Another politics test, but much shorter than the other one I posted a while ago:

http://www.helloquizzy.com/tests/the-in ... itics-test

-------------

My results:

Politically Libertarian, Privately Liberal

Your stance on social issues matches across both political and private spheres - you believe in personal freedom, for yourself and for others. You are not bothered by change as long as this change doesn't involve personal decisions - yours or others - being forced by someone else's hand. Tradition is not as important to you as the right to decide for yourself which rules to follow. Economically, you believe in different principles depending on the size of the group. In large groups, you worry that too much interference will lead to stagnation at best and more likely corruption and loss of freedom and productivity. It's too easy for people to take unfair advantage of an impersonal large system, and you do not want the government acting as a nanny to a nation of adults. In private interactions, you are confident that the negative effects of cooperation and wealth-sharing can be eliminated or at least minimized and mitigated.

It's difficult, especially in a complex political system, to expose and combat fraud and waste. In small groups, if someone is taking unfair advantage of your goodwill, and won't stop after being confronted, you can simply cut that person off and preserve generosity and cooperation for everyone else. More simply put, you're open-minded, you think that it's good when the able help the less able, and you think equality is a virtue. You just don't trust the government, especially the Federal government, to enforce this without creating more and potentially worse problems. Your idea of communities coming together for the common good is small communities, like neighborhoods and groups of friends; groups small enough that everyone knows everyone at least a little bit. And a freedom-oriented government lets each small group handle its problems as is best for that particular group. This is the result I got too, by the way.

You scored 32% on Public-Econ, higher than 29% of your peers.
You scored 62% on Public-Soc, higher than 33% of your peers.
You scored 72% on Private-Econ, higher than 64% of your peers.
You scored 63% on Private-Soc, higher than 29% of your peers.

_________________
What would the world be, once bereft
Of wet and of wildness? Let them be left,
O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet. - Gerard Manley Hopkins

libertarian across the board. surprise surprise.

_________________
Isn't it pretty to think so?

The external politics section was so specific to the US (for which the test gave fair warning) that I find it really difficult to answer.
The internal politics section was very, very interesting. Thanks for posting this, DC.

My results:

The Liberal
Public and private views match.

Some might call you a bleeding heart, but to you, the blood flowing means you're alive and aware. There are certain freedoms that you hold dear, and others that you believe should be sacrificed for the common good. You want to help the downtrodden and deeply resent when others, especially those who have more ability, don't do the same. Your political beliefs are consistent with the way you live your life, which keeps you from suffering the cognitive dissonance that some others feel and gives you strength in your convictions, but it also makes it more difficult for you to see these matters from another's point of view.

Politically Libertarian, Privately Liberal

Your stance on social issues matches across both political and private spheres - you believe in personal freedom, for yourself and for others. You are not bothered by change as long as this change doesn't involve personal decisions - yours or others - being forced by someone else's hand. Tradition is not as important to you as the right to decide for yourself which rules to follow. Economically, you believe in different principles depending on the size of the group. In large groups, you worry that too much interference will lead to stagnation at best and more likely corruption and loss of freedom and productivity. It's too easy for people to take unfair advantage of an impersonal large system, and you do not want the government acting as a nanny to a nation of adults. In private interactions, you are confident that the negative effects of cooperation and wealth-sharing can be eliminated or at least minimized and mitigated. It's difficult, especially in a complex political system, to expose and combat fraud and waste. In small groups, if someone is taking unfair advantage of your goodwill, and won't stop after being confronted, you can simply cut that person off and preserve generosity and cooperation for everyone else. More simply put, you're open-minded, you think that it's good when the able help the less able, and you think equality is a virtue. You just don't trust the government, especially the Federal government, to enforce this without creating more and potentially worse problems. Your idea of communities coming together for the common good is small communities, like neighborhoods and groups of friends; groups small enough that everyone knows everyone at least a little bit. And a freedom-oriented government lets each small group handle its problems as is best for that particular group. This is the result I got too, by the way.

You scored 45% on Public-Econ, higher than 37% of your peers.
You scored 57% on Public-Soc, higher than 27% of your peers.
You scored 72% on Private-Econ, higher than 63% of your peers.
You scored 67% on Private-Soc, higher than 36% of your peers.

_________________

Question 21. Where's the option "I'd tell them that I'm wearing a red-coloured sweater, and not a red-coloured shirt, thus the law does not apply in this case"?

Question 23. Why can I not agree with his motives?

I might say that the first 6 questions were difficult to answer, due in no small part to my not being a US citizen. I've also found business and finance a very dry subject since my school years, though I suppose getting to grips with it is something of a necessary evil when it comes to functioning in society. Anyway...
And there I thought I was a libertarian. I think I agree more with the description provided for crystal and DC, but then again I also dislike the idea of there being a disparity between my beliefs and the way those beliefs manifest themselves in my actions and everyday attitudes.

_________________

We are beyond our own ability to define ourselves - we can only describe what we think we are.

I thought that too.



I think the question is specifically trying to assess how you deal with people who hold beliefs you don't agree with/approve of, so obviously having a "I agree with him" option would rather undermine that.

_________________
What would the world be, once bereft
Of wet and of wildness? Let them be left,
O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet. - Gerard Manley Hopkins

[police mode]Semantic antics, my boys? Off to prison with ye! [/police mode]

You'll neva take me alive, coppa!!

_________________
What would the world be, once bereft
Of wet and of wildness? Let them be left,
O let them be left, wildness and wet;
Long live the weeds and the wilderness yet. - Gerard Manley Hopkins

Politically Libertarian, Privately Liberal

You scored 33% on Public-Econ, higher than 31% of your peers.
You scored 83% on Public-Soc, higher than 77% of your peers.
You scored 72% on Private-Econ, higher than 63% of your peers.
You scored 83% on Private-Soc, higher than 77% of your peers.

_________________
"...he must bring forth values which are an equivalent substitute for his absence in the collective personal sphere. Without this production of values individuation is immoral and, more than that, suicidal..." Jung