Old yet new [Political]

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

If the purpose is to determine if the reader is RACIST, then surely RACE is the perfect word to use.

Not when race has ambiguous meanings, no. Racist only really has one meaning (speciest being the preferred term for animals). Plus, what the hell does racism have to do with being authotarian or economically egalatarian (the two things being measured here, apparently)? If I think my race is "special" (e.g. I think we're pretty) what does that tell you about anything? Same with the previous question they used to use "Do you think abstract art is good" or something. I mean, wtf?

I suppose it was wrong of them to assume that people might use their brain and perhaps subsititute the country/region where they live/work/etc into this question.

Indeed, but that wouldn't give particularly good results in terms of comparison. By answering "Yes, the rich are too highly taxed" you are scoring "right wing points" as it were. But let's say I think 50% is a fair rate for high earners to pay. The top rate in Britain is 40%, so I'll vote "No, the rich AREN'T taxed too highly". Let's say W thinks 60% is the tax rich people should pay, but in his country the top tax rate is 70%, so he votes "Yes, the rich ARE tax too much", then he will (on the political compass) be more right wing than me, despite having a more left-wing view. Do you see?

Just because you do not support either idea, does not mean they do not currently exist. There are undoubtedly rich people in your country, and they are being taxed. The question is not "do you support taxation". Feel free to invent your own questions though if it makes you feel better.

I'm fully aware of what the question is, but any answer I give will be misleading. I'm merely suggesting ways they could improve things.

[Deciduous]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Not when race has ambiguous meanings, no. Racist only really has one meaning (speciest being the preferred term for animals). Plus, what the hell does racism have to do with being authotarian or economically egalatarian (the two things being measured here, apparently)? If I think my race is "special" (e.g. I think we're pretty) what does that tell you about anything?

The people behind the quiz are apparently quite clued up on the subject so maybe you should ask. Any definition of race (excluding the human race) boils down to a group of individuals linked by some genetic or geographical commonality. If you're a black welshman, choose black people, choose welsh people, choose any people you like because it doesn't matter. The meat of the question is whether you think any one group of people is inherently better than another.

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Indeed, but that wouldn't give particularly good results in terms of comparison. By answering "Yes, the rich are too highly taxed" you are scoring "right wing points" as it were. But let's say I think 50% is a fair rate for high earners to pay. The top rate in Britain is 40%, so I'll vote "No, the rich AREN'T taxed too highly". Let's say W thinks 60% is the tax rich people should pay, but in his country the top tax rate is 70%, so he votes "Yes, the rich ARE tax too much", then he will (on the political compass) be more right wing than me, despite having a more left-wing view. Do you see?

I understand, and your suggestion to change the question to "is 50% fair" fails for the same reason. I think the idea behind this one is that people don't have a concrete value for what they consider "too high" and probably more to do with people who are high earners are taxed proportionally more than low earners which may be construed by the right wingers as being unfair and by the left as "well why do you need 200k a year anyway you greedy twat".

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

I understand, and your suggestion to change the question to "is 50% fair" fails for the same reason.

Sorry, I don't understand this. My suggestion may indeed fail, but how does it fail for the same reason as the one I gave?

[JonnyBGood]

Economic Left/Right: 5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.59
I answered the questions by intent this time.

Last time I took them literally I was 2.5, -4.5 I think.


Total Inefficiency: 31.6%
Authoritarian: 20%
Anarchic: 40%
when I took the questions literally

Total Inefficiency: 49.5%
Authoritarian: 0%
Anarchic: 70%
when I took them by intent.

[Lupin]

http://www.libertarianunderground.com/quiz.php

Total Inefficiency: 55.2%

Authoritarian: 60%

Anarchic: 50%

i think this test was stupid

[Deciduous]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Sorry, I don't understand this. My suggestion may indeed fail, but how does it fail for the same reason as the one I gave?

If you have a left winger who lives in a country where 25% is the top rate of taxation then 50% might seem unbelievably high even to them.
It wouldnt be unreasonable for a right winger living in a country where the top rate is 75% to answer "no 50% is not too high" and so you get a slight role reversal similar to your previous post.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

If you have a left winger who lives in a country where 25% is the top rate of taxation then 50% might seem unbelievably high even to them.
It wouldnt be unreasonable for a right winger living in a country where the top rate is 75% to answer "no 50% is not too high" and so you get a slight role reversal similar to your previous post.

That's not what the question asks though. You're assuming the question means 'Is this rate of tax higher or lower than your own country?', which it quite clearly doesn't.

[edit]

I didn't think evergreen was banned.

[Deciduous]

No, if you read back that's not what I'm assuming at all. I was pointing out that once you slap a specific figure on it the question becomes meaningless.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

If you have a left winger who lives in a country where 25% is the top rate of taxation then 50% might seem unbelievably high even to them.

Erm, that would mean your political opinion is affected by the country you are in, which is exactly what the test should be measuring. They're not trying to asses where you are in relation to your countrymen, they're comparing you to other people who took the test.

Therefore, it's wholly correct that an American should (generally) score more "right-wing points" than an European (on average) as they have a more right wing political culture.

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

No, if you read back that's not what I'm assuming at all. I was pointing out that once you slap a specific figure on it the question becomes meaningless.

People can assume things in isolation duder. There will be a problem with situation, but it's much less than it would be in the existant question.

