NationStates Jolt Archive

This test is supposed to determine how libertarian one is. I got between 159 and 160. www.bcaplan.com/cgi/purity.cgi

I got nothing 'cos the link is empty.

16-30 points: You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure.


Probably because libertarianism blows hard.

all of my 29 points came from things like legalising pot, heh.

I got nothing 'cos the link is empty.
It works for me.

I can't take the test, though. It's for U.S. citizens.

We need nukes to place order In this world.I just cant understand why U.N didnt want it.Only hippies believed that nukes were the end of the world.No reasonable man could believe that bullshit.Thanks for reading...

Last time I took it I was a 66.

14, here.

We need nukes to place order In this world.I just cant understand why U.N didnt want it.Only hippies believed that nukes were the end of the world.No reasonable man could believe that bullshit.Thanks for reading...
And that was really relevant to the topic.

I scored 48, although I do not identify with he libertarianism as espoused by the US LP AT ALL, as I'm not a fan of capitalism...

No, watch The Fog of War. Robert McNamara said that reasonable were lucky on several occasions to avoid a nuclear holocaust. Nuclear weapons will kill us sooner or later.

A nuclear defense system would provide some order in the world.

19. Apparently I'm not an anarchist.

109

91-130 points: You have entered the heady realm of hard-core libertarianism. Now doesn't that make you feel worse that you didn't get a perfect score?

Apparently I'm not an anarchist.
Well, not an anarcho-capitalist...
The word libertarian has sooo been hijacked. :p

I'm Anarchist... just not Anarcho-Capitialist. I'm anti-Capitialism. :-/

Socially though, I am completely Libertarian.

92, word.

Took it twice to adjust some answers first was a 39 then a 47. From their perspective that means "31-50 points: Your libertarian credentials are obvious. Doubtlessly you will become more extreme as time goes on."

Personally though I do not identify with that result. While I do believe in a person being ultimately responsible for themselves and their choices I also see the need for some societal constraints.

58.

Sounds about right.

...You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure.There no such a thing as a "pure" Libertarian.

and its better that way

42 baby!

118...I'm dissapointed in myself.

Should medical liscensing be abolished??? What are the arguments for that???

Privately issued money? Didn't we learn our lesson when states could make their own money?

I have to ask, do real libertarians actually belive these things? Christ this stuff is like batshit insane.
There's a big difference between legalizing pot and privatizinng the police force, I would think.

You've all read Jennifer Government :D

91-130 points: You have entered the heady realm of hard-core libertarianism. Now doesn't that make you feel worse that you didn't get a perfect score?

I think Jennifer Government goes a bit to the extreme, and I'm certainly not a anarcho-capitalist (which is the "pure libertarian way" (John Nike is a Anarcho-Capitalist in JG, although me thinks that if the government would only tax the poor and then give it in funds to the corporations he wouldn't object to the government ;))

I'm a Minarchist Libertarian, I believe in a state that only does what it's ment for, justice and defense of the nation.

Your score is...
159

Almost 160. Almost pure. :D

There no such a thing as a "pure" Libertarian.

and its better that way

So I'm better of dead am I?

91-130 points: You have entered the heady realm of hard-core libertarianism. Now doesn't that make you feel worse that you didn't get a perfect score?

I think Jennifer Government goes a bit to the extreme, and I'm certainly not a anarcho-capitalist (which is the "pure libertarian way" (John Nike is a Anarcho-Capitalist in JG, although me thinks that if the government would only tax the poor and then give it in funds to the corporations he wouldn't object to the government ;))

I'm a Minarchist Libertarian, I believe in a state that only does what it's ment for, justice and defense of the nation.

JG does go to the extreme, but thats probably what would happen if pure libertarianism happened and managed to avoid plunging into complete anarchy.

Libertarianism is pure shit

53: Medium-core libertarian.

That test, unfortunately, is not testing what it pretends to be. It is an anarcho-capitalism test; the focus is overmuch on economics and privatization for it to be testing for true libertarianism. If it is testing for libertariansim at all, it is for the ALP version, which is not agreed upon by the majority of those who call themselves libertarians.

I also find it rather amusing that I scored so low on a test for "libertariansim," considering I am an anarchist (though decidedly not an anarcho-capitalist).

(15) 6-15 points: You are starting to have libertarian leanings. Explore them.

This is rather silly, since I am a hardcore collectivist. Obviously, whoever wrote this test suffers from the (common) delusion that everyone has natural libertarian sympathies.

The fact that I am a former Libertarian makes the test's urging to "explore" my "libertarian leanings" all the more amusing.

98

How odd. I've never truly thought of myself as a Libertarian.

*remembers how her brother has said that Libertarians are funny in that they're somewhat contradictory* Yay?

