Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

I am, are you?

I scored 5.98 on “right” and 6.47 on “libertarian” which places me firmly in the “Right Social Libertarian” camp. To be honest I actually thought I would come out as more socially liberal but the quiz does state that on social matters it is pretty much aimed at Americans. For example the one question on gun-control is firmly framed in terms of the Second Amendment. I’d love to be able to legally own a gun but not particularly to engage in an armed insurrection but just because shooting stuff is cool and popping a cap in a crim’s ass is cool as well. Perhaps more pertinently my “social liberalism” is very much of the “don’t give a toss” variety. I mean I’m 35 and married (to a woman) and as far as I know I’ve been straight for all those years* so I can’t get that het-up about gay marriage either way.

Interestingly, the quiz also shows an average score which is much more economically to the left of me and slightly more socially liberal than me. Hmm… I’d be more interested if it showed some kinda scatter-graph. I am curious about how attitudes to things relate. Now that would be very interesting because as it stands the test is ultimately somewhat crude. Example. There is a question about a “state language” and immigrants having to learn it. Well, how do I answer? I dunno. While obviously folks planning on living here ought to learn English I don’t think that is a matter for officialdom. It’s just common-sense. I mean what sort of job can anyone do in a foreign country if they don’t speak the language? It’s essentially self-regulating or should be. And there’s another one which caused a little head-scratching for me, “It does not make sense to understand the motivations of terrorists because they are self-evidently evil.” Well, I think it does make sense to understand the motives of terrorists. Many lefties would agree but for a very different reason. I have plowed my way through The Qu’ran (when I could have been reading Terry Pratchett and actually enjoying it) to understand what the likes of Mohammed Atta were motivated by. That is understanding in the Sun Tzu sense. It is not empathy which is what I suspect that question was driving at. I understand Islamic terrorism in terms of a logical structure going back to the Qu’ran and hadith but that in no way implies that I approve of it or “feel the pain of the Ummah”. I don’t because whilst it is a logical structure it is one built upon absurd (and evil) axioms.

Anyway, take the quiz. It’s flawed but it ain’t too bad and I am curious how you lot score.

These are my full results…

My Political Views
I am a right social libertarian
Right: 5.98, Libertarian: 6.47

Political Spectrum Quiz

My Foreign Policy Views
Score: 4.7

Political Spectrum Quiz

My Culture War Stance
Score: -3.33

Political Spectrum Quiz

*I have been known to dance very camply to Suede but that’s not exactly full-on cock ‘n’ bum fun now is it? How do you not dance camply to this? I am though “lesbian curious” but isn’t everyone?

6 Comments

  1. Sam Duncan says:

    Don’t like the Foreign Policy spectrum at all. The opposite of “non-interventionist” is “interventionist”. Neo-conservatives are former leftists who have altered their opinions. That these people tend to be interventionist in their views on American foreign policy is entirely incidental. It certainly doesn’t make every interventionist a neo-con. Lazy thinking.

  2. Sam Duncan says:

    Oops, forgot to post my results: Right: 8.2, Libertarian: 6.36, Foreign policy 1.22, Culture -3.45.

    Surprisingly far “right”, but I don’t buy that crap anyway, and surprisingy non-interventionist (although still on the so-called “neo-conservative” side of centre). But as you say, there were some tricky questions there where you kind of know what they mean, but can’t really answer. I don’t think it reflects my real views on foreign policy at all.

    This one‘s way better.

  3. NickM says:

    I got 100% on both counts on your test. I guess I’m a libertarian then. That makes twelve of us. I agree with you Sam on the foreign policy schtick. Because inter alia all the questions are on principle. And not on practicalities. And the practicalities matter. So I left them neutral. Should we send the lads over to stop genocide? I dunno. I dunno without the specifics. If it ain’t likely to help then regardless of the morality of the cause I say “no!”.

    Also spreading democracy is not a cause for which I feel deserves the bones of a single Pomeranian Grenadier (Bismarck). The great irony of the war on terror is that it has resulted in the democratically setting up of two Islamic Republics.

  4. RAB says:

    Well mine was right:- 6.55

    Libertarian 6.33

    After that fatuous excercise, I had lost the will to live for going through the other two categories!

    Words like Left and Right, when not pertaining to shoes, gloves etc have long lost their meaning for me. Much like the details of the French Revolution ;-)
    Left and right seem to be going in opposite directions. But as the world is circular they meet up round the back, at a place called Totalitarianism!

    So what am I after this little “survey”?
    Better or worse informed about myself and can so self correct?

    Bollocks!

  5. Sam Duncan says:

    That’s exactly it, Nick. There were a lot of questions that I marked “unimportant” although I think the issue itself is very important in a specific sense, for precisely that reason: the practicalities. I can’t say “Yes, ‘X’ should be immediate the course of action every time”, because clearly that’s not the case. It’s not “important” to send our troops to stop every single instance of genocide, but I agree that it can sometimes be a good idea.

  6. Nick M says:

    I also hated the bank regulation question.

    But I think the crudest thing is the Culture War reduced to a number.

    I am sure, for example, there a great many people who are very much pro-gay marriage but anti-abortion. Making it just a number means those opinions cancel out meaning that individual is placed in the same position as someone who doesn’t give a toss either way on either subject. And that really is not the same thing.

    Ditto the death penalty question. It asks whether you support it if the case was serious enough. Well. I don’t and it has nothing to do with the severity of the crime. Can you think of a crime more serious than murdering your own children? I think there is no doubt that Trupti Patel would have swung for that. Except she didn’t do it. What about the various Irish folk fitted-up for terrorism? And then belatedly it turns out that you can get a false positive for handling explosives if you’d handled playing cards. And guess how they’d already stated they’d whiled away a train journey? And then there was Barry George and the poor sod who was sent down for the “Bakewell Tart” murder. And God help you if you’re a Brazilian sparks commuting… Not only will they repeatedly shoot you in the head but they will then lie through their teeth over it. Shouldn’t Cressida Dick and Ian Blair be breaking rocks in Dartmoor?

    I mean they reported the “suspect” at varying times as “white”, “asian” and “mixed race”. They could have shot anyone. They lied about his jacket. About challenging him. About him vaulting a turnstile. About making themselves known as cops. There ought to have been serious repercussions over that. There weren’t. At the inquest the Judge ordered the jury not to return a verdict of unlawful killing. Please explain to me quite how shooting a completely innocent man repeatedly in the head at short range is not unlawful? If anyone can convince me of that I shall pay them a retainer to act as my legal counsel in all cases. Because they would clearly be able to argue that black is white and that it’s turtles all the way down.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: