Mapping the blogosphere
Grant points out an interesting experiment being conducted over at MetaFilter. Quite a large number of users has completed the Political Compass test, and a graph (popup) has been produced. He also notes that it is very similar to my Political Blogmap; I’d go further and say that the distribution is similar on both.
To me, that is a reasonable indication that they offer a fair estimate of the ideological distribution of the blogosphere (or at least the political blogosphere). However, I’m not convinced that Grants conclusion is accurate:
It’s quite interesting — Metafilter appears to have a far more left-leaning membership than you would imagine from reading the posts. I guess the right-wing nutters just shout louder.
That’s possibly true to a certain extent, but the test is also imperfect. There are a good few questions that lend themselves to a “leftist” response, when that’s not necessarily the case.
I’m not sure what it means, but it’s certainly very interesting.
Well, of course, there is a bias. It’s plain obvious that the political compass is geared towards coaxing people to a libertarian leftie position, and, if it becomes clear they are beyond redemption, slingshotting them into Adolf Hitler territory.
Some questions don’t matter, particularly on tariffs, work for the dole, and other issues. Yet there are some trigger questions like “are all cultures equal?” that are deliberately placed to create more recruits for the chattering classes. Thus people who answer “disagree” to such a question will get a major kick upwards into Authoritarian land. Shocked that they are so fascist and intolerant, they will go over the test again, making themselves suitably politically correct, and receive a warm inner glow when they break back into Libertarian Left territory. The test penalises you for being honest and calls it “right wing authoritarianism”.
It is not just cultural issues where the test is looking for converts, but on economic issues too. Again, it depends how the question is worded. Should people with a capacity to pay have a better standard of education? Really what that question says is “should we ban private schools”. Most honest people will answer a moderate “disagree”, but in doing so go flying out into Friedman territory.
I wouldn’t go as far as Steve (who, I’d guess, is a right-winger feeling a ton of resentment towards the test, due to whatever result it gave him), but it *does* pull you towards Left-Libertarian. What’s more, because it’s American, its idea of left-wing is further to the right than ours.
So it’s entirely possible that many of the raving loonies Grant speaks of *are* represented, but they’re considered to be somewhere around the centre.
Steve is actually a friend of mine, and is a proud, card-carrying member of the party of labour (although it wouldn’t be the first time he’s been accused of right wing zealotry).
I think the test is British, so how do you explain it?
Comments about Steve: cheerfully withdrawn.
Comments about the Americanisms in the Political Compass test: *thinks for a second*. Well, fuck me. You’re absolutely right.
Which means: I don’t explain it. Neither its American Libertarian roots, nor its Americanism as a whole, would pull the user towards the bottom-left: because, after all, it has neither.
Hmmm.
A lot of people answer the questions dishonestly too.
Rob’s own map is heavily favouring the left, yet the majority of Oz Bloggers are right leaning, even the ones that don’t admit it.
We’ve had conservative government for a while now, so somebody is voting for the right.
The problem is that the test asks guilt-laden questions that people aren’t willing to answer honestly, and get bundled into the left.
When it comes down to voting however, that fear of honesty disappears.
What does it say of the conservative viewpoint that people feel guilty for their own political preferences? Oh, yes, I think Bush and his cronies are just *wonderful*, the way they stick it to those lucky poor bastards! But I hate myself for feeling that way!
“Your guilty conscience tells you to vote Democratic, but deep inside you long for a cold-hearted Republican to lower taxes, brutalise the homeless, and rule you like a king!”
— Sideshow Bob, “Sideshow Bob Roberts” (The Simpsons)
This comment brought ot you by insufferable smugness and the letter A.
Well, such insufferable smugness would explain the incredible deficit spending and tax cuts from almost every republican president in the last quarter century…
Anyway, I think I was about a 3 in libertarian territory (suprisingly low, but given the test likes equates political correctness with “libertarianism”, perhaps not so surprising), and roughly balanced in the middle of economic left/right.
Again, I’m amazed that the test asks nothing about inheritance taxes, or even capital gains and the elimination of economic rent. They are key questions that would differentiate left and right.
