Various issues with questions

A whole lot of the questions are ambiguously worded, incorrectly valued, or just plain silly. No offense.

I also have a problem with your 'tradition' bar in general. Generally, the political spectrum is 'change' versus 'stability'. However, you make it out to be 'science and climate change' versus 'religion and morals'. You also conflate 'Christian traditions' with the general concept of traditionalism, and progress in a particular direction with the general concept of progressivism. This doesn't do the political spectrum justice at all. I won't accuse you of agenda pushing, but it's definitely a bias showing. Figured I'd say it up here to point out the pattern. I'll still mention it down below.

There's also the fact that nearly every question is a 10 to something. I'll point out the most obvious examples of this, but in general this really needs a rework to determine which answers split farther down the scale than others.

Anyway, on with the questions.

"It is necessary for the government to intervene in the economy to protect consumers." Which level of intervention? Which level of protection? The question will get different answers depending on the interpretation. "Publicly-funded research is more beneficial to the people than leaving it to the market." This is not a tradition vs progress question. It's not even directly a progress question. By making it increase towards 'progress', and having the question itself ask which one results in more progress, you insinuate that public funding is the 'correct' answer. "International trade is beneficial." Nobody would possibly argue that the USA should produce all the products it would ever need on its own. I think a better question would be 'Tariffs on international trade are important to encourage local production', with inverted values, because you'd get much more of a split there. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs." Again, not really a progress vs tradition question. "It would be best if social programs were abolished in favor of private charity." Same complaint as above, and this isn't a question likely to have a high split (whereas asking which of the two things you would prefer to err on the side of would produce a better one). "Public utilities like roads and electricity should be publicly owned." That is more or less the definition of a public utility. I would replace 'public' with 'basic'. I'd also increase the point value or knock off roads, because public ownership of roads splits farther to the right than public ownership of electricity. "Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy." I guarantee you very very few people have ever answered 'disagree'. Where political views really split is not whether excessive government intervention is a threat, but what level of government intervention constitutes 'excessive'. "Quality education is a right of all people." Not a progress vs tradition question. Not even by the strange scale you used. "The means of production should belong to the workers who use them." I would increase the point value for this, since it splits farther to the left than the other economic questions. "The United Nations should be abolished." This isn't really a civil rights question, since it's about authorities governing other authorities rather than authorities controlling humans. The UN doesn't have any say in my day to day life. And I'd increase the point value slightly. "Military action by our nation is often necessary to protect it." Similar issue. That is definitely not a +10 to authoritarianism. We're not controlling other countries for the sake of power, we're trying to protect our own interests. It's definitely militant over pacifist, but it's not authoritarian over libertarian. It may be what the words mean, but it's not what the scales mean. "I support regional unions, such as the European Union." Not a progress question. Iffy on whether it's an economic question. "It is important to maintain our national sovereignty." This one's going the wrong way. It should be a +5 instead of a -5 (liberty of nations vs authority of other bodies). "A united world government would be beneficial to mankind." This should probably have increased points since it splits farther to the left. "Wars do not need to be justified to other countries." I don't know whether this should be a couple of points in the positive or not, but it certainly isn't authoritarian, for the same reason as the 'military action' question. "Military spending is a waste of money." And again here. I'm also curious why this isn't econ+5. "My nation is great." This is one of the aforementioned 'silly' ones. I like the country I live in. That does not affect whether I support international unions or accountability. It just means I don't think my country sucks. "Research should be conducted on an international scale." Not a progress vs tradition question. And I'd cut that point value in half, as that splits closer to the center. "Even when protesting an authoritarian government, violence is not acceptable." This doesn't really fit across either of the axes you put it on. It's not related to nationalism vs internationalism, and libertarianism doesn't make violence acceptable. If anything, this would be the first one I'd actually put on the progressivism axis, since it's directly 'change vs security'. "Our nation's values should be spread as much as possible." Not really a libertarianism question. Or if so, then probably -5 instead of -10. The implication in this one that's different from the religion one is that in the religion one, it's a value that you hold, vs in this one, it's a value that the whole nation holds. "It is very important to maintain law and order." Without context (like, as opposed to?), this doesn't fit on any axis, especially not nationalism vs internationalism. "The sacrifice of some civil liberties is