- D821903B-D776-45E1-9738-4E0C6828BAE9.png (602.14 KiB) Viewed 5102 times
Something I notice in a lot of these tests is the defintions of ‘authoritarian’ versus ‘liberty’. They tend to define ‘authority’ as
how much you want to ban, while I think that’s a lousy metric. I score pretty high on the liberty scale because on the common subjects they ask about - drugs and prostitution in this case- I’m a pretty live-and-let-live person. But while I hold liberal views, I think of myself as authoritarian: I default strongly towards increased (centralized) government power, consider following the law a moral imperative in and of itself besides whatever morals the law in question serves, and would
in extremis likely chose a more stable dictatorship over a more volatile but freer state. Libertarian, I am certainly not. I can’t see beneath the hood of this test but I don’t think my views on drug legalisation and my hestitation to condone violence even against oppression should be considered for the same axis.
The rest is expected. Not sure why the diplomatic axis is called ‘peaceful’, since I did expres that I believe war can be required (a higher score gets ‘internationalist’, which I think is a much better term). I’m also still not fond of framing it as ‘nation vs the world’, as some questions did. I certainly favor international coöperation and accountability, but do not mistake that for not thinking my nation has its stuff together better than the vast majority of the planet.
If there be here lesson or moral, it lies beyond the competence of him who wrote this post.
(Jack Vance, Emphyrio)