Tuesday, April 01, 2008

U.S. primaries 2008

US Primaries 2008

In response to many requests, not only from Americans, The Political Compass™ has charted the most prominent names in the 2008 US Primaries. They have been evaluated through scrutiny of public statements, manifestos, interviews and, crucially, voting records. Our apologies for those not included.

It is important to recognise that The Political Compass™ is a continuum rather than consisting of hard and fast quadrants. For example, Ron Paul on the social scale is actually closer to Dennis Kucinich than to many figures within his own party. But on the economic scale, they are, of course, far apart.

When examining the chart it's important to note that although most of the candidates seem quite different, in substance they occupy a relatively restricted area within the universal political spectrum. Democracies with a system of proportional representation give expression to a wider range of political views. While Dennis Kucinich and Ralph Nader are depicted on the extreme left in an American context, they would simply be mainstream social democrats within the wider political landscape of Europe. Similarly, Hillary Clinton is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while in any other western democracy her record is that of a mainstream conservative.

Perhaps the most breath-taking u-turn in the primaries so far belongs to Mike Gravel, a left-leaning Democrat and undoubted civil libertarian who has now put his lot in with the Libertarian Party. On the social scale this doesn't represent much of a leap, but economically the mercurial Mr. Gravel, a long-standing champion of universal health care and a redistributive economy, has vaulted from social democracy to a radical neo-liberal platform well to the right of most Republicans.

my political compass again

About The Political Compass™

In the introduction, we explained the inadequacies of the traditional left-right line.

If we recognise that this is essentially an economic line it's fine, as far as it goes. We can show, for example, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung and Pol Pot, with their commitment to a totally controlled economy, on the hard left. Socialists like Mahatma Gandhi and Robert Mugabe would occupy a less extreme leftist position. Margaret Thatcher would be well over to the right, but further right still would be someone like that ultimate free marketeer, General Pinochet.

That deals with economics, but the social dimension is also important in politics. That's the one that the mere left-right scale doesn't adequately address. So we've added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian.

Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis. By adding the social dimension you can show that Stalin was an authoritarian leftist (ie the state is more important than the individual) and that Gandhi, believing in the supreme value of each individual, is a liberal leftist. While the former involves state-imposed arbitary collectivism in the extreme top left, on the extreme bottom left is voluntary collectivism at regional level, with no state involved. Hundreds of such anarchist communities exisited in Spain during the civil war period

You can also put Pinochet, who was prepared to sanction mass killing for the sake of the free market, on the far right as well as in a hardcore authoritarian position. On the non-socialist side you can distinguish someone like Milton Friedman, who is anti-state for fiscal rather than social reasons, from Hitler, who wanted to make the state stronger, even if he wiped out half of humanity in the process.

The chart also makes clear that, despite popular perceptions, the opposite of fascism is not communism but anarchism (ie liberal socialism), and that the opposite of communism ( i.e. an entirely state-planned economy) is neo-liberalism (i.e. extreme deregulated economy)

The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal "anarchism" championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America's Libertarian Party, which couples social Darwinian right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues. Often their libertarian impulses stop short of opposition to strong law and order positions, and are more economic in substance (ie no taxes) so they are not as extremely libertarian as they are extremely right wing. On the other hand, the classical libertarian collectivism of anarcho-syndicalism ( libertarian socialism) belongs in the bottom left hand corner.

In our home page we demolished the myth that authoritarianism is necessarily "right wing", with the examples of Robert Mugabe, Pol Pot and Stalin. Similarly Hitler, on an economic scale, was not an extreme right-winger. His economic policies were broadly Keynesian, and to the left of some of today's Labour parties. If you could get Hitler and Stalin to sit down together and avoid economics, the two diehard authoritarians would find plenty of common ground.

Your political compass

Economic Left/Right: -5.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.62

my enneagram

Your Score: 4- the Individualist

Thanks for taking the test !

you chose BY - your Enneagram type is FOUR (aka "The Romantic")

"I am unique"

Romantics have sensitive feelings and are warm and perceptive.

