“My Political Compass” 2
According to these folks. I think the quiz might have skewed things a little (but not much).
Note that they are not using the same definition of “libertarianism” as do the Paulistas. From the results page (emphasis added):
The usual understanding of anarchism as a left wing ideology does not take into account the neo-liberal “anarchism” championed by the likes of Ayn Rand, Milton Friedman and America’s Libertarian Party, which couples social Darwinian right-wing economics with liberal positions on most social issues. Often their libertarian impulses stop short of opposition to strong law and order positions, and are more economic in substance (ie no taxes) so they are not as extremely libertarian as they are extremely right wing.
My guess would be that my high score on the “libertarian” scale came because of my strong views on civil liberties and privacy. Furthermore, I sometimes selected seemingly contradictory answers from one question to another, because a question said “most important value,” rather than “important value.” The word “most” could change my answer from “agree” to “disagree.”
I can’t link to my results page. As near as I can tell, the results page is dynamic, based on one’s answers to the quiz, so, to see their explication, you’ll have to take their quiz.
Via PoliticalProf.
January 14, 2012 at 2:40 pm
I occasionally run across libertarians who think I have a lot in common with them for, I think, the same reasons you think you scored in that way. About six or seven years ago I even gave a talk on cybersecurity at Cato where they much preferred my views to those given by the military man who spoke first. But they give me the creeps and now I’ve learned to signal my real positions to them by mocking the use of things like “sound money” and “the Zim note” in various discussions.
January 14, 2012 at 4:12 pm
Most of the folks I’ve met who call themselves Ron Paul Libertarians know nothing of the Ayn Rand “Objectivist” underpinnings of that theory, nor of human nature to realize that the theory ignores social reality.
They are like persons who call themselves “Epicureans” with no knowledge of what Epicurus believed or how he lived.