The Political Compass

Kiwi in IE · 16-04-2014 9:56pm #1

I found this and completed it. It is slightly US biased and the questioning method is not perfect by any means. Some are impossible to answer acurately due to varied potential circumstance, but it is interesting. Maybe this thread is better in Politics or AH, but the reason I put it in A&A is because I suspect many A&A regulars might have similar political positions, but maybe not.

The website itself is also interesting. If you click on 'Irish Parties 2011' in the green strip on the home page, it shows the position of political parties here. I always said FF and FG are identical! Labour are the only party I could bring myself to vote for, but they are nowhere near my position.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

A&A Group Graph
https://www.politicalcompass.org/crowdchart?&Kiwi+In+Ie=-3.6%2C-5.3&The+Chizler=-2.1%2C-4.5&Pherekydes=-6.9%2C-5.9&Sulla+Felix=-3.3%2C-4.8&Orion=-5.6%2C-6.5&Pope+Palpatine=-4.5%2C-6.8&Turtwig=-4.5%2C-7.4&Legspin=-8.3%2C-9.1&Ninja900=-5.3%2C-6.7&Calibos=-7.0%2C10.0&Bluewolf=9.8%2C-7.8&Thedoctor=-1.4%2C-0.8&Absolam=-5.6%2C-2.8&Redfacedbear=-4.3%2C-5.2&Bannasidhe=-6.8%2C-7.3&Skrynesaver=-8.4%2C-4.5&Obliq=-5.4%2C-7.7&Doctor+Doom=-7.0%2C-5.4&Diego+Simeone=-5.0%2C-6.5&Sink=-0.6%2C-5.1&Spacetime=-7.3%2C-8.2&Sw=12.0%2C10.5&Keane=-6.5%2C-6.9&Rughdh=-5.6%2C-8.1&Sciencenerd=-0.8%2C-5.8&Fouxdafafa=-5.4%2C-4.8&Agent+Smith=0.4%2C1.7&Marienbad=-5.9%2C-9.2&Mark+Hamill=-7.0%2C-5.5&Dazmarz=-2.5%2C-1.8&Benny+Cake=-8.8%2C-7.7&Robindch=-4.0%2C-6.4&Brian+Shanahan=-9.5%2C-9.0&Wprathead=-6.5%2C-6.8&Ulysses1874=-3.5%2C-5.4&Gvn=6.9%2C-7.0&Pauldla=-4.9%2C-5.9&Oscarbravo=-4.3%2C-7.5&Blowfish=8.3%2C-6.3&Smacl=-4.1%2C-4.6&name=recedite&ec=-4.75&soc=-1.38

crowdchart?&Kiwi+In+Ie=-3.6%2C-5.3&The+Chizler=-2.1%2C-4.5&Pherekydes=-6.9%2C-5.9&Sulla+Felix=-3.3%2C-4.8&Orion=-5.6%2C-6.5&Pope+Palpatine=-4.5%2C-6.8&Turtwig=-4.5%2C-7.4&Legspin=-8.3%2C-9.1&Ninja900=-5.3%2C-6.7&Calibos=-7.0%2C10.0&Bluewolf=9.8%2C-7.8&Thedoctor=-1.4%2C-0.8&Absolam=-5.6%2C-2.8&Redfacedbear=-4.3%2C-5.2&Bannasidhe=-6.8%2C-7.3&Skrynesaver=-8.4%2C-4.5&Obliq=-5.4%2C-7.7&Doctor+Doom=-7.0%2C-5.4&Diego+Simeone=-5.0%2C-6.5&Sink=-0.6%2C-5.1&Spacetime=-7.3%2C-8.2&Sw=12.0%2C10.5&Keane=-6.5%2C-6.9&Rughdh=-5.6%2C-8.1&Sciencenerd=-0.8%2C-5.8&Fouxdafafa=-5.4%2C-4.8&Agent+Smith=0.4%2C1.7&Marienbad=-5.9%2C-9.2&Mark+Hamill=-7.0%2C-5.5&Dazmarz=-2.5%2C-1.8&Benny+Cake=-8.8%2C-7.7&Robindch=-4.0%2C-6.4&Brian+Shanahan=-9.5%2C-9.0&Wprathead=-6.5%2C-6.8&Ulysses1874=-3.5%2C-5.4&Gvn=6.9%2C-7.0&Pauldla=-4.9%2C-5.9&Oscarbravo=-4.3%2C-7.5&Blowfish=8.3%2C-6.3&Smacl=-4.1%2C-4.6&name=recedite&ec=-4.75&soc=-1.38

