Any such test will have its weaknesses, issues not raised, or issues where what response fits a particular ideology are not clear, this test is no exception.
For example - "If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations." Those who strongly agree might argue against trans-national corporations, potentially others might really think that trans-national corporations should be put ahead of humanity, but those would be rather few. A more common response might be that serving the interests of such corporations serves the interests of humanity. Some of this might be the "what's good for GM is good for the country" type of arguments, where even blatant rent-seeking is somehow seen as good, but some of it could be serious libertarian though thinking that freedom serves the interest of both (probably the people more than the corporations, who do indeed like rent-seeking, but many proposed policies that are relevant to the question, are not so much anti-rent seeking as they are attempts to hobble the corporations.
If I simply take the question literally, I'd have to say that sure it should primarily serve humanity, but I don't think that anti-corporate steps serve humanity. I'll probably answer it "agree", but I really think its a bad question.
Another example "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" depends on the specific enemies and the situation (and also your definition of friend, which isn't really a political issue).
Another "Our race has many superior qualities, compared with other races." doesn't seem relevant to either conservatism vs liberalism, or authoritarian/totalitarianism vs suppoting liberty. Sure if you are racist you might support abuse of the supposed inferior race(s) and want to infringe on their liberty, but the mere belief is not inherently authoritarian (or libertarian, conservative, or liberal).
And that's just from the first page.
More generally I think it would be better if instead of just Agree or Disagree, strongly or not, they had a 5th answer something like "don't know" or "none of the above" or "bad question", or it should let you skip questions. Failing that or in addition to that perhaps even less mild agreement or disagreement ("very slightly agree", "lean towards" or such) Another way to handle the problem would be to use a lot more questions, so the problematic questions have less wait, or might be asked in several ways, but that would make the whole thing more time consuming to take, and would result in less completed tests.
Later in the Quiz - "Governments should penalise businesses that mislead the public." Mislead can be anything from creating mildly misleading impressions without any misrepresentation of fact, to full out fraud.
Other questions seem to deal more with supporting corporations instead of supporting free markets, I think the questions should focus more on the later.
And I don't really have a position on the death penalty, but the test makes you take one.
The problems with the questions don't end there but I won't try to provide an exhaustive list.
Which doesn't mean I think the test is worthless, just that this particular test is not as useful as it possible could be, and that any tests of this type are unavoidable going to have some weaknesses.
I have gotten different scores on this tests at different times. Most recently (just now)
Economic Left/Right: 6.12
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.13
I notice you only posted your Social Libertarian/ Authoritarian score, not both. I think on this test a higher "Economic Left/Right" number also represents a more libertarian view. I don't think its a good label for it, but "Social Libertarian" is hardly the only libertarian concern.
Other somewhat similar tests
nolanchart.com
Its main problem is combining certain thoughts in to one answer when someone might not believe all of the points for that answer. Took it anyway. It doesn't give numbers, it shows a chart with a start for where you ideas belong. Mine was in the top center, that areas is rated libertarian.
--
allthetests.com
I didn't even take this one. As an example the anti economic regulation answer is worded -
"The government should let the private sector control the economy. Corporations should make all their decisions and the government should not check for corruption, greed, or monopolies. You’d rather pay for a cheap Chinese product rather than keeping jobs in the USA. "
and for the question about environmental regulation, if you want less the answer says things like "I believe the environment should be the last thing to worry about".
and you can't express the opinion that unions are more bad than good for the economy without checking next to 'Are bad and should be avoided at all costs. "
All rather biased, also only allows for the most extreme positions in a number of cases, at least if your not trying to go straight down the middle.
Even more biased than that is the free market health care answer. There is no real free market answer (we don't have a free market today), and the only answer that supports as free or more free than we have today is " Healthcare is fine. The rich deserve the best healthcare and the poor deserve none. I would not support universal healthcare because it leaves a level playing field..."
All in all its a really lousy quiz
--------
Next up is gotoquiz.com
It has some of its own problems. For example "Whatever maximizes economic growth is good for the people." Whatever, if taken literally makes the question too strong. I'd have to disagree, but I agreed because I looked more to what I saw as the spirit of the question, rather than being overly literal. If they had dropped "whatever" and said something like "maximizing economic growth is good for the people" I would have strongly agreed, and given it the maximum rating.
But while actually taking the test it seemed the best so far
The result was
"You are a far-right social libertarian.
Right: 7.66, Libertarian: 4.89 "
Since "social libertarian" (which it separately scored as -1.27 with lower numbers being more socially liberal) is covered by the social libertarian part, it suggest that economic freedom is covered by the "far-right" part. I'm not sure I'd agree with that terminology. Also perhaps I am not quite as socially liberal/socially libertarian as it paints me. I have some some socially conservative attitudes (if not as much as I used to have), and I am pro-life. OTOH other then in the case of abortion (because I see another person involved) I generally want people to be able to do whatever they want with their social lives (assuming consenting adults), so maybe it makes some sense. I'm pro drug legalization, pro legalization of prostitution, against government restriction of adult's sex lives etc.
--------------------------
theadvocates.org
Which gave me
Your PERSONAL issues Score is 90%
Your ECONOMIC issues Score is 100%
Its a bit simplistic, very few questions and only agree, maybe, or disagree, but then its supposed to be "the shortest".
------
bcaplan.com
It only has yes no, which is a bit of a problem, but less of a problem then it might be given the questions are more specific without trying to combine multiple ideas in one question.
One question I thought problematic was - "Is it morally permissible to exercise "vigilante justice," even against government leaders?" since IMO normally it would not be (against government leaders or not), but in the right situations I think it would be permissible (a general break down in order, or the government becoming sufficiently abusive that it was more criminal than a protection against criminals). If it said "always", or "usually" I'd answer no. If it said "ever", I would say yes. But it doesn't qualify it either way.
My result was
"51-90 points: You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much."
-----------
And last
bestpoliticalquiz.com
Generally not a bad test, although questions like "Should more money be invested in the military?" depend on how much is currently being spent, and the circumstances the country is in, at least as much as they depend on your general political ideology.
And I wished "Should the government be concerned with global warming?" had a more qualified answer like "slightly concerned", or "concerned as a potential issue but it should not take any major steps on the issue".
And "Should marijuana be legalized in the same way as alcohol?" doesn't cover if you want it legalized in a different way, either more, or less restricted than alcohol, or just restricted in a different manor.
"Should the government expand offshore drilling?" makes it seem like the government should drill or actively encourage drilling rather than just allowing it.
etc.
Generally any question I had any problem with I didn't check as a crucial issue, even if I thought the issue was important.
For "Should more money be invested in alternative energy research?" I said maybe, since I'm not against basic research, OTOH I'm not calling for increases in this research, or for spending or tax advantages that go beyond basic research. Perhaps I should have said no, OTOH if taken literally, should even one penny be spent on research (without considering development, and subsidies) I guess the answer would be yes for me.
At the end it told me I was socially conservative and economically a capitalist. Interesting that it was (one one of those two axises) the opposite of a couple of other tests which showed me as socially liberal. |
