Which French Party Would You Vote For?

 

Update: My answers are now here.

Let’s take a break for a bit of mild amusement. My friend Arun has translated the questionnaire below, designed to see which French political party you should vote for, into English. As he notes:

[T]his is a multiple choice questionnaire developed six or seven years ago by former students at Sciences Po, to determine where one is situated on the French political spectrum. There are questions on twelve key issues, with some of the choices complex and only slight nuances of difference between them, so as to identify precisely which political party or current within a party—of a list of some 25—most closely articulates one’s views (and with a runner-up). So the algorithm is sophisticated. N.B. It does not speak to how one may actually vote, just which parties one is politically closest to. The test’s satisfaction level has been very high (see ‘Les taux de satisfaction’ tab), particularly for those supporting the major parties of government.

Here are the rules. You’re on the honor system:

  1. Don’t click on Arun’s site until you’ve taken the test (so you don’t prejudice yourself), and — although his comments are very interesting — don’t write anything about what he says until tomorrow, after everyone’s had the chance to take the test and come up with their own thoughts about what they think their score might mean.
  2. Take the test before reading anyone else’s comments and before seeing how everyone else did.
  3. Answer the questions, as much as possible, based on your own political principles, instead of trying to second-guess what you might think if you were French.
  4. Be honest about your results, even if they surprise you. It’s fine — encouraged, even — to speculate about why they were or weren’t what you expected, but again, take the test before reading everyone else’s results and before reading their thoughts about why they scored the way they did!
  5. Were you surprised? If so, why? Why do you think you scored the way you expected to, or why do you think you came up with a surprising result?
  6. I’ll tell you my results, why I think I got them, and what I think that means, tomorrow.

Here’s the translation from Arun’s website. (Remember, take the test first before clicking on that link. Ideally, don’t look at his site at all until after you’ve reported your results and speculated about why you scored the way you did — it’s not apt to influence you hugely, but it may prejudice you a bit. And we’ll talk about his hypotheses tomorrow, not today.) Some of the questions may have more than one answer that seems right to you; just pick the statement with which you most strongly agree.

TAXES (1 /12)

1.  There should be a tax cut for everyone when government has the means to do so and a tax increase for everyone when this is necessary.

2.  There should be an across-the-board tax cut to enable business and individuals to invest more money in the economy and in order to create more jobs.

3.  There should be a tax cut for lower-income persons and a tax increase for the rich or on business, in the interest of social solidarity and to finance public services.

GLOBALIZATION (2 / 12)

1.  Globalization should be regulated.  International institutions (or even national governments) should impose rules to better protect the rights of working people, the environment, and sensitive sectors of the economies of each country (for example, agriculture or culture).

2.  All customs barriers should be abolished, as well as subsidies and national regulations that distort competition, so that competition between firms throughout the world may take place in all areas and without impediment.  It is by these means that optimal economic efficiency will be realized and which will be in the interest of all.

3.  Globalization can be an opportunity.  It enables firms to find new markets.  Jobs that are lost due to outsourcing and plant closings are generally compensated for by those that are created elsewhere in the economy, which are higher skilled and raise living standards.  But government should help those who lose out due to globalization.

4.  Globalization of the economy aggravates the exploitation and pollution of poor countries, and brings about outsourcing and plant closings that destroy jobs in rich countries.  International institutions that are truly democratic should protect the rights of people (and not multinationals).  The profits of business that are generated by globalization should be taxed in order to help poor countries develop.

5.  Globalization is an opportunity, as the opening up of borders gives firms access to new markets and which enables them to create jobs.  “Barriers” that prevent goods and services from circulating freely should thus be brought down.  But in order for national firms to fully benefit from this, they should be freed to the utmost from regulatory constraints that place them at a disadvantage vis-à-vis foreign competitors.

POVERTY AND EXCLUSION (3 / 12)

1.  Rather than having people depend too much on public assistance (or in tempting them to profit from the system) they should be made responsible [for their own fate], so they will depend more on themselves and less on government in order to get out of the situation they find themselves in.

2.  Government should come to the aid of the poorest members of society, though they should not become too dependent on government.

