|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Remember: if you get a strange combination of seemingly contradictory terms,
these terms are defined more narrowly for the purposes of this quiz. Although "democratic" and "authoritarian" or "fascistic"
and "communist" seem like mutually exclusive concepts, they represent narrower ideas. The point of the lines is to fully distinguish
between social relations, political power and economic regulation; the quiz is not meant to perfectly reflect the entire scope
of ideologies.
If you'd prefer to avoid the terms entirely, even for this application
alone, then replace them with their concepts. Radical and conservative ideas are social equality and social hierarchy, respectively.
Liberal and populist ideas are legal equality and communal authority, respectively. Capitalist and socialist ideas are economic
freedom and economic equality, respectively.
Radical-Conservative Line:
Democrat -
This includes some left and center-left Western parties. The French Communists and Socialists or in the US the Progressive
Caucus or left wing of the Democrats would likely fit in this label. The French policy of laicite, dating back to the
French Revolution, is the perfect embodiment of the democrat rating. Laicite is very secular, even to the point of being
anti-clerical, and is the reason God is a taboo subject in the realm of politics, and why religious items are banned from
student wardrobes in schools. The democrats of this scale go beyond legal equality and use the force of government and
law to secure social equality - through affirmative action, quotas, hiring reforms, special ethnic apportionments in legislatures,
and other policies aimed to correct even indrect discrimination. The rating 'democrat' is NOT the same thing as a US
Democratic party member.
Republican - This includes a large bulk
of modern-day American politicians, whether Republican or Democratic. This includes values of basic racial equality
but not necessarily affirmative action. It's a strong rejection of racism and a strong embrace of democracy, but not
into the social levelling or hyper-secularism of the democrat level.
Radical-Leaning - Those American politicians
not in the republican category are probably in this section. It is moving in the same direction as the republican group,
embraces democracy and rejects racism, but perhaps these people strongly support the death penalty or stand opposed to
gay marriage. In American terms, these are more conservative people, but on this scale - which includes a wider range
of global and historical politics - they are clustered under radical-leaning.
Conservative-leaning -
This is not the same as American conservatives. This group hesitates on or even rejects issues in the modern
US that are essentially mandatory for public office - rejection of racism, support for democracy or opposition to monarchy.
This group wavers on some of these key issues, or on many of them. Simply being conservative on the mainstream US issues
will not get a test-taker into this zone. Some members of this section are those with positive views on the
Confederacy and Jim Crow, those in Europe or elsewhere who perhaps distrust democracy, and those who are neutral on racial
or democratic issues but fiercely conservative on other social issues.
Feudalist - This group includes monarchists,
Confederates, and those opposed to democracy. It does not just mean a social system of lords and peasants, but rather
a stratified society with rigid social castes and a level of social inequality that would surprise most Americans.
Autocrat - Totalitarians, dictators,
malevolent monarchs, communist despots and the like all obviously fall under autocrat. They support a system wherein
their group, clan, caste or religion receives most or all of the benefits of state and society but other receive considerably
less. Saddam Hussein, Castro, Stalin, Hitler and others all fall here.
Liberal-Populist Line:
Anarchist
- While perhaps not supporting the total elimination and privatization of the state and police, an anarchist supports
individual rights in virtually all conflicts between communities and individuals. Many in the US Libertarian Party ascribe
to this belief, but many anarchists also find their way into fringe groups or simply abstentionism. A good rule of thumb
for the anarchist level is that the only relations or acts that can be prohibited are those that initiate force and fraud
- a view first famously summarized by Mill then enshrined into the non-aggression or zero aggression principle.
Libertarian
- Many people in the US Libertarian Party are minor heretics or simply adhere to certain social controls while remaining otherwise
nearly anarchical. These people, in addition to a number of especially independent Democrats and Republicans, fit into
the libertarian category. They do not seek the philosophical uber-consistency of the anarchists, but they propose
most or nearly all of the same ideas and policies. Someone in the ACLU or the Republican Liberty Caucus would likely
fall here.
Liberal-Leaning
- Those moving in the direction of individual autonomy, critical of government, opposed to sin taxes and moral codes fall
in this area. A majority of Americans fall here or in the moderate section.