necessary to protect us from acts of terrorism." Which ones? This has no context. This is less egregious than the 'excessive government intervention' thing, but the same concept. "Government surveillance is necessary in the modern world." To which level? "The very existence of the state is a threat to our liberty." The only way this would be a relevant question to any of them is if you defined anarchy as the farthest reach of libertarianism, in which case that point value should be seriously increased. "Regardless of political opinions, it is important to side with your country." This is nationalism, but it isn't nationalism at the expense of internationalism. And it's also not progressivism - the idea is that you put aside your values for your country, whether they be traditionalism or progressivism. "A hierarchical state is best." As opposed to what? I think this is actually less authoritarian, since it's different levels of delegation instead of one big ruling body. "The stronger the leadership, the better." This is not nationalism vs internationalism. Unless you were talking about international unions, in which case the point value would be in the other direction. "Democracy is more than a decision-making process." This is incredibly vague; certainly not worth ten points for libertarianism. "Environmental regulations are essential." Context of extent is missing, and it's not progressivism. Climate science is not politics. "A better world will come from automation, science, and technology." There is no way this is +10 for progressivism. The alternative is the Amish. The split is way farther to the right than 10 points. "Children should be educated in religious or traditional values." Not 10 authoritarianism. More like 5. There is not a difference in the level of government intervention in schools in these sides. "Traditions are of no value on their own." Vague, and not worth 10. Generally traditionalism is done for an actual purpose, even if the purpose is simply the morals the traditions teach you. "Churches should be taxed the same way other institutions are taxed." This isn't the socialist end. Churches, as nonprofits and seriously altruistic ones at that, should not be taxed if you're redistributing money based on need. Taxing them would actually be more towards the capitalist end. "Climate change is currently one of the greatest threats to our way of life." Climate science is not politics. Interpretation of a nonpolitical threat to our way of life as being more or less important than others is extremely not politics. "It is important that we work as a united world to combat climate change." Climate science is not politics. And if it were, then it wouldn't really affect your views on internationalism, since what everyone else does affects you, so it'd generally be something you'd put aside your differences for. "Society was better many years ago than it is now." This doesn't relate to traditionalism. It can, but it's more about whether it's change in the wrong direction than whether it's change at all. "It is important that we maintain the traditions of our past." Which ones are those? In which context? Stuff like Thanksgiving or Christmas splits in a completely different place than stuff like religious ceremonies. "It is important that we think in the long term, beyond our lifespans." That's not progressivism. Progressivism is about making change and traditionialism/conservatism is about not making change; whether you flex towards recognizing the eventual outcome of your decisions is beside the point. "Reason is more important than maintaining our culture." Not worth 10 IMO. Phrased like that, few would disagree - just like with 'excessive', the definition of reasonable is what counts here, not the importance of reason vs culture. "Drug use should be legalized or decriminalized." You already asked that, so it effectively becomes +20 for libertarianism instead of the sensible +10. "Same-sex marriage should be legal." This entirely depends on whether this is interpreted to mean governmental pairing for purposes of tax and representation or to mean the cultural ceremony of wedding. "No cultures are superior to others." This isn't a libertarianism question. No part of this implies requirement. "If we accept migrants at all, it is important that they assimilate into our culture." Not authoritarian. The government isn't getting involved in the assimilation. "Abortion should be prohibited in most or all cases." To the untrained eye, this may seem like a libertarianism question. However, it's important to remember that the other side comes not from a position of control, but simply a religious belief that life begins at conception. The point of libertarianism which would allow human murder wouldn't be even on this graph; the argument is simply whether a fetus constitutes a human. "Gun ownership should be prohibited for those without a valid reason." This has nothing to do with internationalism vs nationalism. "Governments should be as concerned about foreign citizens as they are about those within their borders." This certainly isn't a capitalism vs socialism question, and I'd say the point value on internationalism should be higher because the entire point of paying for a government is generally considered to be for it to look out for you. "All people - regardless of factors like culture or sexuality - should be treated equally." That's not progressivism, that's not socialism, that's only barely libertarianism, and that's just slightly more internationalism than it is libertarianism. "It is important that we further my group's goals above all others." That's not capitalism, that's not nationalism, that's not traditionalism, and I'd question the point value of the authoritarianism simply because the question doesn't say whether it's important to you or important to your country or important to all of humanity.