3.  Government should do what is necessary so that each person receives what he or she needs to live decently.

PUBLIC SERVICES AND THE ROLE OF GOVERNMENT (4 / 12)

1.  Government should focus its efforts on the principal missions of public service and share other missions with the private sector (such as health insurance, postal service, universities…), in order to lower their cost and increase efficiency.

2.  Public sector employment should be increased and with much more money allocated to public services, so that each user, whatever his or her means, has access to quality public services (health, education, culture, water, energy, communication, public transportation…).  Public services have a social mission and must not seek to make a profit.

3.  All public services have a social mission—not to leave anyone by the wayside—that private enterprise cannot assume.  They should have sufficient means to serve the public, but government should also seek to make them more efficient.

4.  To ensure their mission but without representing too heavy a burden for government, public services should become both more efficient and less costly.  Some of them (the postal service or rail transport, for example) can be made to compete with private firms and even be partially privatized (though where government maintains majority control), which will motivate public services to improve.

5.  Government should focus only on its three veritable missions, which are the police, justice, and national defense.  All the rest can be given over to the private sector, whose methods of management are much more efficient.

BUSINESS (5 / 12)

1.  Laws benefiting working people (e.g. health care, pensions, collective bargaining, paid vacations and maternity leave) should be imposed on business, and indemnities paid to laid off employees by profitable companies should be increased.

2.  Government should give business total freedom by doing away with the various taxes and regulations that impose handicaps on their development.

3.  Priority should be given to aiding small business, by lowering their taxes and lessening regulations, and government should not interfere in labor-management relations.

4.  The profits of companies should benefit employees before they do shareholders.  Moreover, there should be a law that forbids mass layoffs by profitable companies, under penalty of being requisitioned by the state and to the benefit of the employees.

5.  The tax burden on business should be lessened and regulations reduced, so that companies will create more jobs and be more competitive.

RELIGION (6 / 12)

1.  Whether or not one is religiously observant, one must not neglect the moral values conveyed by religion.

2.  One must tolerate all types of religious practices so long as they are freely consented to, even when they may be shocking to some.

3.  Religious morality should be combated, as it prevents people from living and thinking freely.

4.  Religion may sometimes be incompatible with personal freedom but it can, at the same time, offer answers to the profound questions of human existence.

5.  The message of religion is primordial, as it helps us distinguish good from bad in our lives.

HOMOSEXUALITY (7 /12)

1.  LGBT parenting should be recognized, with gay couples enjoying the same rights as heterosexual couples, and who should be able to openly live their homosexuality as they wish.

2.  Homosexuality is dangerous for society. Anything that encourages it should be opposed.

3.  The attitude of society toward gays needs to change so as to do away with discrimination that they may be subjected to, but gay marriage should not be authorized nor should gay couples be allowed to adopt children.

4.  There should be total equality of rights for gays, who should be able to live normally, marry, and adopt and raise children.

5.  If homosexuality in itself does not pose a problem, it may do so when it is openly displayed. The traditional couple—with a father and a mother raising children—should be defended.

ABORTION (8 / 12)

1.  The right of abortion should be guaranteed but women should also be made aware that abortion is not a trivial act.

2.  Women should be able to have abortions but only in cases of rape or if their health in is danger.

3.  The right of women to freely have abortions must be defended.

4.  Abortion should be illegal. To abort an unborn child is a crime.

DRUGS (9 / 12)

1.  The legalization of cannabis would be a serious error. The use of all drugs must be opposed.

2.  Soft drugs should be legalized. The consumption of hard drugs should be decriminalized.

3.  Cannabis should be legalized, though, as with alcohol, it should be consumed only in moderation.

4.  The issue of drugs is complex; the viewpoints of specialists should be accorded particular consideration.

DELINQUENCY/CRIME (10 / 12)

1.  Each person is responsible for his or her acts and has it within his or her power to decide not to engage in delinquency. To deter people from committing delinquent acts, the punishment they risk should be truly dissuasive (i.e. sufficiently severe).

2.  Delinquency often develops in difficult contexts (unemployment, ghettos, family problems, difficulties in integrating into society…) but context does not explain everything. In order to effectively counter delinquency the right balance between dissuasive punishment and preventive measures (i.e. getting at the causes) should be sought.

3.  Delinquency is above all the result of difficult contexts (unemployment, ghettos, family problems, difficulties in integrating into society…). In order to obtain lasting results in countering delinquency, tackling its causes should be given priority.