Kiwi in IE · 16-04-2014 9:57pm

My results were:

Economic Left/Right: -3.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.33

TheChizler · 16-04-2014 10:15pm

Forgive me but I think we might have discussed this before, interesting to see any changes though! Was slightly off centre then. Gimme a sec...

Pherekydes · 16-04-2014 10:18pm

I've done this 3 times now and my results are fairly consistent:

Economic Left/Right: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.90

Kiwi in IE · 16-04-2014 10:22pm

TheChizler wrote: »

Forgive me but I think we might have discussed this before, interesting to see any changes though! Was slightly off centre then. Gimme a sec...

Sorry didn't check old threads before posted. I did this years ago and just came across it again. Don't think I've changed much in 10 years or so. Somewhere near Ghandi and Nelson Mandela.

16-04-2014 10:23pm

Bottom right corner again

Kiwi in IE · 16-04-2014 10:27pm

Pherekydes wrote: »

I've done this 3 times now and my results are fairly consistent:

Economic Left/Right: -6.88
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.90

bluewolf wrote: »

Bottom right corner again

Anarchists! :P

TheChizler · 16-04-2014 10:29pm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

Sorry didn't check old threads before posted. I did this years ago and just came across it again. Don't think I've changed much in 10 years or so. Somewhere near Ghandi and Nelson Mandela.

No bods! Always interesting to do again. I've moved down since last time, -2.12 left right and -4.51 lib auth.

Someone get graphing!

PopePalpatine · 16-04-2014 10:39pm

Here's me:

Kiwi in IE · 16-04-2014 10:48pm

TheChizler wrote: »

Someone get graphing!

OK done it and added to OP. Will update as people add their co ordinates (as time permits).

How did you add the graph PopePalpatine? Is it because I am on phone or technogically challenged that I can't seem to do it?

Sulla Felix · 16-04-2014 11:02pm

I'd expect most of us to cluster in the middle of the liberal/libertarian block tbh.

Economic Left/Right: -3.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.82

Orion · 16-04-2014 11:05pm

and me

Calibos · 17-04-2014 12:25am

More Authoritarian than you lot but no more left

Turtwig · 17-04-2014 1:32am

Turtwig.

turt-wig turtwig!

Economic Left/Right: -4.50
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.44

Turtwig · 17-04-2014 1:45am

bluewolf wrote: »

Bottom right corner again

Calibos wrote: »

More Authoritarian than you lot but no more left

Tell us yer numbers so we can add ye.

Edit: nm I just guessed based on what you said.

legspin · 17-04-2014 2:03am

-8.25
-9.08

As I get older I'm moving further left and libertarian. I expect to be completely in the bottom left box in about 5 years.

Hotblack Desiato · 17-04-2014 2:19am

Economic Left/Right: -5.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.72

Wow, wouldn't consider myself left at all but I'm probably a commie by American standards.

Deeply socially libertarian (i.e. personal morality, not economics) but believe in strong regulation of corporations, that part doesn't seem to show up in the results.

