When time permits, please take the Libertarian Purity Test.
I scored a 105 out of a possible 160.
The test could use some clarification in places. For instance, question #36 asks "Should we abolish welfare?" I believe that publicly funded welfare could easily be replaced by privately funded welfare, and that's the way we oughta go. So I don't believe we should "abolish welfare". We should turn it back over to the churches, civic groups, benevolence funds, etc.
Question #42: "Should the FDA and Medical licensing be abolished?" Well, yes. But only after some competing certifications have a chance to get themselves established. Until then, we're like that video of Democrats stuck on an escalator. We've forgotten how to walk.
I would trust a Wal-Mart certification far more than an FDA certification. Heck, the FDA has certified Oxycontin, but won't allow for marijuana. Go figure.
Anyway, it's nice to occasionally take a test that makes me seem moderate.
Please post results below.
14 comments:
Score of 73: You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so.
Thanks! That was fun! Who knew I was a 'moderate"?!
I'm a 78
Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much.
Haha, they do, at that....
Score of 138: You are nearly a perfect libertarian, with a tiny number of blind spots. Think about them, then take the test over again. On the other hand, if you scored this high, you probably have a good libertarian objection to my suggested libertarian answer. :-)
86. Some of the questions were too vague as to how the goal would be accomplished.
25. And most of those were from being a nonviolent activist civil liberties type.
Score of 154 out of 160 - probably because, as a Christian, I have to oppose vigilante justice against politicians (as tempting as that is.)
46 and proud of it.
Some of the questions were too absolutist to be reasonable. Others, I'd be open to limited and careful experimentation before full adoption.
I'd like to question how some people feel about certain answers after they suffer the carnage of their idealism. Many functions of government evolved after harsh experience taught us the folly of disbelieving in market failures.
No abortion or gun questions? Shameful!
Got a 115... I didn't see what that 'made me'... but I too felt some of their questions were absolutist and unreasonable... I'm not Ayn Rand. I just want her to be my Congressperson writing tax laws.
22 ...and like Nick, it probably would have been higher had the questions/answers not been so absolutist.
I was amused to be classified as "soft-core" -- who would have guessed?
I don't like that anarcho-capitalist label, at least for me it doesn't fit, even though I am a libertarian anarchist. I like voluntaryist because it fits my ideals much better.
Interesting, Ralph, that you and I fall in the relatively "statist" end of the non-random sample of people presenting their scores here, even though the description of our scores is fairly libertarian. Of course we probably have very different views on where and how government should be involved.
Although this was the most comprehensive political test I've taken, I think a better one could be designed. I'll have to give it some thought or do some searching. Still, some political ideals don't survive first contact. Others take a while before idealism falls to reality. It was fairly easy for Rand to fill her books with deus ex machinas.
I'd be scared to take the test again and see what I would have to answer to break 100.
I scored a 155. The questions are too absolutist. I answered questions like, "Should welfare be abolished?", with the assumption that it meant government welfare. I do consider myself an anarcho-capitialist and a voluntaryist.
159. Even on a test like this, I'm on the far end of the scale.
I got a 140 but the test in my opinion is very black and white but then again you can't really make a test like that without that kind of flaw
Post a Comment