VOTING RIGHTS AND NATIONALITY (11 / 12)

1.  All foreigners who have lived in France for a long time, regardless of where they come from, should have the right to vote at least in local elections. The acquisition of French citizenship should also be facilitated for them.

2.  Only French citizens should have the right to vote, and, except in special cases, one cannot be French without having at least one French parent. The mere fact of having been born in France should not lead to the automatic acquisition of French citizenship.

3.  Only French citizens should have the right to vote. All persons who were born in France and live here, whatever their origin, should have French citizenship.

4.  All foreigners resident in France should have the right to vote, whatever their nationality.

5.  Only French citizens should have the right to vote. The only immigrants who should be able to become French citizens are those who have demonstrated their attachment to France in making an effort to integrate, and who have applied for French citizenship on their own volition (and including children born in France to foreign non-naturalized parents).

IMMIGRATION (12 / 12)

1.  Integration works when immigrants feel that they not only have rights but also responsibilities. It is also important to fight against illegal immigration.

2.  Problems linked to immigration do not come from immigrants themselves but rather from the various contexts (economic, social, historic…) in which immigration occurs. The first order of business is to make sure the rights of immigrants are respected, whether the immigrants are legal or not.

3.  To facilitate the integration of immigrants it is necessary to fight against unemployment—which hinders their integration—and to make sure that the rights of immigrants are respected in countering discrimination of which they may be victims.

4.  In order for the integration of immigrants to succeed they must not suffer from discrimination but, at the same time, they should respect the values of the host country.

5.  Some immigrants will always remain foreigners. They should therefore return to their home countries, for our good and for theirs.

OPTIONAL QUESTION — THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR YOU IN FEELING CLOSE TO A PARTY OR POLITICAL PERSONALITY IS SHARING THE SAME CONVICTIONS ON:

1.  Economic issues.

2.  Social and moral issues.

3.  The idea one has of France, Europe, or the world.

4.  None of these in particular.

OTHER ISSUES NOT MENTIONED IN THE PRECEDING LIST:

1.  Defense of the environment, and particularly ending nuclear power.

2.  Defense of rural life.

3.  Defense of republican equality (i.e., refusing special treatment based on the specificities of regions or individuals, such as Corsica, homosexuals, those who practice such and such a religion, etc).

4.  None of these in particular.

And here’s the test itself.

Have fun! I’ll refrain from weighing except in response to specific, factual questions, or problems of translation, until tomorrow — so that I don’t prejudice anyone’s answers or thoughts about their results.

And a bonus for those of you studying French, or interested in French politics …

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 88 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    Does this settle some of your worries, Claire?

    Le Pen has dominated headlines, so Americans’ defense of her has generally involved distrust of media and an assumption that because of one or two policy stances she must be on the side of sanity. But, as this shows, the French have more options than Americans. So in France multiple parties might share a couple sane policy positions and yet only one of the parties is generally sane.

    I wasn’t entirely sure which option to choose on two or three of those questions. But we can get into the details tomorrow.

    Nah, don’t bother. I think everyone experienced that. I got the feeling that it was worded so that you had to really think sometimes about your answer, and I like the fact that I was a little stuck here and there. Unlike the “surveys” I get from the GOP, “Do you think murderers should be put in prison?”

    • #31
  2. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    It’s interesting to see how Ricochet’s conservatives/libertarians of various priorities and concerns unite not only in support of the GOP (albeit, grudgingly) but also in support of one party among a wider array of options. It’s tempting to focus on our differences, which are substantial. But we generally remain allies.

    • #32
  3. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):
    It’s interesting to see how Ricochet’s conservatives/libertarians of various priorities and concerns unite not only in support of the GOP (albeit, grudgingly) but also in support of one party among a wider array of options. It’s tempting to focus on our differences, which are substantial. But generally remain allies.

    Yes, this! I am so happy we of Ricochet can disagree (with the exception of a few Trolls who seem to only be here to disagree) and I am happy we aren’t in lock-step. The MSM made such a big deal out of the “news” that some of Trump’s appointees disagreed with him on some issues. We want that!