[Deciduous]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Erm, that would mean your political opinion is affected by the country you are in, which is exactly what the test should be measuring.

I wonder why they didn't use your question instead then.
It's a fairly straightforward proposition to determine whether you have right/left leanings, you dont need to attach a figure.
Are someone's politics determined entirely by where they live?

edit: read the FAQ, q. 19 for an answer to the abstract art thing

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

I wonder why they didn't use your question instead then.

It's not like the questions are great or anything.

Originally Posted by Deciduous

It's a fairly straightforward proposition to determine whether you have right/left leanings, you dont need to attach a figure.
Are someone's politics determined entirely by where they live?

Dude, lefties are going to have pretty similar views the world over. They're not going to arise to a cry of 'THE RICH SHOULD BE TAXED 7.3%!!!!!' in the cayman islands. Just because the 'left' in america (say) is right to the left of (say) england, doesn't mean that there should be a built in compensation factor to make the two (differing) ideologies align.

[Deciduous]

You're just writing what I'm thinking so why are we replying to each other like it's an argument

[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

You're just writing what I'm thinking so why are we replying to each other like it's an argument

See: Dante's post at the top

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

Are someone's politics determined entirely by where they live?

Of course not. Class, religion, random opinion stuff, upbringing, region, etc. It all affects it. The "average" working class person probably would get a subtly different score to the "average" middle class person, and that's indeed proper.

edit: read the FAQ, q. 19 for an answer to the abstract art thing

Yeah, I'm aware of their justification for it, as it's been discussed here before I think. I'm sure they'd use the same argument about racism. But they're indulging in a fallacy (imho).

Let's examine what they say :

"Likewise, authoritarian régimes frequently attack highly imaginative and unconventional art, music and literary works as a threat to the rigid cultural conformity they uphold." (emphasis added)

I think they're confusing a correlation with a causation. A lot of black people like hip-hop, but liking hip-hop doesn't make you black (well, not literally at least). If the question was "Should people be free to produce abstract art" then I'd understand. But they're not measuring opinion, they're seeing how well you match up to stereotypes.

[Deciduous]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Let's examine what they say :

I'll leave you to it since arguing against the authors, who seem to do this kind of business for a living, is a little out of my depth.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Deciduous

I'll leave you to it since arguing against the authors, who seem to do this kind of business for a living, is a little out of my depth.

Is there any info about the authors btw? I can't find their qualifications* or whatever on the site. Am I being dense?

* = I'm not implying they need any, but usually people are falling over themselves to tell you how many PhD's they have.

edit : There are very few people who are beyond the scope of criticism for the intelligent layman, unless we are getting onto highly specialised topics. If you go to University you generally end up arguing with the lecturer - who invariably has some prestigious PhD + years of experience as an advantage over you.

[queball]

I don't see why terms like economic left/right and libertarian/authoritarian can't capture aspects of global absolutes and culutral relativities. Some people might join one of the various political tribes and espouse values associated with that tribe, or might come to considered opinions and espouse those, and if you're analysing political sociology all these things might be important. Dante is only whining because he's vain and wants double digits.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by queball

Dante is only whining because he's vain and wants double digits.

Sorry, are you disagreeing with me, because from your post you seem to be saying what I was saying...?

[queball]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Sorry, are you disagreeing with me, because from your post you seem to be saying what I was saying...?

Yeah I'm disagreeing, I'm saying that comparing your views to your neighbours' and comparing your views to people on the other side of the globe are both valid, and the test doesn't need to be specific and choose just one. And if this seems vague and contrarian: I'm coming from the uncontroversial point of view that consequences and utopia are at most only aspects of real politics, and support for short term and direct campaining is important too.

Also the specific example, of whether the rich are taxed too highly, seems better than asking whether the rich should be taxed at 70% of their earnings or less or something, where a vaguely left-wing 'merican might say yes while wondering what the question was about. And there I mean left wing in a more political sense than global ideology sense. (edit, ****, that's what deciduous just said)

[Quazi Starbucks]

Economic Left/Right: -2.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.41

Just Left of centre, as I imagined

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by queball

Yeah I'm disagreeing, I'm saying that comparing your views to your neighbours' and comparing your views to people on the other side of the globe are both valid, and the test doesn't need to be specific and choose just one.

I'm not sure how it's useful to compare how people view their own country though. Let's move away from taxation (which is perhaps slightly complicated) and say the question was :

"Do you think prisoners are treated too harshly?"

Now, presumably this would be authotarian vs libertarian question in the same form as our taxation one. But in the United States the prison system is a lot more harsh than most of Europe, and in other parts of the world it's even worse. So what would a "No" answer tell us about an individual's opinion? That they are satisfied with the criminal justice system in their individual country?

I appreciate they have got efforts to do a different Political Compass for each country, and if that was achieved then my criticism on this particular question would evaporate.

btw : This has nothing to do with utopia, - the same comments apply from a purely reformist perspective.

p.s. Why wouldn't an American understand the notion of a 70% tax rate?

[Bunga]

Last time I took it I was -4, -4 or so. Now...

Economic Left/Right: -4.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.38

I don't know if I have changed my views slightly or if they have just changed the test, but it seems just about right.

[Nicole]

Economic Left/Right -5.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian -7.23