Not sure in what ways they're contradictory... but. *shrugs*

This site is overtly biased. (I got 38, btw)
An anti-libertarian is _not_ by definition a "nazi nut"... this site seems as though it's living in the era of McCarthy's hunts.

I guess the impression this gives me of "libertarianism" is being a liberal with Republican bent. Thank goodness I don't have the blindness of the latter.

"Your score is...26

16-30 points: You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure."

I think I got 59 the last time I took it . . .

I scored 28

16-30 points: You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure.

What a silly quiz.

Privatizing everything is the worst idea ever. If you honestly believe the roads, police, and even money should be privatized, you're a delusional fool. Yes, a delusional fool.

I mean, come on. Think. Privatized currency? Bill Gates dollars? Ok great. Let's say it happens. You make some smart moves and get a nice fat bank account in the Microsoft Bank of, let's say, 250,000 Gates Bucks. The Ford Motor Company, who bought the road that runs by your house, decides to make it a toll road, but you have to pay the toll in Ford Bucks only. The toll is 5 Ford Bucks. They don't take your stupid Gates Bucks, but will buy them from you at an exchange rate of 1 Ford Buck for every 100,000 Gates Bucks. You, of course, have no recourse in this action because you decided privatizing the courts would be a good idea and, well, Apple owns your district judge and they rule against you and fine you 300,000 Gates Bucks for supporting Microsoft.

Smart move, people.

Libertarians are teh suck!!!1!!11one!!!1

Oh, by the way, my score: 8

Jesus Christ, please be a bit realistic... if you start beginning to think of a bad case scenario then I'll tell you everything that could happen in a communist society, where the soviets or the nazi's ruled the world. That's a lot worse then a capitalist society.

People need to work together in a Free Market, corporations need to offer a good service for the people or the people will not consume their goods. The corporations need us so they can make profit. Like your scenario in which there are multiple currencies, people will just refuse to use one type of currency. In the end one currency will become the most important.

Most Libertarians aren't "Pure" most of them are minarchists (or classical-liberals) and in that system there would still be a government to handle justice. I agree on your last part.

Privatizing the roads is a good idea in my eyes, your currently paying for them, and you'll still be paying for them in the future, however if they are privatised for much less.

Privatizing the roads is a good idea in my eyes, your currently paying for them, and you'll still be paying for them in the future, however if they are privatised for much less.

Yes ... good idea ... let's make yet another way for the rich to get richer off of the poor. Just what people like Bill Gates needs ... more money.

Or is there a plan to give everyone an equal chance to own a road?

Anyway, roads and land should remain public property. A county gets a grant to fix up a road, that county goes to a privately owned contracting company and pays them to fix up the road. That way the money is spread out. That's about as privatized as I'd want the roads.

100,000 people paying 12 cents each for something is a lot better than 10 people having to pay $1200 each. Dontcha think?

78

29
Purity is overrated anyways.

51-90 points: You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much.

Enh... totally untrue IMO, but that's what I got on the test.

I think the problem is that alot of the questions don't allow room for elaboration.

Alot of my views are that certain things (such as the police force and such) should be government controlled, but that the government should act more like a private company in the way it handles it.

51-90 points: (I got a 65.) You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much.

I don't see why it should be a choice between being ruled by corrupt corporations and being ruled by a corrupt government. What if you don't like the way the state handles things, but you also don't think they'd be better privatized? Then where are you?

100,000 people paying 12 cents each for something is a lot better than 10 people having to pay $1200 each. Dontcha think?

I shouldn't have to pay for what I don't use. Plain and simple.

If people had to pay $1200 each, they would live closer to work. Your example highlights what is wrong with the system. It is inefficient.

You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much.

The test is flawed. It gives you points for wanting to lower the defense budget, but a Libertarian believes that the government's job is to defend its people. This test actually decides how much of an anarchist you are.

27.. hmm...

I shouldn't have to pay for what I don't use. Plain and simple.

Well, okie dokie. So what's wrong with helping out someone else who couldn't afford it otherwise?

For example: Police protection. Everyone needs it at some point in their lives, but very few people can afford 24 hour private security.

The Libertarian system is basically one that says, "If you're not wealthy, you don't deserve protection, safe roads, medical attention or education".

If we abolish taxes all together, for example, how much more money would you really have? How much did you, personally, pay in taxes last year? Well, imagine you had it all back. What would you do with it? Could you afford private security, road repairs (on the roads you use), private school (for yourself or your kids), plus all the other little expenses that go along with day to day life?

I highly doubt it. Unless you pay several million dollars in taxes per year.

Well, okie dokie. So what's wrong with helping out someone else who couldn't afford it otherwise?

For example: Police protection. Everyone needs it at some point in their lives, but very few people can afford 24 hour private security.

The Libertarian system is basically one that says, "If you're not wealthy, you don't deserve protection, safe roads, medical attention or education".