    I would have been upset if Trump had just picked a bunch of “yes men” for his Cabinet. I think we can all agree that he needs some folks who will get in his face and tell him that he is wrong. Of course, I want them also backing him 100% when he is right.

    • #33
  4. Dad Dog Member
    Dad Dog
    @DadDog

    My results:

    You are on the right.

    The party of which you are the nearest:

    The Republicans (liberal tendency)
        The party The Republicans supports the candidacy of François Fillon.”

    • #34
  5. Jon Gabriel, Ed. Contributor
    Jon Gabriel, Ed.
    @jon

    Weird, I got Gary Johnson.

    The actual results:

    No party exactly matches your opinions.
    However, the party you are closest to:

    The Republicans (liberal tendency)
    But you are more open about issues related to changing mores.
    The Republicans party supports the candidacy of François Fillon.

    The following party (ies):
    The Democratic Movement (MoDem) by François Bayrou
    But you do not always share the same opinions on economic or social issues or on the evolution of mores.

    Most interesting to me is how many of us Ricochetti landed on Fillon as our choice.

    • #35
  6. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Dad Dog (View Comment):
    My results:

    You are on the right.

    The party of which you are the nearest:

    The Republicans (liberal tendency)
    The party The Republicans supports the candidacy of François Fillon.”

    Well heck yeah. You’re Dad Dog, dammit!

    • #36
  7. Old Bathos Member
    Old Bathos
    @OldBathos

    I was as honest as I could be given the choices.  (I am told that most of my political views only register when examined within the spectrum between William McKinley on the left and Moses on the right.)

    I see my questionnaire-guided preferred candidate will be badly stomped and really should have dropped out.

    • #37
  8. Joe P Member
    Joe P
    @JoeP

    Question for Claire: When the quiz says “liberal”, they mean that in the traditional sense of that word, right? As in, someone who is interested in liberty. As opposed to the contemporary American meaning of left-wing quasi socialist.

    • #38
  9. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Jon Gabriel, Ed. (View Comment):
    Weird, I got Gary Johnson.

    The actual results:

    No party exactly matches your opinions.
    However, the party you are closest to:

    The Republicans (liberal tendency)
    But you are more open about issues related to changing mores.
    The Republicans party supports the candidacy of François Fillon.

    The following party (ies):
    The Democratic Movement (MoDem) by François Bayrou
    But you do not always share the same opinions on economic or social issues or on the evolution of mores.

    Most interesting to me is how many of us Ricochetti landed on Fillon as our choice.

    Well, there was nobody further to the right, so he’s the default. :-)

    • #39
  10. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    I don’t think I’m giving anything away by saying that I found this test especially interesting because on more than one question, in fact on most of them, I really agreed with more than one answer, and found it very hard to decide which statement I most agreed with. For example:

    1. Whether or not one is religiously observant, one must not neglect the moral values conveyed by religion.

    2. One must tolerate all types of religious practices so long as they are freely consented to, even when they may be shocking to some.

    3. Religious morality should be combated, as it prevents people from living and thinking freely.

    4. Religion may sometimes be incompatible with personal freedom but it can, at the same time, offer answers to the profound questions of human existence.

    5. The message of religion is primordial, as it helps us distinguish good from bad in our lives.

    I definitely don’t agree with (3) — except in the case of certain strains of Islam (not all). But (1), (4), and (5) all seem like good answers to me, and in most cases I agree with (2), especially as an American who takes religious freedom very seriously. Though we come up against some very hard cases when religious practices shock majority sensibilities or are in conflict with the law or with other religious beliefs. So I eliminated (2) as “too difficult,” and went with (1).

    I found that if I went back and changed my answer in just a few places to one that I thought was “almost as good, or maybe better,” it moved me from center-left (really!) to liberal-republican and then, the third time I tried, back to center. So … small change, big variance.

    But I think my responses are going to be different from most people’s here, because try as I might, I can’t separate “my own political principles” from “what I might think if I were French” — because by this point, I’m just too familiar with French problems not to have an opinion about them. So whereas I bet most of you would have gone with an answer other than this one, which I chose:

    3. To facilitate the integration of immigrants it is necessary to fight against unemployment—which hinders their integration—and to make sure that the rights of immigrants are respected in countering discrimination of which they may be victims.

