How far right are you?

[Valmy]

Says, the libertarian.  Don't bother denying it.

The Raz Inquisition!

[Razgovory]

Nope.  Most forms of Anarchy abolish private property.  That's a big no-no in libertarian circles.

Just pretend it says 'order vs anarchy'.  Same intended meaning and no need for us to get into semantic debates.

That is a bit more acceptable.  It the graph seems like a lot like the Nolan chart, which is designed to convince people they are already libertarian.

[derspiess]

That is a bit more acceptable.  It the graph seems like a lot like the Nolan chart, which is designed to convince people they are already libertarian.

I think the issue isn't with the chart itself, but the questions asked and where it plots your answers on the chart.  The chart itself is solid IMO.

[grumbler]

Just pretend it says 'order vs anarchy'.  Same intended meaning and no need for us to get into semantic debates.

So long as no one but Raz makes that blunder, that's a good solution.  Anarchy is a condition, though, not a belief system.  If other people make the mistake of believing that the only alternative to authoritarianism is anarchy, then they fall into the trap the right routinely sets.

[Valmy]

Ok I recommend we move to this one:

[Razgovory]

That is a bit more acceptable.  It the graph seems like a lot like the Nolan chart, which is designed to convince people they are already libertarian.

I think the issue isn't with the chart itself, but the questions asked and where it plots your answers on the chart.  The chart itself is solid IMO.

Where would you put Anarcho-Syndacism?

[Eddie Teach]

I think the issue isn't with the chart itself, but the questions asked and where it plots your answers on the chart.  The chart itself is solid IMO.

Eh, even if you had perfectly chosen issues along a line to demarcate a preference for order vs freedom or vice versa, but only when those principles collide, there would still be the problem that many controversial issues don't fit properly on either that axis or the economic one.

[derspiess]

I think maybe you're trying to put too fine of a point on it.

[derspiess]

That is a bit more acceptable.  It the graph seems like a lot like the Nolan chart, which is designed to convince people they are already libertarian.

I think the issue isn't with the chart itself, but the questions asked and where it plots your answers on the chart.  The chart itself is solid IMO.

Where would you put Anarcho-Syndacism?

Bottom left.

[grumbler]

Eh, even if you had perfectly chosen issues along a line to demarcate a preference for order vs freedom or vice versa, but only when those principles collide, there would still be the problem that many controversial issues don't fit properly on either that axis or the economic one.

You can always find issues that don't fit on any axis, let alone the economic freedom/personal freedom axes that the political compass is trying to capture), but I suspect they will be fewer on the compass than most 2-axis spectra.

[Razgovory]

Even when they forced collectivization?  Or when they Joined with the communist government in Spain.  Or Nestor Makho's Anarchists in the Ukraine who did similar things and slaughtered Mennonites.

Any ideology that totally rejects government is like a saddle without a horse.  When put in practice it must be amended to use coercion otherwise it's as useless people debating on a forum.

This is one of the reasons I am suspicious of Libertarians and their desire of a world without coercion.  A great deal of them own weapons, and people who own weapons believe in coercion.

[Grinning_Colossus]

Any ideas for a z-axis for the Political Compass?

[Razgovory]

Any ideas for a z-axis for the Political Compass?

Necktie-Bacon.

[Valmy]

Even when they forced collectivization?  Or when they Joined with the communist government in Spain.  Or Nestor Makho's Anarchists in the Ukraine who did similar things and slaughtered Mennonites.

No. Not then. Nobody's perfect.

Any ideology that totally rejects government is like a saddle without a horse.  When put in practice it must be amended to use coercion otherwise it's as useless people debating on a forum.

None of us have an ideology that totally rejects government, so I am glad we are still useful to debate on a forum. Well at least not so far as I know. Scips or Habs might but they rarely debate this kind of stuff with us.

This is one of the reasons I am suspicious of Libertarians and their desire of a world without coercion.  A great deal of them own weapons, and people who own weapons believe in coercion.

I do believe in coercion yet I have no weapons. It is only because of coercion that I am able to do so.

But in any case, as I said, that axis there is not an indication of fanatical Libertarians but 'Liberty vs. Safety' or 'Freedom vs. Control' or whatever. We all know you hate Libertarians.

[Caliga]

And FWIW, here are my results from the quiz at https://www.politicalcompass.org/