The Political Compass

In describing the political beliefs of people, parties, and organisations, we have a habit of applying either a “liberal” or “conservative” label. This is a problematic dichotomy in that these labels can only be meaningful when considered in reference to the established norms of the society concerned. An individual who identifies as a “conservative” in one country may have a fundamentally different political perspective from one who is considered “conservative” in another. In many Western countries, the liberal/conservative and left/right distinctions are often used interchangeably, when in fact they need not necessarily refer to the same set of social and economic convictions. Further diminishing the meaningfulness of this distinction is the fact that in middle America the word “liberal” is widely, if unwittingly, used as generic term of disparagement.

The Political Compass offers an alternative continuum on which the beliefs of individuals may be compared. This system proposes two axes – the traditional left/right distinction, and running perpendicular to this, an authoritarian/libertarian scale. An individual’s political stance can be expressed in terms of where their beliefs place them on these two axes. This provides a more meaningful method of comparing individuals, being less open to ambiguity and consequent misinterpretation.

The site, usefully, plots the candidates in both recent and forthcoming elections in several different countries. It also gives the visitor the opportunity to plot themselves on the continuum by asking a series of questions relating to their personal beliefs. Obviously these questions can never be completely value-neutral, and hence some degree of cultural bias is inevitable (the site’s creators openly state that it is intended for use in Western democracies). Of course, it is also the case that even within a particular society, a proposition will be open to varying interpretations.

Naturally I couldn’t pass up the opportunity to take the test myself, so here is my result:

The red dot is where I supposedly sit. So much for the moderate views motivated by a sound balance of empathy and pragmatism that I believed I held.