    I chose it strongly over the others (probably pushing me toward “center” or “center-left”) because I firmly believe, after seeing it and the effects of it every day, that strict French labor laws serve to keep immigrants out of the labor market and unemployed; that this consigns them to ghettoization; and that this makes it vastly more difficult for them to integrate. I also think this is a form of discrimination, of which immigrants are very much victims — and the consequences of this have become a serious problem in France.

    If I were taking this quiz in America, though, I’d probably answer:

    4. In order for the integration of immigrants to succeed they must not suffer from discrimination but, at the same time, they should respect the values of the host country.

    I don’t think immigrants to America suffer from a want of entry-level jobs, or that the lack thereof is the source of huge social problems; and I think that statement best describes the “basic American integration compact.”

    (Also, I’m pretty sure I skewed things by giving myself the vote. Heck, I pay taxes, I’m integrated, I obey the laws, and I’m very much affected by what French politicians decide — why shouldn’t I be represented? I reckon I’m the only one here who’d let me vote, though. That pushed me to the left on one version.)

    But besides that, I’ll keep my thoughts to myself until tomorrow …

    • #40
  11. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Joe P (View Comment):
    When the quiz says “liberal”, they mean that in the traditional sense of that word, right?

    It usually means “economically liberal,” as opposed to statist. So someone who scores very high on social conservatism but is very anti-globalization or opposed to privatizing public services would probably be “right-illiberal.”

    • #41
  12. Richard Finlay Inactive
    Richard Finlay
    @RichardFinlay

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    I found that if I went back and changed my answer in just a few places to one that I thought was “almost as good, or maybe better,” it moved me from center-left (really!) to liberal-republican and then, the third time I tried, back to center. So … small change, big variance.

    I changed 9 of the 12 answers to what I thought were plausible second choices.  It barely moved me at all.
    You are on the right.

    The party of which you are the nearest:

    The Republicans (ex-UMP)
        The party The Republicans supports the candidacy of François Fillon.

    The following party (s):

    Standing France (DLF), the party of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan
    but you give much less importance to the role of the State in the economic and social field .
    Standing France supports the candidacy of Nicolas Dupont-Aignan.

    • #42
  13. Matt Y. Inactive
    Matt Y.
    @MattY

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    I don’t think I’m giving anything away by saying that I found this test especially interesting because on more than one question, in fact on most of them, I really agreed with more than one answer, and found it very hard to decide which statement I most agreed with. For example:

    I had the same problem on a lot of the questions.

    I initially went with (2) on the religion question, but seriously considered (1) and (5).

    On the immigration one, your answer is interesting because I didn’t seriously consider (3), but it makes sense the way you explain it. I rejected (2) and (5) immediately (the two extremes), but didn’t think very long about (3) either, deciding it was between (1) vs (4). I had gone with (4) on my original answer. (That’s the centrist answer though, right smack in the middle, according to the explanation of how they determined your profile – so it won’t make your profile very right-wing).

    If I go back and change these two answers, going with (5) on the religion question and (1) on immigration, that changes my result. Here is the new one.

    You are on the right.

    The

    Christian Democratic Party (ex-Forum of the Social Republicans), by Christine Boutin
    The Christian Democratic Party, which participated in the primary of the right and the center, supports the candidacy of François Fillon.

    • #43
  14. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):

    Joe P (View Comment):
    When the quiz says “liberal”, they mean that in the traditional sense of that word, right?

    It usually means “economically liberal,” as opposed to statist. So someone who scores very high on social conservatism but is very anti-globalization or opposed to privatizing public services would probably be “right-illiberal.”

    I think that still requires translation.  In the U.S. when someone says he is “socially liberal but economically conservative,” that usually means he favors cutting taxes and spending.  “Economically liberal” here means you favor tax-and-spend policies.

    Whereas I gather “economically liberal” in Europe primarily means you favor free trade, deregulation, and a generally laissez-faire economic policy.  In recent history such polices were labeled “conservative” in America, though the rise of Trump has cast some doubt over whether conservatives still favor free trade or not.

    • #44
  15. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    1. Whether or not one is religiously observant, one must not neglect the moral values conveyed by religion.

    2. One must tolerate all types of religious practices so long as they are freely consented to, even when they may be shocking to some.