All in all, I would say that this was definitely written by someone with a socialist, internationalist, progressivist bias. It often fails to represent the other side accurately, and the point values don't reflect the actual political values. It's a great concept and the website was clearly designed well, but the questions definitely need more research and thought put into them.

I agree with a lot of the issues raised here, and some are already under consideration. I think I'll probably group some of these changes into several pull requests to fix different kinds of issue.

I do want to address each of these individually, so I'll start with the ones I definitely agree need changing.

Questions that definitely need changing

International trade is beneficial

This question certainly needs rephrasing, and I really like your suggestion about changing the question to one about tariffs and swapping the values.

From each according to his ability, to each according to his need

Yeah, I'm not sure why this is a progress question.

It would be best if social programs were abolished

Likewise for this one.

Public utilities should be publicly owned

This should definitely be changed to 'Basic utilities'.

Excessive government intervention is a threat to the economy

I agree the word 'excessive' is unhelpful here. The question would almost certainly be improved if it was simply rephrased to 'Government intervention is a threat to the economy.'

Quality education is a right of all people

This is probably not a progress question. At least, not since a few decades ago.

I support regional unions, such as the European Union

Fully agreed.

My nation is great

So this one is already under consideration, it's quite vague and so it will probably be rephrased along the lines of 'My nation is great no matter what it does' to reframe it specifically as a question of nationalism.

Our nation's values should be spread as much as possible

I think this one ought to be reduced to a -5 like you suggest.

Government surveillance is necessary in the modern world

I think some clarification would be useful here. It might even be worth splitting it into a couple of different questions to test different levels, although the current scoring system doesn't really lend itself well to that.

Democracy is more than a decision-making process

This question is vague and confusing, and definitely needs an overhaul.

Children should be educated in religious or traditional values

Definitely a good suggestion to reduce this one to -5 on the civil axis.

Reason is more important than maintaining our culture

This one definitely needs to be rephrased to get a more even 50/50 split. Maybe it could be rephrased to 'Progress is more important than maintaining our culture'? Needs some thought.

Drug use should be legalized or decriminalized.

This is a duplicate of 33! I'm surprised I hadn't noticed that before. Maybe it would help just to remove the '(such as drug use)' from Q33 and it would be 'Victimless crimes should not be crimes at all'. It might still need another example to specify though.

Same-sex marriage should be legal

At the moment, this does seem to depend on the interpretation. If rephrased to 'Same sex marriage should not be illegal', that might remove some of the ambiguity (this is definitely about the cultural side).

Gun ownership should be prohibited for those without a valid reason.

I agree, not sure why this is about nationalism.

Governments should be as concerned about foreign citizens as they are about those within their borders

Yep, this is not a socialism/capitalism question.

Questions which might need changing

These are the ones I'm less sure about. In some cases, I agree something's wrong but I'm not sure how to change it, in others I'm so-so on whether the question or its point values are wrong.

It is necessary for the government to intervene in the economy to protect consumers

So this one is fairly vague, and I think the solution to this was suggested in #80, to change it to be a question specifically about consumer protection laws.

Publicly-funded research is more beneficial to the people than leaving it to the markets

In response to the comment made about mutual exclusivity, I think that the scale of answers does allow for some nuance. For instance, someone who believes in a system of research with both public and market funding would probably choose 'Neutral' or 'Agree'. In response to the point about the progress axis, I agree that this question shouldn't affect that axis (and certainly not by +10).