Populist-Leaning
- Many who consider society excessively loose or irresponsible fall into this ranking, supporting certain measures to enforce
a somewhat more rigid code of moral standards like blue laws, dry county laws, and so forth. The typical social conservative
falls here.
Authoritarian
- At levels not seen recently in America, populist arguments turn more aggressive and thorough, perhaps to banning religious
expression or worship, limiting many aspects of dress, instituting curfews for moral or religious reasons, more vigorously
controlling home life or work life, and otherwise enforcing a stringent moral code. One need not be religious to
fall in this heading. This is not about democracy or elections necessarily, but more about rights and rules.
Fascist - This is not used in the same sense of the real word,
but more in the sense of maximization of the state or societal interest over all else. This category moves beyond controlling
behavior and setting moral rules into manipulating the thoughts, opinions and lives of citizens. The most extreme forms
attempt to shift the racial composition of society, or otherwise manipulate the most basic actions of individuals regardless
of their own desires.
Capitalist-Socialist Line:
Anarcho-Capitalist
- Those who believe that all voluntary and non-fraudulent market transactions are acceptable or good are anarcho-capitalists
for these purposes, even if they do not reject the state. They for the most part want to repeal anti-trust laws, legalize
virtually all markets and products and let the market set wages and prices - they are also against involuntary taxes and for
unilateral free trade. Virtually no one outside real world libertarian and anarchist circles ascribes to this belief
in practice. They associate economic success with the ability to easily create business and a near total lack of taxes
and regulations.
Free Marketeer - Accepting that the
market is the fairest and most effective device for setting wages and prices, those in this category support freer trade,
deregulation, privatization, market reforms, tax cuts and economic liberalization. This category includes Reagan
and most Republicans, tax cutters, free traders, and those seeking to shrink governemnt and encourage commerce and business.
They associate economic success with much less government interference, low inflation, easy access to trade and business creation,
and wealth creation.
Capitalist-Leaning - Many Republicans
and some Democrats fall here, and support balanced budgets, tax reform, free trade agreements, estate tax repeal, and
spend more time talking about the problems of small business than raising the minimum wage. They like to push middle
class tax cuts and associate economic success with production, wealth, and especially with high rates of consumerism and ownership.
Socialist-Leaning - Most Democrats and
a few Republicans fall here. They are skeptical of corporate scandals, think that balanced budgets are a good reason
to raise taxes, and want a more progressive taxation system. They view the estate tax and capital gains tax as necessary
balancing devices against the power of the wealthy. They are skeptical or even adamantly opposed to free trade, and
consider the IMF, WTO and World Bank to be closed, dangerous, undemocratic and serving the wealthy. They associate economic
success with more government spending, low unemployment, and a trade surplus.
Planner - Few Democrats fit here, but
FDR is probably the most aggressive move in this direction, followed by LBJ. They believe that the market is useful
for many areas, but overall it is too chaotic, irrational or unfair, and it takes the keen eye of the state or bureaucracy
to correct market imperfections. They support nationalization of industries, guaranteed employment for all, massive
welfare entitlements, and massive public works. They associate economic success with high employment, high production,
and massive government involvement; the super-rich are usually allowed to still exist normally, but less so in business or
managerial capacities. Ultimately, the market is either short-sighted or unfair, and some outside force must step in
to correct it.
Communist - Whether Stalin and Mao or
the Paris Commune and the Spanish Civil War, communists want to eliminate capital, eliminate profit, eliminate private property
as we know it and then what follows is either a state-organized, syndicate-organized or spontaneously-organized distribution
of goods based more or less on the Marxist principle from each according to ability, to each according to need.
Few people press this ideology anywhere, although there are still Communists in some Western European countries and
certainly many left in former Soviet countries such as Russia. They associate economic success with lack of want, and
lack of inequality. Issues such as free trade, welfare and taxes are virtually irrelevant since their ideals don't include
capital and markets, but they tend to vigorously support the normal planner perspectives on these issues as a transitional
policy.
Report Your Score
Take it again!
|
|
|
|