    3. Religious morality should be combated, as it prevents people from living and thinking freely.

    4. Religion may sometimes be incompatible with personal freedom but it can, at the same time, offer answers to the profound questions of human existence.

    5. The message of religion is primordial, as it helps us distinguish good from bad in our lives.

    I eventually went with #5.  The word “primordial” threw me, in English for some reason I associate the word with dinosaurs.  At first I took it as an insult: religion is old-fashioned, outdated, primitive.  But I think it actually means fundamental or foundational, and in that sense I agree.

     

    • #45
  16. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):
    I don’t like any of the questions, like the questionnaires I get from conservative groups to entice me to send them a check. If I send them back it’s with heavy edits and no check, but only if its in a prepaid envelop, it’s not worth the 42 cents or what ever stamps cost now days.

    I used to do that, too. In fact, I liked to send them back when they were paying postage, so I could waste their money. I liked doing it even more with leftwing questionnaires.

    I don’t get those any more, or maybe we do get some but throw them in the trash, unopened.

    ARRP used to send self addressed pre paid envelops.  I really liked to send those back, with the material torn up.  They don’t anymore there must have been a lot of us.

    • #46
  17. Belt Inactive
    Belt
    @Belt

    Well, here’s another data point for you:

    Vous vous situez à droite.

    Le parti dont vous êtes le plus proche :

    Les Républicains (tendance libérale)
        Le parti Les Républicains soutient la candidature de François Fillon.

    Le(s) parti(s) qui vien(nen)t ensuite :

    Debout la France (DLF), le parti de Nicolas Dupont-Aignan
    mais vous accordez moins d’importance au rôle de l’Etat dans le domaine économique et social.
    Debout la France soutient la candidature de Nicolas Dupont-Aignan.

     

    My actual scores in their breakdown ended up a bit further to the right than the Republicains, and it seems economically the DLF is way off to my left.  This seems about right.  Some of the answers could have gone differently, and anyway my context is different.  But in the end, France is in a very different political space than then one I inhabit.  This exercise is amusing, but I’m wondering how you intend to get any significance out of it.

    • #47
  18. Matt Bartle Member
    Matt Bartle
    @MattBartle

    I Walton (View Comment):
    ARRP used to send self addressed pre paid envelops. I really liked to send those back, with the material torn up. They don’t anymore there must have been a lot of us.

    I’ve sent those back with an empty envelope!

    • #48
  19. MJBubba Member
    MJBubba
    @

    Vous vous situez à droite.

    Le parti dont vous êtes le plus proche :

    Les Républicains (ex-UMP)

    Le parti Les Républicains soutient la candidature de François Fillon.

     

    Le(s) parti(s) qui vien(nen)t ensuite :

    Debout la France (DLF), le parti de Nicolas Dupont-Aignan

    mais vous accordez moins d’importance au rôle de l’Etat dans le domaine économique et social.

    Debout la France soutient la candidature de Nicolas Dupont-Aignan.

    • #49
  20. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):
     

    Whereas I gather “economically liberal” in Europe primarily means you favor free trade, deregulation, and a generally laissez-faire economic policy. In recent history such polices were labeled “conservative” in America, though the rise of Trump has cast some doubt over whether conservatives still favor free trade or not.

    Yes, that’s what it means here. Sorry I was unclear. “Liberal” here never means “Left,” as it does in the US; it means classically liberal, especially in economics.

    • #50
  21. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Belt (View Comment):
    This exercise is amusing, but I’m wondering how you intend to get any significance out of it.

    Well, I don’t think there’s earthshaking significance, which is why I prefaced it with, “let’s take a break just for fun,” but I do think it helps to explain this election and the French political spectrum a little bit, as well as giving Americans a bit of a sense of what the candidates and parties stand for — which isn’t usually well-explained in the US media. And a few more points that I’ll make later today when everyone who wants to has had a chance to see where they wind up.

    • #51
  22. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    anonymous (View Comment):
    I think this is a case of a word having different nuances in the two languages.

    Yes, absolutely, thanks for the clarification. I maybe should have reviewed his translation and added a few notes.

    • #52
  23. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    anonymous (View Comment):
    The term for modern laissez-faire economics is neolibéral, which you’ll also encounter in the fever swamps of anglophone academia.