The United Nations should be abolished

There's an argument both ways regarding this. While the UN doesn't necessarily have a say in your daily life directly, it certainly has the potential to. One of the UN's primary stated functions is to prevent human rights abuses, so one can definitely make the argument that support for the abolition of the UN is (even if only slightly) on the authoritarian side. That's a fairly tenuous link, so there is definitely discussion to be had as to whether the question warrants -5 on the civil axis.

Military action by our nation is often necessary to protect it

I can see why this might not be really a -10 for authoritarian, but it's worth noting that support for a strong military is certainly linked to the Authority value of the test. Maybe reducing it to a -5 would be helpful though.

Research should be conducted on an international scale

I agree this is not necessarily a progress question. Not sure about cutting the point value for the nationalism axis though, since selecting "Disagree" or "Strongly Disagree" has the same effect as "Agree" or "Strongly Agree" only negative. This is perhaps a flaw in the points system (not accounting for an uneven split) but that's less an issue with the questions and more with the system as a whole. Maybe something to fix for v2 if it ever happens.

It is very important to maintain law and order

I think the 'as opposed to' you're looking for here is maintaining civil liberties. In other words, this question is (implicitly) asking whether law and order is ever more important than civil liberties or personal freedoms, or to what extent one can be valued over the other. With that interpretation it's perhaps easier to see the link to the nationalism axis, but I do agree it's not a strong enough link to be worth 5 points.

The sacrifice of some civil liberties is necessary to protect us from acts of terrorism

The lack of context here is intentional - this question is less about one's willingness to sacrifice particular liberties (some are more important to certain people than others) but rather to assess whether security and safety are valued over freedom in a more abstract sense. For most people (at least in the US and Europe) the context comes from whichever acts of terrorism are closest to home, and whichever civil liberties have been sacrificed in the aftermath.

Regardless of political opinions, it is important to side with your country

This question's link to progressivism is fairly tenuous. Still, unquestioning allegiance to your nation regardless of political opinions can come from a place of tradition and resistance to change (respect for your country as a historical and cultural entity rather than for its values etc.). So I think the 5 points is just about warranted here.

The stronger the leadership, the better

I think this question can be interpreted two ways: it can mean authoritative leadership (civil axis) or one with a more bullish diplomatic style (nation axis). The two are strongly connected, so although this might introduce some ambiguity into the question, I can understand why it affects both these axes.

It is important that we think in the long term, beyond our lifespans

Phrased as it currently is, you're right that this question doesn't really match progressivism. I think though that it can if rephrased a little, maybe to something about embracing long-term changes.

No cultures are superior to others

I'm inclined to disagree on this point (although I see where you're coming from). The prescence of social hierarchies as implied by this question's sentiment, were someone to disagree, does necessitate a difference in social power - in other words, those of the ostensibly "superior" culture wielding power over the "inferior". That's why this question has a +5 on the civil axis, but the connection is certainly not strong enough for a +10.

Abortion should be prohibited in most or all cases

This is a tricky question to represent on these axes (given the inherently controversial nature of this issue), and I think it falls victim to one of the problems with the scoring system of the quiz as a whole. Answers on the side of 'Disagree' probably correspond with a positive change in the libertarian axis, but the reverse is not necessarily true; answering 'Agree' should not necessarily increase authoritarianism for the reasons you mention. Until the fundamental scoring system is changed, I think the best solution for now is perhaps just to reduce the civil points score to 5.

All people - regardless of factors like culture or sexuality - should be treated equally

So this question is perhaps a little misleading in the examples it gives: culture and sexuality. Really it's only about assessing belief in equality. Now that's an ambiguous term, and intentionally so; it could refer to equality of class (towards the socialist side on economic), equality of race or nationality (diplomatic axis), equality of power (civil axis) or equality of religion and sexuality (social axis). So while there are definitely issues with the way the question is worded, the values assigned to it aren't particularly askew.