Apparently trying to ban private education, ban the purchase and sale of property, and equating Amazonian Head Hunters with Western Civilisation is a much more accurate representation of the mainstream Left of British society.
We righties don’t hate ourselves. It’s only poor people, blacks, arabs, gays, muslims, women, animals, trees, and peace that we hate.
Any self-respecting leftie should know that.
When I say that questions are guilt-laden its along these lines:
Q: What would you rather eat?
a) Tofu
b) A Baby Seal
my honest answer would be b. :-)
Yeah, a number of people (ACB for instance) have made the claim that the Political Compass test was designed by Libertarians. I don’t believe this, although I would like to point out that the 0,0 position is not necessarily the population average - the actual “zero” position may well be somewhere in the lower-left quadrant.
The test was not designed by libertarians by any stretch of the imagination. It was designed by the same old gang of fuzzy-wuzzy Soft-Left Nanny-Statists (the usual public sector kulturkampfers) who have authoritarian tendencies and ideologies. The test was crafted to put the makers of the test in the Libertarian Left. Some of the questions which produce a “libertarian” result do so with no feasible justification beyond a general desire to legitimize certain academic fads that don’t stand up on their own.
“Academic fads,” said the fuzzy math compassionate conservative NGO plutocrat. While I also have reservations about the wording of the questions. for instance, the ambiguous “The only social responsibility of a company should be to deliver a profit to its shareholders;” companies are created for profit. For them to change to a more conscientious platform would be a conflict of interest, and thus as unfeasable in the system as it is as the validity of their self-evaluations.
…the vague “Restrictions are sometimes necessary in trade;” to combat globalization or to enforce it? As punishing sanctions or a boost to local industry?
…the biased “The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and the artist;” none are expendable, but manufacturers create jobs, which this capitalist system is based on.
However, the test IS useful for discovering my position as relative to my position previously. Since the questions stay the same, I can go back and see if I’ve changed - which I have: -9.00 l/r, -7.28 a/l…
Ooooh, who’s a bitter little man then, Steve?
I’ve never eaten tofu, I don’t like alfalpha, Neil from the Young Ones put me off lentils at a very young age. I’ve never been one for lattes. Gee, my chances of gaining any traction in the left are absolute zilch.
Darn it, does this mean I’ll have to join the Genghis Khan Right faction, I’d better hurry and get some cuttings of old Janet Albrechtsen OpEds. I always knew that September 11 was the result of multiculturalism (shame about the multitude of cultures killed in the WTC, but hey you have to remember the non-whites don’t count).
Debates about left and right have become more and more philosophically meaningless as the years roll by. I concede that on some occasions with some peole with some issues, the question of left-right ideology may have some relevance.
In general, however, it’s gone the way of Rugby League Clubs. Intense tribal loyalties may still be there — with our TV mentality, may in some aspects be even stronger than was once the case.
Rugby League Clubs are no longer composed of locals with genuine ties to their tribal area. But as a species, we need tribal links. The real thing’s no longer possible in modern societies, so we seek substitutes — and don’t acknowledge its absurd artificiality.
Anyone ready to chose ideological sides? Your position is rock solid? Let’s hope you have better luck than Tom Uren, who began his ALP career as a loyal member of the Right. None of us , of course, will ever, like Tommy, be able to know we were ALP right wingers before even John Ducker.
Man, talk about a copout.
“I’m above partisan politics because they obviously bicker too much!”
Dear Johnathan (Sunday, 9/3/03)
Man (If one is still permitted to employ such a genderist term?) talk about a copout.
You should have responded: —-
“I’m above intellectual analysis because they obviously think too much.”
p.s. Johnathan, I’m tempted to say , “You show me yours & I’ll show you mine,” but modesty intervenes. Despite any advantage you may feel you have over silly ducks like me, I suspect I’ve had far more involvement in political & industrial fields than perhaps even you.
Best wishes in your search for —-?
but I thought tofu was made out of little baby seals.
As a group toddlers are “left libertarians” in there teens “spoiled brats” as adults “parasites”.