    I lean neoliberal on economics and neoconservative on foreign policy…

    • #53
  24. Claire Berlinski, Ed. Member
    Claire Berlinski, Ed.
    @Claire

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    anonymous (View Comment):
    The term for modern laissez-faire economics is neolibéral, which you’ll also encounter in the fever swamps of anglophone academia.

    I lean neoliberal on economics and neoconservative on foreign policy…

    No one’s ever been able cogently to explain to me the difference in meaning between “neoliberal” and “capitalist.” I join you in leaning neo-liberal and neo-conservative — the latter meaning, as far as I can see, “an American foreign policy traditionalist.”

    • #54
  25. Joseph Stanko Coolidge
    Joseph Stanko
    @JosephStanko

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):

    Joseph Stanko (View Comment):

    anonymous (View Comment):
    The term for modern laissez-faire economics is neolibéral, which you’ll also encounter in the fever swamps of anglophone academia.

    I lean neoliberal on economics and neoconservative on foreign policy…

    No one’s ever been able cogently to explain to me the difference in meaning between “neoliberal” and “capitalist.” I join you in leaning neo-liberal and neo-conservative — the latter meaning, as far as I can see, “an American foreign policy traditionalist.”

    Now we just need a catchy portmanteau like “conservatarian” and we can start a movement!  Neo-libercons?  Neoconeolibs?  Neo-neos?

     

    • #55
  26. JcTPatriot Member
    JcTPatriot
    @

    Matt Bartle (View Comment):

    I Walton (View Comment):
    ARRP used to send self addressed pre paid envelops. I really liked to send those back, with the material torn up. They don’t anymore there must have been a lot of us.

    I’ve sent those back with an empty envelope!

    If you mean the AARP, I refuse to give them any more of my time than it takes to rip the mail in half and drop it into the trash.

    • #56
  27. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    I am sure that, whatever the outcome of the election, Msr. Fillon is heartened by his strong support on Ricochet.

    • #57
  28. Petty Boozswha Inactive
    Petty Boozswha
    @PettyBoozswha

    Claire it’s being reported here that Rex Tillerson was sandbagged at the G-7 by Germany and Italy on Russian sanctions – do you have any observations?

    • #58
  29. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Claire Berlinski, Ed. (View Comment):
    No one’s ever been able cogently to explain to me the difference in meaning between “neoliberal” and “capitalist.” I join you in leaning neo-liberal and neo-conservative — the latter meaning, as far as I can see, “an American foreign policy traditionalist.”

    Pundits seem to invent a new ideological classification every few months. I don’t understand half the terms casually tossed around today (neocon, crunchy con, paleocon, evangelical vs social conservative, etc). Or rather I learn them and quickly forget due to lack of necessity.

    Any categorization is oppositional. Which classification one cites in a particular conversation, even to self-identify, depends on the context. When discussing automobiles, it is sometimes sufficient to merely distinguish between a car and a truck; other times sedan or coupe, Korean or American, 2003 model or 2005 model, standard or luxury, etc. Likewise, it’s sensible for one’s political views to be summarized by different measures in different conversations.

    • #59
  30. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    The answers I was least sure of were on globalization, role of government, and homosexuality.

    On globalization, I chose #2 but considered #5. I ultimately opted for #2 because it included the elimination of subsidies. However, the United States prospered for more than a century by relying on tariffs in lieu of a national income tax. While minimization of tariffs is a respectable goal, total elimination of them seems unduly extreme; unprecedented. And if we could eliminate the national income tax, we could topple the whole tyrannical mess that has accrued since the New Deal. Globalization is good but it’s the wrong focus.

    On the role of government, I chose #5 but considered #4. The original US system represents an extreme preference for liberties over securities. To push beyond the standards of early America when even Americans culturally drifted toward more common (globally) political preferences, as we changed from frontier colonies to an entrenched society, seems utopian. So I don’t believe authorities can be so neatly defined as in #5. On the other hand, #4 smacks of changes too mild and gradual to matter.

    On homosexuality, it was a toss-up between #3 and #2. There is no longer significant discrimination against gays. Arts, media, and schools have effectively normalized them. #3 hits the primary concerns of most SoCons, though it leaves aside public education and anti-discrimination laws.

    In all of these considerations, one can imagine how local context could influence one’s responses with underlying assumptions.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.