You are wrong, although I don't blame you because this test is also wrong. Libertarians believe the government's only job is to protect its citizend from harm and coercion. Taxes still exist in a Libertarian system, there's just a lot less of them because they only pay for things like military, police, hospitals, and fire fighters.

I got a 44.

Well, okie dokie. So what's wrong with helping out someone else who couldn't afford it otherwise?


I don't want to pay so some jackass can move 30 miles outside the city and spend two hours a day commuting. That's not helping people out.


For example: Police protection. Everyone needs it at some point in their lives, but very few people can afford 24 hour private security.



I agree. Of course, an AK provides a decent amount of security.


The Libertarian system is basically one that says, "If you're not wealthy, you don't deserve protection, safe roads, medical attention or education".

If we abolish taxes all together, for example, how much more money would you really have? How much did you, personally, pay in taxes last year? Well, imagine you had it all back. What would you do with it? Could you afford private security, road repairs (on the roads you use), private school (for yourself or your kids), plus all the other little expenses that go along with day to day life?

I highly doubt it. Unless you pay several million dollars in taxes per year.

I don't have kids, I pay for my own education, and have not driven in months. I only drive during the summer. And I use a privately owned toll road (just a coincidence, I don't go out of my way to use it). My current medical plan is "don't get sick."

I don't make much now, so I don't pay much. I dread the day when 30% of my income will go to the state. I would think that a 30% increase in wages would be enough for most families to afford education and health care.

That's right, let's deregulate and privatize anything. Corporations can do no wrong. They'd never abuse their power and do anything unethical. They'd never exploit the environment. They'd never have corporate price setting. They'd never maximize profits at the expense of people, let alone in medical care or education. They'd never make it possible to buy the law. We can trust them with police who have the ability to use lethal force.

The magical invisible hand of the market watching them and will protect us!

Actually indeed

Corporations destroying the environment, yeah take a look at Eastern Europe, like Communism was so good for the environment. Private owned forests (or reservations) will be much better protected, sure you'll need to pay a few bucks to get in, but they will be protected and you would've payed anyway for them through taxes.

Corporations giving you the lowest possible salary? A worker that gets payed will is more loyal to his boss (will not jump jobs because of a better salary at another place) can more focus at his job (instead of worrying if he can feed his/hers children) and can consume (giving the money back to the corporations)

In the Libertarian system you can decide if you want medical attention, road repairs and education. The Free Market will bring the price of those things down, so as many possible people can use it (more people-more cash-more profit) and meanwhile the corporations still need make them as good as possible (if they don't people will go to another school, will not drive that road and will not use that insurance company or hospital.)

The Government is not efficient, the only thing the government is good for is supplying justice (since it can be seen as a fairly objective organisation, police force can be done by private security companies) and defense (although free gunownership, and militia's defending each town could render that useless, unless you want to attack other nations.)

Your score is...

68

51-90 points: You are a medium-core libertarian, probably self-consciously so. Your friends probably encourage you to quit talking about your views so much.


Hmm. Flaming social liberal, economically moderate slightly toward the left. Sounds about right - my raving on free speech cancels out my light leftism.

I scored 81...

Good effing lord. Some of those questions are ridiculous. Should we privatize the police? Abolish public universities? Ugh!

I got a 27.
16-30 points: You are a soft-core libertarian. With effort, you may harden and become pure.Fat chance, if that means paying even more for college and refusing to do anything for poor people...

I got a 77, which is reasonable for my political views.

Corporations destroying the environment, yeah take a look at Eastern Europe, like Communism was so good for the environment. Communist countries also never had an EPA. If they had, then they would have been able to make sure that their businesses complied with it though. Companies have shown again and again that it is the bottom line they are about, and not environmental responsibility.

Private owned forests (or reservations) will be much better protected, sure you'll need to pay a few bucks to get in, but they will be protected and you would've payed anyway for them through taxes.

I completely agree. However, there still needs to be a set of standards to make sure that someone who owns the land upstream from you isn't polluting the water, and harming your land as well.

Corporations giving you the lowest possible salary? A worker that gets payed will is more loyal to his boss (will not jump jobs because of a better salary at another place) can more focus at his job (instead of worrying if he can feed his/hers children) and can consume (giving the money back to the corporations)

If you remove limits on trade, monopolies are created. If you're training is in one industry, and only one company offers jobs in that industry, you are going to have to work for the wage they offer you, even if it isn't enough to live on. Why do you think we have two income families now? If wage deregulation worked, no one family would have to work two jobs.

Just my two cents.

BTW - I scored a 90 on the test.

29 points

All because I wouldn't mind being able to smoke weed without having to worry about cops showing up...

I got 46.

31-50 points: Your libertarian credentials are obvious. Doubtlessly you will become more extreme as time goes on.