Choice.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

And up and down ? no difference between Labour and tories in the UK?
Lib Dems just like the rest?

They're two sides of the same coin. One's just marginally more left than the other.

like I said, Money isn't everything , but maybe you disagree there.

Not at all, but like I said, the problem is more that we've reversed the angle on a few things - why should something that advocates more state control (like abortion restrictions) be considered right wing? If it were any other issue, we'd call them left wing positions.

[spaz-own-joo.livejournal.com]

the more control you're looking for, the further left you're going.

Sure, if we're willing to adopt your definitions for what left and right ought to mean, rather than the definitions which are already well-established in vernacular English.

What is the puropse of words, other than to establish shared intersubjective meaning?

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm totally aware that this is a battle I'm unlikely to win. But when the understanding of left/right in the vernacular is "government should have more/less of a role," it's kind of hard to make that mesh with the way we've placed a lot of these social issues.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

No- the issue isn't ' more or less government, it's 'more or less change' - and the days when the aristos and the church sat at the king's right hand and the merchants of the town sat on his left kinda set the stage.

basically, if you want to keep your own cash; have wimmin back in the kitchen , barefoot and pregnant; have little or no social welfare and your own collection of guns and a big military, and a big corporation you are right.

OTOH, if you want gay civil unions, trade unions, a strong social services and nationalised industries, you are a leftie. At least , in the UK you are.

But, as the poll shows, there is social and fiscal conservativism.
The more secular society gets , the more we will see iit coming to the fore.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

No- the issue isn't ' more or less government, it's 'more or less change'

Except that the right wants change too - a different change from the left. Generally speaking, the further left you go, the more you're looking for the government to impose your ideas.

THAT is why I'm saying the common wisdom regarding social conservatism being right wing doesn't make sense - it's become a misnomer based on what we know about the left and the right historically.

[green-man-2010.livejournal.com]

As others have said, this is your personal interpretation . I can see where you are coming from , but it isn't where most of us are at.

Fascism is where the State is powerful, but the individual is there to serve the State - Socialist Democracy is where the State is there for the individual and in service of the idividual to achieve their potential. however, Communism under the Russian system developed to the point where the extreme left of Communism and the extreme right of Nazism were like the poles of a horseshoe magnet - theoretical opposites that were in fact very close to each other.

But, again , that is another take on things. This double axis is just another valid way of looking at things. it takes the assumption that social control is differnt from Fiscal control, and lets it all go from there.

And Lo - one can be socially progressive but fiscally conservative, and so forth.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

As others have said, this is your personal interpretation . I can see where you are coming from , but it isn't where most of us are at.

Well, it's a historical interpretation. It's the general perception of what people think of right v. left. I'm simply a proponent of extending that general perception to all individual issues.

And Lo - one can be socially progressive but fiscally conservative, and so forth.

Yes, we call them libertarians, or libertarian-leaning.