So, who didn't tick 'strongly disagree' to all the questions in the religion section

17-04-2014 9:09am

The more I read about corporations and govt regulation and how it was failed monopolists trying to get more regulation to protect themselves, the more right I'm going.
http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCsQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.daviddfriedman.com%2FThe_Machinery_of_Freedom_.pdf&ei=notPU7vjE66u7AbUtoHQDA&usg=AFQjCNGPz2MMvkCqQduhku6vq0AKhFxPUg&bvm=bv.64764171,d.ZGU

Mentioned US steel also
wiki quote The federal government attempted to use federal antitrust laws to break up U.S. Steel in 1911, but that effort ultimately failed. Time and competitors have, however, accomplished nearly the same thing.[citation needed] In its first full year of operation, U.S. Steel made 67 percent of all the steel produced in the United States. One hundred years later, its shipments accounted for only about 8 percent of domestic consumption

interesting read

So questions like this "A genuine free market requires restrictions on the ability of predator multinationals to create monopolies." - strongly disagree.

lol
I'm on the second square up from the very bottom but still over on the right

Economic Left/Right: 9.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.79

Peregrinus · 17-04-2014 9:16am

Subtle glide there from measuring USS's share of steel produced in the US at the start of the period to their share of steel consumed in the US at the end. These are not comparable figures, and the contrast between the 67% figure and the 8% figure probably tells us more about the massive contraction of the US steel production industry than it does about the dominance or otherwise of that industry by USS.

17-04-2014 9:17am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Subtle glide their from measuring USS's share of steel produced in the US at the start of the period to their share of steel consumed in the US at the end. These are not comparable figures, and the contrast between the 67% figure and the 8% figure probably tells us more about the massive contraction of the US steel production industry than it does about the dominance or otherwise of that industry by USS.

Yeah I wanted to quote the book itself which does a nice analysis of monopolies and all but the pdf is blocked at work, which is why I copied the google link. So I took it from wiki which is clearly all "citation needed"

I'm not sure that being less in demand on domestic consumption vs competitors tells us anything about steel overall contracting though and it goes into more detail in the wiki

he Corporation, as it was known on Wall Street,[4] always distinguished itself to investors by virtue of its size, rather than for its efficiency or creativeness during its heyday. In 1901, it controlled two-thirds of steel production.[4] Because of heavy debts taken on at the company's formation — Carnegie insisted on being paid in gold bonds for his stake — and fears of antitrust litigation, U.S. Steel moved cautiously. Competitors often innovated faster, especially Bethlehem Steel, run by U.S. Steel's former first president, Charles M. Schwab. U.S. Steel's share of the expanding market slipped to 50 percent by 1911.[4]

The point is being big doesn't mean you get to be in charge of everything as people seem to fear, not in industry when there is nothing (assuming no regulation propping up high barriers) stopping anyone else popping up and doing the same thing

Anyway I can edit or post better when I can quote the book itself I think. I was just saying it's an interesting read indeed

TheDoctor · 17-04-2014 9:26am

My results

Economic Left/Right: -1.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.82

Absolam · 17-04-2014 9:51am

Economic Left/Right: -5.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -2.77

Hmm. I obviously need to improve my theistic fascist tendencies.

redfacedbear · 17-04-2014 11:27am

I think there's a trend emerging

Economic -4.25
Libertarian -5.18

Strange - I always describe my economic outlook as much more centreist than my social outlook. Not much of a difference here.

I wonder if it's the US bias of the site that's skewing things or if my views have shifted? Certainly after the economic crisis of the last few years I'm probably far more in favour of Government regulation and oversight than I was a few years ago.

Kiwi in IE · 17-04-2014 11:55am

I actually answered a few of the questions a lot more conservatively than my true views because of the way they were worded and the inability to differentiate between variable situations. For example I answered agree to the question about people who are able and refuse to work not expecting to get social welfare. When I read the question I immediately got a picture in my head of a thug who spends all day alternating between bookie/pub/chipper (the are quite a few in the nearest town to me). However when I think about it I actually don't agree at all in most circumstances apart from the above. In the case of families who are offered minimum wage work that will make them worse off due to childcare/travel I strongly disagree. The immediate image of chipper/pub/bookie man influenced me to answer incorrectly.