How to Get Along with Me

Give me plenty of compliments. They mean a lot to me.
Be a supportive friend or partner. Help me to learn to love and value myself.
Respect me for my special gifts of intuition and vision.
Though I don't always want to be cheered up when I'm feeling melancholy, I sometimes like to have someone lighten me up a little.
Don't tell me I'm too sensitive or that I'm overreacting!

What I Like About Being a FOUR

my ability to find meaning in life and to experience feeling at a deep level
my ability to establish warm connections with people
admiring what is noble, truthful, and beautiful in life
my creativity, intuition, and sense of humor
being unique and being seen as unique by others
having aesthetic sensibilities
being able to easily pick up the feelings of people around me

What's Hard About Being a FOUR

experiencing dark moods of emptiness and despair
feelings of self-hatred and shame; believing I don't deserve to be loved
feeling guilty when I disappoint people
feeling hurt or attacked when someone misundertands me
expecting too much from myself and life
fearing being abandoned
obsessing over resentments
longing for what I don't have

FOURs as Children Often

have active imaginations: play creatively alone or organize playmates in original games
are very sensitive
feel that they don't fit in
believe they are missing something that other people have
attach themselves to idealized teachers, heroes, artists, etc.
become antiauthoritarian or rebellious when criticized or not understood
feel lonely or abandoned (perhaps as a result of a death or their parents' divorce)

FOURs as Parents

help their children become who they really are
support their children's creativity and originality
are good at helping their children get in touch with their feelings
are sometimes overly critical or overly protective
are usually very good with children if not too self-absorbed

Renee Baron & Elizabeth Wagele

The Enneagram Made Easy
Discover the 9 Types of People
Harper SanFrancisco, 1994, 161 pages

You liked the test?
so S P R E A D I T ! tell everyone!!! (use Quick-Paste below)

you wanna know MORE?
so check out, what Wikipedia says about your type...

...even more you'll find in Google

or do you prefer to

You are not completely happy with the result?!
You chose BY

Would you rather have chosen:

AY (EIGHT)

CY (SIX)

BX (NINE)

BZ (FIVE)

My test tracked 2 variables How you compared to other people your age and gender:

You scored higher than 39% on ABC
You scored higher than 53% on XYZ

my political bent

You are a
Social Liberal
(78% permissive)

and an...
Economic Liberal
(26% permissive)

You are best described as a:

Strong Democrat

Link: The Politics Test on Ok Cupid
Also : The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

Explanation Of Results

We wanted to get beyond the two catch-alls of American politics, the Democratic and Republican parties, and see where people actually stand. Parties can bring together people with marginally differing values and make collective action easier. But party platforms can misrepresent their constituents, and blind loyalty to a party can convince individuals to harbor inconsistent views.

The goal of this test was to exactly classify your personal politics, without the traditional labels. We avoided the edgy party issues and focused on fundamental values. Your score is a measure of what you believe in, economically and socially.

Higher permissiveness, on either axis, indicates a "live and let live" philosophy. Of course, we're almost conditioned in America, "Land of the Free", to think positively of such a philosophy. But practically speaking, permissiviness (or its opposite, regulation) can create any number of outcomes:

For example, on the economic axis, a highly permissive system, like the American system of the early 1900s, might mean things like low taxes and increased scientific innovation. It might also result, as it did back then, in unrestricted child labor and millions of poor people with black lung.

At the other end of the economic spectrum, a highly regulated system might conserve the environment, establish national health care, and eliminate poverty. But as we've learned from the Soviet system, extreme regulation can also lead to stagnation, sameness, and unhappiness.

If you liked the test, forward it. Thanks for participating.

Friday, March 21, 2008

Dante's Inferno

Did You Know?: History buffs might recall that a British Navy surgeon shortly before 1750 concluded that sailors, by sucking on limes, could reduce the incidence of painful and debilitating scurvy. Concurrent experiments involving sailors taking vinegar or sea water failed. Eighteenth century medicine was unaware that limes contained Vitamin C (a substance not really understood until the 1930s) and also did not fully comprehend scurvy as a nutritional disease, but crews were issued limes in their rations after the field study. British sailors and later British people generally were nicknamed "limeys" shortly afterward. At the film's dock set, around a peck of sucked-on cut limes litter the ground as if discarded by sailors.