Notes

Additional information may be put here from time-to-time.

The Big Picture

The design of the Political Objectives Test is such that it cannot be accurately represented as a chart or compass like many other multi-dimensional politics tests. However, for those who find it useful to visualize, I will try describing an approximate graphical representation of the relationships between the many descriptions.

Imagine a wheel consisting of three concentric rings and six spokes evenly radiating from a hub. The hub is itself a ring representing moderates with a core representing the apathetic at its centre. From the hub we move next to the six spokes (moving clockwise).

Arrayed along the liberty spoke (from centre to periphery) are liberal then libertarian then anarchist.

Arrayed along the liberty+stability spoke (from centre to periphery) are establishmentarian then reactionary then survivalist.

Arrayed along the stability spoke (from centre to periphery) are conservative then ultra-conservative then fascist.

Arrayed along the equality+stability spoke (from centre to periphery) are communitarian then authoritarian then totalitarian.

Arrayed along the equality spoke (from centre to periphery) are socialist then utopian socialist then communist.

Arrayed along the liberty+equality spoke (from centre to periphery) are progressive then radical then revolutionary.

Another way to look at the relationships between the descriptions is with reference to the concentric rings.

The innermost ring (in a clockwise direction) has the following conventional forms of politics that seek to optimize particular values: liberal then establishmentarian then conservative then communitarian then socialist then progressive then back to liberal.

The intermediate ring (in a clockwise direction) has the following transitional or alternative forms of politics that seek to maximize particular values: libertarian then reactionary then ultra-conservative then authoritarian then utopian socialist then radical then back to libertarian.

The outermost ring (in a clockwise direction) has the following extremist forms of politics that seek to totalize or transgress particular values: anarchist then survivalist then fascist then totalitarian then communist then revolutionary then back to anarchist.

There is a final further ring beyond the spokes which encircles or orbits the entire wheel and represents confused extremists.

Hopefully this text description makes sense and vistors can see the wheel thus traced.

Internationals

'Internationals' are networks of like-minded political parties and examining them may help demonstrate the avowed ideology of a variety of parties worldwide. Three internationals worth looking at are the Socialist International (SI) for democratic socialist parties, the Liberal International (LI) for liberal parties and the Centrist Democrat International (CDI) for traditional conservative parties.

A party is an aggregate of many members. And an international is an aggregate of many parties which are themselves aggregates of many members. As such generalizations of the political character of an international are just that. They may embrace and cut across different forms of political ideology. They also change over time while preserving many aspects of historical nomenclature.

The SI includes many garden-variety socialist parties while its history shows a growing progressive identity. Those SI members that are most successful as holders of government majority tend to be more moderate than anything. Finally there is a communitarian presence in the SI that tends to derive from less developed nations.

The LI includes many classical liberals but it also accommodates both progressives and establishmentarians and its mission statements are carefully worded to be inclusive of all strands of liberalism. Those few LI members that are most successful as frequent holders of government majority tend to be more moderate than anything.

The CDI includes many garden-variety conservative parties while its history shows a growing establishmentarian identity. Those CDI members that are most successful as holders of government majority tend to be more moderate than anything. Finally there is a communitarian presence in the CDI that tends to derive from less developed nations.

Be mindful that the composition of internationals are always changing and parties will move from group to group. Also be aware there are other internationals that sit between or beyond the ones referred to here.

Statement of Bias

It is worth stating my own political biases as the author of the Political Objectives Test. My own test result is 'progressive' with scores of 78% Liberty 78% Equality 29% Stability. This very much fits with my own self-image and past political involvement. But how much does it affect the way in which I have written the test?

If my questions made the progressive result too attractive then I would expect my survey results to be different. More than 22% of participants would be Progressive and it would be the largest group (rather than one of two largest groups). Likewise those of opposing sentiment would be depicted as unattractive. Feedback says otherwise. The opposite of progressive within the 'conventional ring' is conservative. Persons who are given a conservative result by my test with whom I have corresponded say that they find it an accurate and even complimentary description.

I need to draw a distinction however between emotional and intellectual bias. As a progressive I have an aversion to fascism more than any other political movement. And yet as a student of political history I consider both communism and fascism to be as dangerous as one another. My emotional preference is for those movements that champion a combination of liberty and equality but my intellectual preference is for any movement that engages in negotiation with others in the context of multi-party parliamentary democracy.

If one examines my descriptions of different results one will see that criticism and sometimes even a hint of lampooning only enters into my descriptions for non-conventional forms of politics. Nonetheless I think that I have provided descriptions which draw on the statements and concepts of different movements themselves. In this sense I feel I have represented them accurately.