Bannasidhe · 17-04-2014 12:04pm

Economic Left/Right: -6.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.33

Think I have moved a fraction further left...

Skrynesaver · 17-04-2014 12:17pm

Did this before, in a politics thread I think, for someone who thinks he's a social democrat I look a lot like an anti-capitalist anarchist from the US perspective...

Economic Left/Right: -8.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -4.51

redfacedbear · 17-04-2014 12:29pm

Kiwi in IE wrote: »

I actually answered a few of the questions a lot more conservatively than my true views because of the way they were worded and the inability to differentiate between variable situations. For example I answered agree to the question about people who are able and refuse to work not expecting to get social welfare. When I read the question I immediately got a picture in my head of a thug who spends all day alternating between bookie/pub/chipper (the are quite a few in the nearest town to me). However when I think about it I actually don't agree at all in most circumstances apart from the above. In the case of families who are offered minimum wage work that will make them worse off due to childcare/travel I strongly disagree. The immediate image of chipper/pub/bookie man influenced me to answer incorrectly.

Yeah, I agreed to the same question but really wanted to put in an asterisk saying while this ought to be the case the number of people on social welfare that it would actually apply to is very small!

Obliq · 17-04-2014 12:33pm

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Think I have moved a fraction further left...

A fraction further left than me! Think I moved right - I'm feeling uncharitable today....

Doctor DooM · 17-04-2014 12:41pm

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.44

Not suprised at all.

Amirani · 17-04-2014 12:50pm

Economic Left/Right: -5.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.51

I remember doing this when I was younger, and getting about (-1, -3). I have done other similar things that have described me as ultra-liberal, so I'm not quite sure how that fits in.

sink · 17-04-2014 1:14pm

Economic Left/Right: -0.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.08

Centrist economically and liberal socially.

Turtwig · 17-04-2014 2:01pm

Calibos wrote: »

More Authoritarian than you lot but no more left

bluewolf wrote: »

lol
I'm on the second square up from the very bottom but still over on the right

Economic Left/Right: 9.75
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -7.79

:pac:

SpaceTime · 17-04-2014 2:12pm

Here's where I came out.

Economic Left/Right: -7.25
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.21

Delirium · 17-04-2014 2:36pm

I think I broke it

:P

Amirani · 17-04-2014 2:40pm

SW wrote: »

I think I broke it :P

That's presumably the sort of area Satan would inhabit?

Pherekydes · 17-04-2014 3:21pm

Diego Simeone wrote: »

That's presumably the sort of area Satan would inhabit?

Or god.

PopePalpatine · 17-04-2014 3:23pm

Pherekydes wrote: »

Or god.

That explains the Tea Party! :pac:

keane2097 · 17-04-2014 3:52pm

-6.5,-6.9 for me

rughdh · 17-04-2014 4:17pm

Bottomish-leftist.
Economic Left/Right: -5.62
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -8.05

TheDoctor · 17-04-2014 4:27pm

There certainly appears to be a dominant square in this anyway

17-04-2014 4:28pm

Mine's the cool square

GLaDOS · 17-04-2014 4:31pm

-0.75 Economically, -5.8 Socially. Much as I expected.

Would to see compare to a boards-wide one to see how Atheists compare.

FouxDaFaFa · 17-04-2014 4:35pm

Econ: -5.38
Soc: -4.77

I finally fit in.

Agent Smith · 17-04-2014 4:39pm

Economic Left/Right: 0.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: 1.69

marienbad · 17-04-2014 4:45pm

Economic Left/Right: -5.88

Social Libertarian/Authoritarian : -9.23

Hotblack Desiato · 17-04-2014 8:28pm

bluewolf wrote: »

The more I read about corporations and govt regulation and how it was failed monopolists trying to get more regulation to protect themselves, the more right I'm going.

Without regulation we get melamine in milk, horsemeat and hormones in beef, plaster of paris in bread, cartels, monopolies, unfair contracts and price gouging.

