I take issue with 15, 23 and 24:

15, a democratic, voluntarily funded 'government' that maintains laws and a judiciary etc. is perfectly legitimate in a pure libertarian framework. The Democracy is not actually a problem if it is limited in the same manner as the citizen.

23. Again, a limited government could perfectly well exist to protect rights.

24. I'd say that the law is badly written. Crimes should be things like murder, where "I didn't know it was wrong" would hardly be considered an excuse either.

@Ghost: Democracy is tyranny of the majority.

Plus: 23) Any government that limits people is taking away from their rights.
24) It's not talking about whether or not you know it's wrong, it's talking about whether or not you know it's illegal.

So, you scored a 3?

I think this is a totally ridiculous test. The fact is, nothing can be either "true" or "false" - I had issues with every single one of these questions, becuase when you're dealing with politics, you're dealing with issues that cannot EVER be totally black and white.

@Olympic: Don't take the quiz then. Just read the arguments on the results page.

@CM, "Democracy is tyranny of the majority" that depends on what role the government is allowed to play. If microsoft democratically elected their CEO by popular vote, there would be no tyranny involved in the matter. The tyranny is dependent on the constitution allowing the government to be tyrannical.

@Ghost: In a democracy, the will of the many is imposed on the few, therefore it is tyranny of the majority. I don't understand your analogy at all.

I changed my view on #1 from yes to no after reading the explanation, but many of the other explanations are really stupid.

And a few of the questions are pretty deceptive. I voted 'yes' on politicians are our servants because I took that to mean that politicians *should be* our servants.

I scored 11.

CM, I really can't make it any clearer than that. A democratic election of a government that doesn't infringe on rights would not be tyrannical.

Bad test (no wonder, it was inspired by Glenn Beck, every outcomen then, of course, is negative.)

True or False doesn't cut it for those questions, many are questions that are DEGREE baded, ie, The State DOES have the right to surveillance ot some extent (ie, cameras in airports and the like) but not an excess, ie, cameras in the bedrooms... *looks up, sees camera, thinks "Oh shit..."* ;)


For whatever it's worth, I scored an 11, which would seem a middle-ground score, seeing as that's about even between 0-25, leaning slightly towards the "anarchist" 0, which makes sense as I lean a bit to the Left and that's somewhat looser than the Right.

But nope, apparently that means I'm "a state-worshipping authoritarian; you probably vote Democrat or Republican along strict party lines"

:/

The other outcomes-


You're an anarchist! Congratulations!
You're bordering on libertarian, possibly even a voter. You still have some delusions to shed.
Get in AA (Authoritarians Anonymous)now! You would most likely shove your neighbors into ovens if the authorities told you to! (OK, that one IS a bit funny...)
You should be locked up for your own personal safety.

...

Like I said, bad test.

If the anarchists were trying to look good with this, they certainly failed.

scored a 2, and after reading the explanation of one of them I noticed I dun goofed

I don't remember which one I disagreed with

Also, while the arguments were respectable as a whole (in my opinion), the T/F format threw things off a bit. There were quite a few where I agreed with the argument but found the T/F to be a toss-up because the question behind the argument didn't fit nicely into T/F format.

I scored 1. Apparently there's something wrong with thinking it's a good thing for society (NOT the state) to take care of the weak and infirm.

This quiz is inspired by Glenn Beck. Therefore, unless you are a Randian (i.e. everyone should act as selfishly as possible and the only relationships in society should be based on money, except for the rigid, patriarchal, almost fascist family structure), then you can't get zero.
This quiz fails to acknowledge many other types of anarchism, especially those based on the abolition of many or the idea of society working together without the interference of a government (basically leftist anarchists).

Er... folks, the quiz was "inspired" by Beck producing the Nolan Chart on one of his shows in... February? Beck had nothing to do with the production of it, so stop associating him with the quiz. Bash it on its perceived faults, not on a fallacious association.

We are not saying that Beck created this quiz, but that the quiz was inspired by him. Glenn Beck may hate this quiz, I don't know or care, but that doesn't change the fact that the creator of this quiz seeks to improve upon Beck's Nolan Chart.

@Ghost: A democratic election of government is not democracy, it's a republic. (Which has it's own problems)

The Nolan Chart was created by David Nolan, the primary creator of the Libertarian Party as a way of demonstrating the flaws of the one-dimensional left-right political 'spectrum'. I believe Glenn Beck was in elementary school at the time. It had nothing to do with him.

This quiz in question is essentially a test of how anarchistic you are, and has little to do with the Nolan Chart. For a quiz that does have something to do with the Nolan Chart, try this one from the Advocates for Self Government:

http://www.theadvocates.org/quiz

And Glenn Beck is most definitely not a Randian. I've only seen his show once or twice, but from that and the handful of youtube clips I've watched, he's definitely a traditional values/national greatness conservative.

@Tolstoy: They're not saying it's a bad thing, it's just saying that society doesn't have an obligation to protect the weak and infirm. It's a good thing if it does, but not a bad thing if it doesn't.

@largeham: I'm not a Randian and I scored 0.

I do remember the first time I came across this test a few years ago. I scored pretty high, probably in the teens, and thought that most of the arguments were crap. Then, this february I came across it again and scored an 8, and the arguments got me down to a four. After coming back a few times, I finally got down to a zero and became an anarchist.

Well then it is as Tolstoy said earlier: "I scored 1. Apparently there's something wrong with thinking it's a good thing for society (NOT the state) to take care of the weak and infirm. "

@largeham: As I said earlier, the key word in that question is obligation. It is a good thing if we take care of the weak and infirm, but it is in no way an obligation. It's only an obligation if the state makes it one.