Political Compass

Various bloggers are posting their results from the "Political Compass" test, which purports to chart your political preferences.

So here's the chart that supposedly represents my results. It puts me almost right smack in the middle, which I found a bit surprising.

I have to object to some of the statements, though.

For instance, the first statement is this: If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations. Well, what about those of us who take a more nuanced and sophisticated view, i.e., that the interests of humanity and the interests of trans-national corporations might at least occasionally coincide? After all, trans-national corporations aren't staffed by robots or Martians. A sizeable portion of humanity either earns a living by working for trans-national corporations, or buys the products of such corporations.

Or this: Taxpayers should not be expected to prop up any theatres or museums that cannot survive on a commercial basis. What does that mean? What if I think that the taxpayers should be able to vote to do whatever they please in this regard? If they vote to fund theatres or museums, more power to them. If not, then that's fine as well. I don't have any general expectation as to what the right result is for every particular case.

Or these:
Everyone has their rights, but it is better for all of us that different sorts of people should keep to their own kind.
Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity.
Both of these are exceedingly vague.

Or these:
When you are troubled, it's better not to think about it, but to keep busy with more cheerful things.
Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all.
What do these have to do with politics?