The relationship between corporation and consumer is not an equal one just as the relationship between employer and employee is not an equal one.

17-04-2014 8:47pm

ninja900 wrote: »

Without regulation we get melamine in milk, horsemeat and hormones in beef, plaster of paris in bread, cartels, monopolies, unfair contracts and price gouging.

The relationship between corporation and consumer is not an equal one just as the relationship between employer and employee is not an equal one.

Yes that all sounds like a lovely soundbite and the point I was making was that no, I don't think it IS true in the case of monopoly.

We have regulation anyway and still end up with horsemeat in products. I'm not sure how listing the failures of regulation is an argument FOR regulation. Maybe with less blind trusting to regulation and more asking questions and investigating, we wouldn't have that problem.

Once again I point you to the book linked earlier. I was wrong, I'd be doing the arguments injustice to try and summarise them.
The best historical refutation of this thesis is in two books by socialist historian Gabriel Kolko: The Triumph of
Conservatism and Railroads and Regulation. He argues that at the end of the last century businessmen believed the
future was with bigness, with conglomerates and cartels, but were wrong. The organizations they formed to control
markets and reduce costs were almost invariably failures, returning lower profits than their smaller competitors, unable
to fix prices, and controlling a steadily shrinking share of the market.
The regulatory commissions supposedly were formed to restrain monopolistic businessmen. Actually, Kolko argues,
they were formed at the request of unsuccessful monopolists to prevent the competition which had frustrated their efforts.

Another strategy, which Rockefeller probably did employ, is to buy out competitors. This is usually cheaper than
spending a fortune trying to drive them out—at least, it is cheaper in the short run. The trouble is that people soon
realize they can build a new refinery, threaten to drive down prices, and sell out to Rockefeller at a whopping profit.
David P. Reighard apparently made a sizable fortune by selling three consecutive refineries to Rockefeller. There was
a limit to how many refineries Rockefeller could use. Having built his monopoly by introducing efficient business
organization into the petroleum industry, Rockefeller was unable to withstand the competition of able imitators in his
later years and failed to maintain his monopoly.

Rail executives often got together to try to fix rates, but most of these conspiracies broke down, often in a few months,
for the reasons Rockefeller cites in his analysis of the attempt to control crude oil production. Either the parties to the
agreement surreptitiously cut rates (often by misclassifying freight or by offering secret rebates) in order to steal
customers from each other, or some outside railroad took advantage of the high rates and moved in. J. P. Morgan
committed his enormous resources of money and reputation to cartelizing the industry, but he met with almost
unmitigated failure. In the beginning of 1889, for example, he formed the Interstate Commerce Railway Association to
control rates among the western railroads. By March a rate war was going, and by June the situation was back to where
it had been before he intervened

The relationship between corporation and consumer is not an equal one

I quite agree. All we have to do is stop consuming from a particular company and they will be in trouble. We have the money and we can purchase or not purchase. And so they go above and beyond what's legally required and make offers and sales such as 365-day refunds for simple changes of mind as a very simple example.

SpaceTime · 17-04-2014 9:12pm

Soooo... Should we organise a green square drinks night??

Mark Hamill · 17-04-2014 9:22pm

Economic Left/Right: -7.00
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -5.54

Mark Hamill · 17-04-2014 9:32pm

bluewolf wrote: »

We have regulation anyway and still end up with horsemeat in products. I'm not sure how listing the failures of regulation is an argument FOR regulation.

Is it a failure of the law that people kill and steal even though it is illegal to do so? Regulations don't start these acts, but they do act to stop them.

bluewolf wrote: »

Maybe with less blind trusting to regulation and more asking questions and investigating, we wouldn't have that problem.

Because without any regulations, multinationals are really going to give individuals honest answers to their questions :rolleyes:.

17-04-2014 9:44pm

Mark Hamill wrote: »

Is it a failure of the law that people kill and steal even though it is illegal to do so? Regulations don't start these acts, but they do act to stop them.

Do they?

The Political Compass

Comments