It is important that we further my group's goals above all others

So this one I definitely agree the word "group" is a bit vague. In a way this is intentional, since this question is intended as the reverse of the previous one. The interpretation of group can economic class (econ axis), national identity (diplomatic axis), social class (civil axis) or religious group (social axis). So this question sort of suffers from the same issues as the previous question, and probably needs rephrasing, but I don't think the values are significantly off.

Questions I don't think need changing

The means of production should belong to the workers who use them

So in terms of the question split, unfortunately the current scoring system doesn't really take it into account (since disagree has an equal and opposite effect to agree). Maybe with v2 that can be changed, but increasing the point value for 'Agree' will also increase point value for 'Disagree'.

It is important to maintain our national sovereignty

The point values are correct here, since the civil axis refers to individual liberties. In the case of this question, the concept of "national sovereignty" refers to a lack of influence from other powers such as the EU or UN, which act as a bureaucratic hold on authoritarian policy changes.

A united world government would be beneficial to mankind

See question 15.

Wars do not need to be justified to other countries

Like with the 'military action' question, I can see why this might not be necessarily a -10 for authoritarian, but again support for a strong military is certainly linked to the Authority value of the test.

Military spending is a waste of money

Ditto.

Even when protesting an authoritarian government, violence is not acceptable

It is not so much that libertarianism makes violence acceptable, however the libertarian stance here would likely be that the power of any authoritarian government derives from its monopoly on violence, which is no more acceptable than any violence committed in protest against it. In terms of its influence on the diplomatic axis, the reason it's a 5 away from nationalism is the tendency towards a pacifist viewpoint rather than a hawkish one.

The every existence of the state is a threat to our liberty

See question 15 for why a point value increase wouldn't really help here.

A hierarchical state is best

I think you've misunderstood this one a little. It is testing one's belief in a hierarchical system of government versus a more horizontal or decentralised system. An authoritarian system with one big ruling body is still a hierarchical state, since it splits into those with power (part of the big ruling body) and those without. So this question refers more to hierarchical systems of power and governance.

Environmental regulations are essential

I wish climate science were not a political issue, but it has certainly become a polarising one in today's political climate (no pun intended), and the axis along which it polarises is necessarily the progress/traditionalism axis. Environmental regulations which would affect way of life are just the kinds of changes which this axis is designed to test resistance to.

A better world will come from automation, science, and technology

It's not necessarily true that the alternative is the Amish. I for one know plenty of people (albeit mostly in the boomer or silent generation) who are of the opinion that automation and technology are damaging our society.

Traditions are of no value on their own

Again, there are plenty of traditions (and many people who believe it is important to continue those traditions) for no particular reason other than their nature as traditions, or their history within a family or religious group. This is often framed as respect for one's history, and I believe that viewpoint is what the question refers to.

Churches should be taxed the same way other institutions are taxed

This is testing a couple of different views here (hence why it affects both the economic and social axes). It tests whether one considers churches' charitable contributions to be more valuable than the same monetary contributions being made on a government level via taxation. In other words, it tests government programs vs private charity (toward the socialist end for the former) and also trust in religious institutions (for the social axis).

Climate change is currently one of the greatest threats to our way of life

See question 43.

It is important that we work as a united world to combat climate change.

Ditto.

Society was better many years ago than it is now

This is more of an abstract question than a concrete one. Agreeing with its sentiment indicates support for the status quo or status quo ante, and so swings towards the traditionalist side.

It is important that we maintain the traditions of our past

Again, more of an abstract question about traditions in general. Also see question 15 for why the split doesn't really influence the scoring under the current system.

If we accept migrants at all, it is important that they assimilate into our culture

While the government might not be involved in the assimilation, it is likely that they would be involved with the consequences for not assimilating.

Overall thoughts

This is a really excellent set of ideas and issues with the questions. For the first group (which definitely need changing) I will group them and start making changes to fix the issues. As to the ones I'm not sure about, I'll leave the issue open for further discussion and probably make some more commits for smaller improvements based on those issues.

8values / 8values.github.io