Political quizzes

Today, a buddy of mine asked me and some of his friends to fill out a political quiz. I had some serious problems with how some questions were worded, since I didn't agree with either of the options being afforded with too me. Sometimes I would say I disagree with a statement, not because I agreed with the alternative they provided but because I disagreed that the question was valid.

At any rate, what was interesting about Tom's analysis of the results was that he considered me to be an anarchist, despite that fact that two other people (himself included) had scores closer to anarchists than myself. What really distinguished me from the rest of the test takers was my views on economic issues. I was through and through a capitalist. My economic freedom score was more than twice as high as the next highest score. And this among people who are generally libertarian in beliefs.

Perhaps it was just the odd wording of the questions that confused them or caused them to answer contra to their professed beliefs, but I can't help but give them enough respect and grant that they really answered the questions based on their beliefs. But I still find their results odd. While I have a great deal of respect for those that took the quiz, I believe they'd do well to reconsider some of their answers.

How can you advocate less government involvement in social affairs yet demand the opposite in economic affairs? Don't they see that rights of individuals in a social context should extend to rights in economic matters? If you have a right to do what you want morally, why can't you keep the money you rightfully earn to spend it on whatever moral behaviors you prefer, as long as you don't violate the rights of others. By asking the government to provide a safety net, they most by extension force good people to fork over their rightfully earned money.

Responsibility for living belongs to the person doing the living. It requires lots of effort and thinking on our parts, but that is part of the joy of staying alive. When we fail in our efforts, we better hope we have good friends and close family that can help us back on our feet again. Given how generous most Americans are, that usually isn't an issue. Private charities have long helped sustain the down and out. Neighborhood associations used to support those unfortunate few who lost their jobs or had sudden illnesses. What happened to those associations? Starting with Roosevelt's "New Deal", the government pretended to take over. This had the sad side affect of destroying the support structure that once existed. What once was a voluntary, nice to do thing, has now become a mandatory or go to jail thing. What a perversion of justice!

If its not a disagreement with taxation per se, but businesses in general, then I highly suggest they start their own business and see exactly what it means to be stopped and regulated at every turn because some bureaucrat demands it. Businesses (which are owned by individuals trying to make money) should be given the same freedoms as individuals in general.

Is not a businessman also acting in a social context, so shouldn't he likewise be treated with the same political respect? If an entrepreneur creates a highly successful company, does he not have right to run it how he likes? Why (and how) do these guys think the government can now control and regulate the good things his company creates? If their product is dangerous, his customers will learn about it and stop buying from him. If he sells his products frauduently, then of course the business should be punished. But whatever happened to buyer-beware? I don't need a nanny state telling me what is "okay" to buy. I don't need a nanny state demanding honesty from a company I invest in. If I can't determine it on my own, I shouldn't invest in the first place.

Update to this blog