[Ludi]

I'm guessing those folks are in the tiny minority in North America and Europe, probably most places. Most Christians are more with the "love thy neighbor" (as long as they aren't TOO weird) camp than the "stone the adulterers" camp.

[Ludi]

Re: political compass and peak oil. I think it's more likely a place like po.com would represent folks with really strong opinions one way or the other, either very much in the authoritarian camp or very much in the libertarian camp. Most folks here who post a lot are VERY opinionated! There aren't very many "average" or middle of the road types here, probably.

efarmer has been posting a lot lately about how can we overcome our differences to solve some problems facing us. I think it's a relevant question, but I don't see very many threads any more about how to solve problems. Is it because we are too polarized to even discuss it? Or is it because we are so doomer we have given up the idea of solving problems? Or is it because the actual problem solvers among us are off solving problems somewhere in the real world instead of posting about it?

[Quinny]

Interestingly the political compass thread many years ago saw a large proportion of Peak Oiler's (76%) in the bottom left quadrant! I was surprised to say the least.

What I think is more important is where the majority of political leaders would be placed I was not in the least surprised.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Quinny', 'C')onfusion abounds because of oversimplification of left v right arguments. One way to help clarify politicians position is to examine a second dimension which looks as social policy on a different axis to economic policy. If the policies, speeches and answers to questions are analysed to place politicians relative to one another (and to historical politicians) then its interesting to see how similar they all are. Mainstream politicians almost always tend towards the 'authoritarian' as regards social policy, maybe thats why they become politicians (and why I retired!)

I think the following might illustrate why I find the description of Obama as extreme left laughable.



$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', ' ')US Presidential Election 2008
This chart was constructed on the basis of the speeches, public statements and , crucially, the voting records of each of the candidates. During the election campaign, we'll be tweaking their positions as, inevitably, some of them change. We'll also be adding other charts as the campaign continues.
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 Cynthia McKinney 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, Obama is popularly perceived as a leftist in the United States while elsewhere in the west his record is that of a moderate conservative. For example, in the case of the death penalty he is not an uncompromising abolitionist, while mainstream conservatives in all other western democracies are deeply opposed to capital punishment. The Democratic party's presidential candidate also reneged on his commitment to oppose the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act. He sided with the ultra conservative bloc in the Supreme Court against the Washington DC handgun ban and for capital punishment in child rape cases. He supports President Bush's faith-based initiatives and is reported in Fortune to have said that NAFTA isn't so bad. Despite all this, some angry emailers tell us that Obama is a dangerous socialist who belongs on the extreme left of our chart. In an apparently close race, genuine leftists McKinney and Nader may attract sufficient votes from Obama to deliver McCain to the Oval Office.
Sarah Palin is popularly described by her detractors as an extreme right winger. In reality, she has some protectionist leanings. Her comparatively extreme positions are on the social rather than the economic scale. While her pro-gun, pro-Iraq invasion, anti-gay and anti- abortion positions are applauded in some quarters, Joe Six-pack may not be quite so enamoured with what Palin's denominational website, the General Council of the Assemblies of God, has to say:
We urge all believers to avoid the Satanic tool of alcohol which destroys lives, damns souls, and blights society.
One of Palin's evangelical supporters reminded us that Obama's background was as a mere community organiser. Well yes, but so was Jesus, while Pontius Pilate was a governor.
One present difficulty in positioning the candidates concerns the nationalisation of investment banks. While a commitment to universal healthcare shifts the candidate to the left, what are we to make of tax-payer funded corporate healthcare ? The United States seems to be in the throes of a unique political formula: socialism for some corporations and private enterprise for most individuals.
The Libertarians' choice of diehard conservative Bob Barr is particularly odd. Their party is now led by an anti-choice enthusiast for the death penalty who initially supported the Patriot Act, though later regretted it. He is also pro teacher-led prayers. While Libertarians tend to place more importance on economic matters, Barr has nevertheless not displayed unbridled enthusiasm for free trade, although he ticks most of the right boxes on matters of taxation and public spending.



For those who are interested, we include here our earlier chart showing most of the candidates from the Primaries. Observant readers will notice shifts in the positions of Biden, Obama and McCain.



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.
Perhaps the most breath-taking u-turn in the primaries 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.

[ralfy]

I remember seeing this test passed around through BBSes, and I discovered from that time onwards that most scores for the middle class fall in bottom left quadrant.

[dixonge]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'T')here's a quiz somewhere that helps you plot yourself on that graph. I was over near Gandhi somewhere. Left/Libertarian. Or maybe Anarcho-socialist.

[Tyler_JC]

The trouble with this quiz is that its questions do not relate to public policy.

It's also very easy to poke holes in these questions.

Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races. What is the public policy implication of agreeing or disagreeing with that statement? You can believe that statement AND support "liberal" social policies like affirmative action. Or you can believe that statement AND support reactionary social policies like segregation. That seems like a paradoxical result, no?

People are ultimately divided more by class than by nationality. So if I agree with that statement I support a Communist like Lenin who wants to unify the workers of the world? Or am I a rich oligarch who supports globalization because it will make me richer? That seems like another paradoxical result.

It's a sad reflection on our society that something as basic as drinking water is now a bottled, branded consumer product. I also think it's sad that Justin Bieber is so popular. That doesn't mean that I'd ever support legislation to ban either bottled water or Mr. Bieber's lousy music. You can dislike something without wanting to ban it. So in order to stand up for the free market, I have to pretend to agree that bottled water isn't a sad reflection on our society. Does that make any sense to anyone?

When you are troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things. That statement sounds just as reasonable coming out of the mouth of a pot-smoking hippie as it does from George Bush. And what on Earth does that have to do with politics? If I agree with that does that make me more liberal? More libertarian? More conservative?

Those are just a couple of examples of questions that don't have reasonable answers or applicability to political ideology.

Depending on how you interpret the questions, you could end up with radically different answers. Just to harp on the bottled water question. I'm willing to wager that most people on this site said that it was sad that bottled water is sold as a branded consumer product. But how many of you are willing to create a law banning its sale? If you allow it to be sold even while complaining about it, you support free markets and should be further to the right.

[rangerone314]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'c')areinke,

I think I agree with almost every single word you've written here. Excellent post.

Do you mind if I quote you for a discussion I've been having with a friend?

[rangerone314]

I came in as:
Economic Left/Right: -4.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -0.92

[The_Toecutter]

Economic Left/Right: 0.38
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -9.42

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Sixstrings', '
')Turns out I'm Libertarian-Left, which is pretty darn accurate.

[efarmer]

Just be sure to go out to the people's chicken coop and feed Comrade Ludi's chickens so the people's egg supply is reliable.

[Ludi]

Yes, Comrade!

(interestingly, my locale in Texas was founded by Marxist atheists. Sadly, there aren't many left.)