Welcome to The Political Compass™
There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional
categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of
the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's
complex political landscape.
For example, who are the 'conservatives' in
today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers
who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret
Thatcher ?
There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional
categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of
the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's
complex political landscape.
For example, who are the 'conservatives' in
today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers
who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret
Thatcher ?
Welcome to The Political Compass™
There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional
categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of
the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's
complex political landscape. For example, who are the 'conservatives' in
today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers
who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret
Thatcher ?
On the standard left-right scale, how do you distinguish leftists like
Stalin and Gandhi? It's not sufficient to say that Stalin was simply more
left than Gandhi. There are fundamental political differences between them
that the old categories on their own can't explain. Similarly, we generally
describe social reactionaries as 'right-wingers', yet that leaves left-wing
reactionaries like Robert Mugabe and Pol Pot off the hook.
That's about as much as we should tell you for now. After you've responded
to the following propositions during the next 3-5 minutes, all will be
explained. In each instance, you're asked to choose the response that best
describes your feeling: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree or Strongly
Agree. At the end of the test, you'll be given the compass, with your own
special position on it.
The test is entirely anonymous. None of your personal details are required,
and nothing about your result is recorded or logged in any way. The answers
are only used to calculate your reading, and cannot be accessed by anyone,
ever.
See link to test yourself:-
http://politicalcompass.org/index
There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional
categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of
the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's
complex political landscape. For example, who are the 'conservatives' in
today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers
who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret
Thatcher ?
On the standard left-right scale, how do you distinguish leftists like
Stalin and Gandhi? It's not sufficient to say that Stalin was simply more
left than Gandhi. There are fundamental political differences between them
that the old categories on their own can't explain. Similarly, we generally
describe social reactionaries as 'right-wingers', yet that leaves left-wing
reactionaries like Robert Mugabe and Pol Pot off the hook.
That's about as much as we should tell you for now. After you've responded
to the following propositions during the next 3-5 minutes, all will be
explained. In each instance, you're asked to choose the response that best
describes your feeling: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree or Strongly
Agree. At the end of the test, you'll be given the compass, with your own
special position on it.
The test is entirely anonymous. None of your personal details are required,
and nothing about your result is recorded or logged in any way. The answers
are only used to calculate your reading, and cannot be accessed by anyone,
ever.
See link to test yourself:-
http://politicalcompass.org/index 
e-mail:
