Political Quiz List. Are you a Quiz Whiz?

[Donerail]

You are Justice David Souter
You agreed with Souter 84% of the time.

Appointed to the Court by Republican President George H. W. Bush, he usually votes with the more liberal wing on the Roberts court.

At the time of Souter's appointment, John Sununu assured President Bush and conservatives that Souter would be a "home run" for conservatism.  In his testimony before the Senate, Souter espoused the concepts of originalism and was thus thought by conservatives to be a strict constructionist on Constitutional matters.  However, as a state's attorney and state Supreme Court judge, he had never been tested on matters of federal law.Initially, from 1990 to 1993, Souter tended to be a conservative-leaning Justice, although not as conservative as Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, or William Rehnquist.  In Souter's first year, Souter and Scalia voted alike close to 85 percent of the time; Souter voted with Kennedy and O'Connor about 97 percent of the time. The symbolic turning point came in two cases in 1992, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, in which the Court reaffirmed the essential holding in Roe v. Wade, and Lee v. Weisman, in which Souter voted against allowing prayer at a high school graduation ceremony.

In Planned Parenthood v. Casey, Anthony Kennedy considered overturning Roe and upholding all the restrictions at issue in Casey. Souter considered upholding all the restrictions but still was uneasy about overturning Roe. After consulting with O'Connor, however, the three (who came to be known as the "troika") developed a joint opinion that upheld all the restrictions in the Casey case except for the mandatory notification of a husband while asserting the essential holding of Roe, that a right to an abortion is protected by the Constitution. Casey was decided by a 5 to 4 vote.

After the appointment of Clarence Thomas, Souter moved to the middle of the idealogical spectrum.  By the late 1990s, Souter began to align himself more with Stephen Breyer and Ruth Bader Ginsburg on rulings, although as of 1995, he sided on more occasions with the most liberal justice, John Paul Stevens, than either Breyer and Ginsburg.  On abortion, Souter began to vote to override restrictions he believed in back in 1992. On death penalty cases, worker rights cases, criminal rights cases, and other issues, Souter began voting with the liberals in the court. So while appointed by a Republican president and thus expected to be conservative, Souter is now considered part of the liberal wing of the Court.

According to The New York Times, Souter has "put himself in the camp of jurists who view the Constitution as a flexible set of principles that can evolve."  However, Souter often employs originalist analysis in his opinions; though he often reaches very different conclusions than the Court's conservative wing.

[Miles]

Yikes, 'sorry I took this quiz!


You agreed with Alito 57% of the time.

You are Justice Samuel Alito



Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. (born April 1, 1950) is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States. Appointed by President George W. Bush, Alito is generally considered a fairly conservative jurist with a libertarian streak (especially on First Amendment issues).  Educated at Princeton University and Yale Law School, Alito served as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey and a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit prior to joining the Supreme Court. He is the 110th justice.


Justice Alito delivered his first written opinion on May 1, 2006 in the case Holmes v. South Carolina, a case involving the right of criminal defendants to present evidence that a third-party committed the crime. (Since the beginning of the Rehnquist Court, new justices have been given unanimous opinions to write as their first majority court opinion, often done as a courtesy "breaking in" of new justices, so that every justice has at least one unanimous, uncontroversial opinion under his/her belt with which to battle critics). Alito wrote for a unanimous court in ordering a new trial for Bobby Lee Holmes due to South Carolina's rule that barred such evidence based on the strength of the prosecution's case, rather than on the relevance and strength of the defense evidence itself.


In his first term, Alito voted fairly conservatively. For example, in the three reargued cases (Garcetti v. Ceballos, Hudson v. Michigan and Kansas v. Marsh), Alito created a 5-4 majority by voting with four other conservative Justices — Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas. He further voted with the conservative wing of the court on Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon and Rapanos v. United States. Alito was also a dissenter in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, alongside Justices Scalia and Thomas.While Alito's voting record is conservative, he does not always join the most conservative Justices on the Court. On February 1, 2006, in Alito's first decision sitting on the Supreme Court, he voted with the majority (6-3) to refuse Missouri's request to vacate the stay of execution issued by the Eighth Circuit for death-row inmate Michael Taylor; Chief Justice Roberts and Justices Scalia and Thomas were in favor of vacating the stay. Missouri had twice asked the justices to lift the stay and permit the execution.

 

On the abortion issue, it appears that Alito believes some restrictions on the procedure are constitutionally permitted, but has not signaled a willingness to overturn Roe v. Wade.  In 2003, Congress passed the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act, which led to a lawsuit in the case of Gonzales v. Carhart. The Court had previously ruled in Stenberg v. Carhart that a state's ban on partial birth abortion was unconstitutional because such a ban did not have an exception in the case of a threat to the health of the mother. The membership of the Court changed after Stenberg, with John Roberts and Samuel Alito replacing William Rehnquist (a dissenter in Roe) and Sandra Day O'Connor (a supporter of Roe) respectively. Further, the ban at issue in Gonzales v. Carhart was a federal statute, rather than a state statute as in the Stenberg case.  On April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court handed down a decision upholding the constitutionality of the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act. Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote for the five-justice majority that Congress was within its power to generally ban the procedure, although the Court left the door open for as-applied challenges. Kennedy's opinion implied but did not absolutely reach the question whether the Court's prior decisions in Roe v. Wade, Planned Parenthood v. Casey, and Stenberg v. Carhart were valid, and instead the Court said that the challenged statute is consistent with those prior decisions whether or not those prior decisions were valid.  Alito joined fully in the majority as did Chief Justice Roberts. Justice Thomas filed a concurring opinion, joined by Justice Scalia


Moreover, despite having been at one time nicknamed "Scalito," Alito's views have differed from those of Scalia (and Thomas), as in the Michael Taylor case cited above and various other cases of the 2005 term. Scalia, a fierce critic of reliance on legislative history in statutory interpretation, was the only member of the Court in Zedner v. United States not to join a section of Alito's opinion that discussed the legislative history of the statute in question. In two higher-profile cases, involving the constitutionality of political gerrymandering and campaign finance reform (LULAC v. Perry and Randall v. Sorrell), Alito adopted narrow positions, declining to join the bolder positions advanced by either philosophical side of the Court. According to a scotusblog.com analysis of 2005 term decisions, Alito and Scalia concurred in the result of 86% of decisions (in which both participated), and concurred in full in only 75%. (By scotusblog.com's reckoning, this is less agreement than between Scalia and Kennedy, O'Connor and Souter, or Stevens and Ginsburg.) On the recent abortion ruling, Alito simply joined Anthony Kennedy's opinion rather than join Scalia in Thomas's stronger assertion.In the 2007 landmark free speech case Morse v. Frederick, Alito joined Roberts' majority decision that speech advocating drug use can be banned in public schools, but also warned that the ruling must be circumscribed that it does not interfere with political speech, such as the discussion of the medical marijuana debate.Alito's majority opinion in the 2008 worker protection case Gomez-Perez v. Potter cleared the way for federal workers who experience retaliation after filing age discrimination complaints to sue for damages. He sided with the liberal block of the court, inferring protection against retaliation in the federal-sector provision of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act despite the lack of an explicit provision concerning retaliation.

[TNF]

David Souter - 88% of the time

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

You are Justice Anthony Kennedy

Anthony McLeod Kennedy (born July 23, 1936) has been an Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court since 1988. Appointed by Republican President Ronald Reagan, he acts as the Court's swing vote on social issues and has consequently wields considerable power on today's Supreme Court. 

Appointed by a Republican president, Kennedy’s tenure on the Court has seen him take a somewhat mixed ideological path; he usually takes a conservative viewpoint, but sometimes has looked at cases individually.  Kennedy supports a broad reading of the "liberty" protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which means he supports a constitutional right to abortion in principle, though he has voted to uphold several restrictions on that right, including laws to prohibit partial-birth abortions. He is "tough on crime" and opposes creating constitutional restrictions on the police, especially in Fourth Amendment cases involving searches for illegal drugs, although there are some exceptions, such as his concurrence in Ferguson v. City of Charleston. He opposes affirmative action as promoting stereotypes of minorities.  He also takes a very broad view of constitutional protection for speech under the First Amendment, invalidating a congressional law prohibiting "virtual" child pornography in the 2002 decision, Ashcroft v. ACLU.
 
According to legal writer Jeffrey Toobin, starting in 2003, Kennedy also became a leading proponent of the use of foreign and international law as an aid to interpreting the United States Constitution. Toobin sees this consideration of foreign law as the biggest factor behind Kennedy's occasional breaking with his most conservative colleagues. In these instances Kennedy attracts the ire of conservatives.  According to Toobin, conservatives view Kennedy's pro-gay-rights and pro-abortion rulings as betrayals. In the wake of 1996's Romer v. Evans, Ramesh Ponnoru wrote in the National Review that Kennedy "is commonly acknowledged as the dimmest of the Court's intellectual lights"; in 2005, associate professor of law David M. Wagner called Kennedy "The worst of Ronald Reagan's appointees to the Court", and claimed he abandoned his conservative principles beginning in the 1990s in order to gain "the plaudits of the media and the Georgetown A-list."  After 2008's Kennedy v. Louisiana, Rich Lowry called Kennedy the Supreme Court's "worst justice" and said that Kennedy's opinions "have nothing whatsoever to do with the Constitution", and amount to "making it up as he goes along."

[Maxwell]

http://anesi.com/fscale.htm

Your F Score is: 2.2

You are a liberal airhead.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

http://www.helloquizzy.com/results/which-supreme-court-justice-are-you-test/?fromCGI=1&var_Breyer=-2&var_Souter=7&var_Roberts=-1&var_Stevens=7&var_Alito=0&var_Ginsburg=6&var_Thomas=-3&var_Scalia=-6&var_Kennedy=5

John Paul Stevens (64%)

[Redalgo]

Stephen Gerald Breyer (born August 15, 1938) is . . . known for his pragmatic approach to constitutional law, Breyer is generally associated with the more liberal side of the Court. . .

. . . Breyer rejects the strict interpretation of the Sixth Amendment espoused by Justice Scalia that all facts necessary to criminal punishment must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt. In many other areas on the Court, too, Breyer's pragmatism is considered the intellectual counterweight to Scalia's textualist philosophy. In describing his interpretive philosophy, Breyer has sometimes noted his use of six interpretive tools: text, history, tradition, precedent, the purpose of a statute, and the consequences of competing interpretations. Breyer notes that only the latter two differentiate him from strict constructionists on the Supreme Court such as Scalia. Breyer argues that these sources are necessary, however, and in the former case (purpose, or legislative intent), can in fact provide greater objectivity in legal interpretation than looking merely to what can often be ambiguous statutory text. With the latter (consequences), Breyer argues that considering the impact of legal interpretations is a further way of ensuring consistency with a law's intended purpose.

54% - Breyer
50% - Scalia
48% - Souter
48% - Stevens
48% - Thomas
46% - Ginsburg
43% - Alito
40% - Roberts
36% - Kennedy

Three things to bear in mind: (1.) I am not well-versed in the field of law, (2.) I answered as I thought the Constitution dictated rather than how I would answer for a constitution of my design, (3.) I snipped out the parts of Breyer's result text that do not apply to my outlook.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

. . . Breyer rejects the strict interpretation of the Sixth Amendment espoused by Justice Scalia that all facts necessary to criminal punishment must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

What's the alternative?

[TJ in Oregon]

87% - Roberts
86% - Alito
83% - Thomas
81% - Scalia
68% - Kennedy
42% - Breyer
32% - Stevens
25% - Ginsburg
24% - Souter

[FEMA Camp Administrator]

3.1. You are disciplined, but tolerant. A true American.

[Modernity has failed us]

Supreme Court Justice test:

Stephens - 68%
Souter - 68%
Ginsburg - 67%
Breyer - 67%
Kennedy - 56%
Alito - 36%
Roberts - 33%
Scalia - 31%
Thomas - 30%

[Goldwater]

What ideology do you agree with the most?

1. Neolibertarianism (100%)
2. Classical liberalism (98%)
3. Liberal conservatism (92%)
4. Libertarianism (92%)
5. Anarcho-capitalism (84%)
6. Christian democracy (72%)
7. Social liberalism (63%)
8. Paleoconservatism (59%)
9. Neoconservatism (56%)
10. Social democracy (52%)
11. International communism (47%)
12. Green anarchism (44%)
13. Democratic socialism (43%)
14. Eco-socialism (43%)
15. Anarcho-socialism (42%)
16. Conservative social democracy (39%)
17. Fascism (37%)
18. National communism (34%)
19. Religious anarchism (23%)
20. Theocratic Socialism (23%)

[TNF]

1. Democratic Socialism (100%)
2. Eco-socialism (98%)
3. International communism (98%)
4. Anarcho-socialism (83%)
5. Green anarchism (83%)
6. National communism (67%)
7. Social democracy (66%)
8. Social liberalism (59%)
9. Classical liberalism (58%)
10. Libertarianism (56%)
11. Theocratic socialism (54%)
12. Anarcho-capitalism (53%)
13. Neolibertarianism (53%)
14. Fascism (50%)
15. Religious anarchism (50%)
16. Conservative social democracy (41%)
17. Christian democracy (38%)
18. Paleoconservatism (27%)
19. Liberal conservatism (25%)
20. Neoconservatism (20%)

[Donerail]

1. Classical Liberalism (100%)
2. Social liberalism (87%)
3. Neolibertarianism (83%)
4. Libertarianism (79%)
5. Social democracy (77%)
6. Christian democracy (73%)
7. Anarcho-capitalism (66%)
8. Green anarchism (62%)
9. International communism (62%)
10. Eco-socialism (59%)
11. Democratic socialism (58%)
12. Liberal conservative (58%)
13. Anarcho-socialism (54%)
14. Conservative social democracy (41%)
15. Religious anarchism (40%)
16. Neoconservatism (38%)
17. Paleoconservatism (36%)
18. Fascism (34%)
19. National communism (27%)
20. Theocratic Socialism (19%)

[TNF]

1. Classical Liberalism (100%)
2. Social liberalism (87%)
3. Neolibertarianism (83%)
4. Libertarianism (79%)
5. Social democracy (77%)
6. Christian democracy (73%)
7. Anarcho-capitalism (66%)
8. Green anarchism (62%)
9. International communism (62%)
10. Eco-socialism (59%)
11. Democratic socialism (58%)
12. Liberal conservative (58%)
13. Anarcho-socialism (54%)
14. Conservative social democracy (41%)
15. Religious anarchism (40%)
16. Neoconservatism (38%)
17. Paleoconservatism (36%)
18. Fascism (34%)
19. National communism (27%)
20. Theocratic Socialism (19%)

Neolibertarianism are libertarians with neoconservative foreign policy views.

[Donerail]

1. Classical Liberalism (100%)
2. Social liberalism (87%)
3. Neolibertarianism (83%)
4. Libertarianism (79%)
5. Social democracy (77%)
6. Christian democracy (73%)
7. Anarcho-capitalism (66%)
8. Green anarchism (62%)
9. International communism (62%)
10. Eco-socialism (59%)
11. Democratic socialism (58%)
12. Liberal conservative (58%)
13. Anarcho-socialism (54%)
14. Conservative social democracy (41%)
15. Religious anarchism (40%)
16. Neoconservatism (38%)
17. Paleoconservatism (36%)
18. Fascism (34%)
19. National communism (27%)
20. Theocratic Socialism (19%)

Neolibertarianism are libertarians with neoconservative foreign policy views.

Yeah, I know what they are, my question is why I got them so high/even above libertarian.

[TNF]

1. Classical Liberalism (100%)
2. Social liberalism (87%)
3. Neolibertarianism (83%)
4. Libertarianism (79%)
5. Social democracy (77%)
6. Christian democracy (73%)
7. Anarcho-capitalism (66%)
8. Green anarchism (62%)
9. International communism (62%)
10. Eco-socialism (59%)
11. Democratic socialism (58%)
12. Liberal conservative (58%)
13. Anarcho-socialism (54%)
14. Conservative social democracy (41%)
15. Religious anarchism (40%)
16. Neoconservatism (38%)
17. Paleoconservatism (36%)
18. Fascism (34%)
19. National communism (27%)
20. Theocratic Socialism (19%)

Neolibertarianism are libertarians with neoconservative foreign policy views.

Yeah, I know what they are, my question is why I got them so high.

My guess is because this quiz is s**t. I got fascism and libertarianism both over 50%.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Social liberalism (100%)
Classical liberalism (95%)
Social democracy (95%)
Christian democracy (81%)
Eco-socialism (81%)
Green anarchism (81%)
International communism (81%)
Democratic socialism (80%)
Anarcho-socialism (71%)
Neolibertarianism (71%)
Libertarianism (66%)
Conservative social democracy (60%)
Liberal conservatism (51%)             
Religious anarchism (51%)             
Fascism (48%)             
National communism (46%)             
Anarcho-capitalism (45%)             
Theocratic Socialism (43%)             
Neoconservatism (40%)             
Paleoconservatism (31%)

[Redalgo]

. . . Breyer rejects the strict interpretation of the Sixth Amendment espoused by Justice Scalia that all facts necessary to criminal punishment must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

What's the alternative?

I actually don't know, the wording is really awkward for me to decipher.

The first time I read the passage I interpreted it to mean opposition to a system under which no assertion or claim or fact is permitted before a jury - whether brought forth by the defense or prosecution - without also presenting sufficient evidence to prove its accuracy beyond all reasonable doubt. Independently of that concern, there are very few things I believe can be proven before all reasonable doubt because of my understanding of how knowledge works in regards to subjective perception versus objective knowledge of reality.

The phrase "reasonable doubt" probably has a legal definition that would clarify a bit of my confusion. Hmm... thanks for not letting that slide, otherwise I wouldn't have given it any further thought! What do you think the difference betwixt Breyer and Scalia is on this matter? In all honesty, I don't have the amendments memorized and don't remember the contents of the sixth - and even if I had it right in front of me I'd be reading into the text differently than would either of them I reckon.


For this latest quiz there were several questions to which none of the available options were acceptable. In those cases I answered "not sure" and placed the emphasis on the question at minimum ranking so as to mitigate any misleading influences over my score, though I think the results are a bit skewed nonetheless. Anyway...

Eco-socialism (100%)             
Libertarianism (98%)             
Classical liberalism (97%)             
International communism (97%)             
Neolibertarianism (92%)             
Anarcho-capitalism (92%)             
Democratic socialism (92%)             
Social liberalism (80%)             
Green anarchism (79%)
             
Anarcho-socialism (74%)             
Social democracy (71%)             
Liberal conservatism (61%)             
Christian democracy (59%)             
National communism (53%)             
Paleoconservatism (51%)       
      
Religious anarchism (45%)             
Theocratic Socialism (38%)             
Fascism (36%)             
Neoconservatism (33%)             
Conservative social democracy (27%)

[Goldwater]

Foreign Policy Philosophy

1. Liberal
Emphasis on freedom, markets, democracy; free democratic states are good and fair, but autocratic states are immoral. We must push for democratization and liberalization around the world using open trade and international organizations: all people should be free. Wilson, Reagan, Kant, Shultz. (100%)

2. Neoliberal
Emphasis on cooperation, consensus, free trade; cooperative, democratic states are more advantageous than rogue autocracies. To secure our own borders, we should make sure other countries are democratic, free-trading, and participate in international organizations: a much more pragmatic version of Liberal. Clinton, Fukuyama, Marshall. (72%)

3. Neoconservative
Emphasis on civilizations, democracy, strength; states act through civilizational and cultural means for their own advancement. We must spread democratic institutions and markets to other countries, but also include a very strong military establishment, democracy is a tool of diplomacy and war, ultimately democracies will side with us and we must side with them, although some of our allies may be non-democratic. Bush-43, Kristol, Wolfowitz. (65%)

4. Libertarian
Emphasis on defense, small government, vital interests; states by and large don't attack you if you don't attack them. Governments should have little or no relations with each other as open commerce and mutual respect can maintain peace in most (or all) situations, only attack them when they attack us. Badnarik, Rothbard. (58%)

5. Realist
Emphasis on power, strength, realpolitik; all states are aggressive and warlike and any chance to improve relative strength will be seized. We must judge our interests and do whatever is necessary to advance them, lest our country be destroyed. Nixon, Morgenthau, Kissinger! (29%)

6. Radical
Emphasis on social justice, cooperation, democracy; the best states are peaceful and democratic, as well as moderately egalitarian. We must stop attacking countries for oil and focus on larger threats; beating up little countries that never hurt anyone is a grave threat to spreading democracy. Basically Neoliberal with a dash of Marxist. Dean, Gore. (22%)

7. Marxist
Emphasis on socialism, exploitation, racism; capitalist countries are either false democracies or outright fascist states, socialist countries are more just (or at least less dangerous). Capitalism and racism are evil institutions spreading Western hegemony and propping up decadent empires, either historical processes or street protests (perhaps revolutions) will bring about more humane world. Trotsky, Molotov, Marx! (15%)

8. Neorealist
Emphasis on power, certainty, stability; states wish to be at peace but the world is unstable and uncertain, so they have to prepare for war to avoid destruction. We must be strong where it is warranted, but military reductions are the default, and arms control agreements can secure some stability. Bush-41, Waltz, Rice. (15%)

9. Nationalist
Emphasis on self-determination, ethnicity, bigotry; large states oppress and slaughter ethnic/national minorities. We, as an aspiring country, must use any means necessary to (re)establish our homeland, even as racists and imperialists. Though normally a broader group, this variant is the violent nationalist, sometimes (but not always!) creeping into terrorism. Arafat, Ceku, Adams. (8%)

10. Pacifist
Emphasis on violence, injustice, war; states spread war, disease and famine. We must encourage an end to all violence, dismantling of al nuclear stockpiles, and eliminate the causes of division, conflict and violence, perhaps including capitalism or business. Thoreau, Tolstoy. (0%)

[Donerail]

1. Libertarian (100%)
2. Marxist (78%)
3. Liberal (56%)
4. Nationalist (45%)
5. Radical (45%)
6. Neoliberal (34%)
7. Pacifist (34%)
8. Neorealist (12%)
9. Realist (12%)
10. Neoconservative (0%)

Certainly an interesting quiz. I agree that the bottom three should be at the bottom. I'd move radical, liberal, and neoliberal up, Marxist, libertarian and nationalist down.

[Redalgo]

I really like this one!


1. Radical

Emphasis on social justice, cooperation, democracy; the best states are peaceful and democratic, as well as moderately egalitarian. We must stop attacking countries for oil and focus on larger threats; beating up little countries that never hurt anyone is a grave threat to spreading democracy. Basically Neoliberal with a dash of Marxist. Dean, Gore. (100%)
         
2. Neoliberal

Emphasis on cooperation, consensus, free trade; cooperative, democratic states are more advantageous than rogue autocracies. To secure our own borders, we should make sure other countries are democratic, free-trading, and participate in international organizations: a much more pragmatic version of Liberal. Clinton, Fukuyama, Marshall. (88%)

3. Liberal

Emphasis on freedom, markets, democracy; free democratic states are good and fair, but autocratic states are immoral. We must push for democratization and liberalization around the world using open trade and international organizations: all people should be free. Wilson, Reagan, Kant, Shultz. (73%)

4. Pacifist

Emphasis on violence, injustice, war; states spread war, disease and famine. We must encourage an end to all violence, dismantling of al nuclear stockpiles, and eliminate the causes of division, conflict and violence, perhaps including capitalism or business. Thoreau, Tolstoy. (73%)
         
5. Libertarian

Emphasis on defense, small government, vital interests; states by and large don't attack you if you don't attack them. Governments should have little or no relations with each other as open commerce and mutual respect can maintain peace in most (or all) situations, only attack them when they attack us. Badnarik, Rothbard. (65%)          

6. Marxist

Emphasis on socialism, exploitation, racism; capitalist countries are either false democracies or outright fascist states, socialist countries are more just (or at least less dangerous). Capitalism and racism are evil institutions spreading Western hegemony and propping up decadent empires, either historical processes or street protests (perhaps revolutions) will bring about more humane world. Trotsky, Molotov, Marx! (45%)          

7. Neorealist

Emphasis on power, certainty, stability; states wish to be at peace but the world is unstable and uncertain, so they have to prepare for war to avoid destruction. We must be strong where it is warranted, but military reductions are the default, and arms control agreements can secure some stability. Bush-41, Waltz, Rice. (25%)          

8. Neoconservative

Emphasis on civilizations, democracy, strength; states act through civilizational and cultural means for their own advancement. We must spread democratic institutions and markets to other countries, but also include a very strong military establishment, democracy is a tool of diplomacy and war, ultimately democracies will side with us and we must side with them, although some of our allies may be non-democratic. Bush-43, Kristol, Wolfowitz. (18%)   
       
9. Nationalist

Emphasis on self-determination, ethnicity, bigotry; large states oppress and slaughter ethnic/national minorities. We, as an aspiring country, must use any means necessary to (re)establish our homeland, even as racists and imperialists. Though normally a broader group, this variant is the violent nationalist, sometimes (but not always!) creeping into terrorism. Arafat, Ceku, Adams. (8%)          

10. Realist

Emphasis on power, strength, realpolitik; all states are aggressive and warlike and any chance to improve relative strength will be seized. We must judge our interests and do whatever is necessary to advance them, lest our country be destroyed. Nixon, Morgenthau, Kissinger! (0%) 

[H. Ross Peron]

Neoliberal
Emphasis on cooperation, consensus, free trade; cooperative, democratic states are more advantageous than rogue autocracies. To secure our own borders, we should make sure other countries are democratic, free-trading, and participate in international organizations: a much more pragmatic version of Liberal. Clinton, Fukuyama, Marshall. (100%)      
   
Liberal
Emphasis on freedom, markets, democracy; free democratic states are good and fair, but autocratic states are immoral. We must push for democratization and liberalization around the world using open trade and international organizations: all people should be free. Wilson, Reagan, Kant, Shultz. (81%)         

Neoconservative
Emphasis on civilizations, democracy, strength; states act through civilizational and cultural means for their own advancement. We must spread democratic institutions and markets to other countries, but also include a very strong military establishment, democracy is a tool of diplomacy and war, ultimately democracies will side with us and we must side with them, although some of our allies may be non-democratic. Bush-43, Kristol, Wolfowitz. (81%) 


Radical
Emphasis on social justice, cooperation, democracy; the best states are peaceful and democratic, as well as moderately egalitarian. We must stop attacking countries for oil and focus on larger threats; beating up little countries that never hurt anyone is a grave threat to spreading democracy. Basically Neoliberal with a dash of Marxist. Dean, Gore. (58%)      

Libertarian
Emphasis on defense, small government, vital interests; states by and large don't attack you if you don't attack them. Governments should have little or no relations with each other as open commerce and mutual respect can maintain peace in most (or all) situations, only attack them when they attack us. Badnarik, Rothbard. (49%)         

Neorealist
Emphasis on power, certainty, stability; states wish to be at peace but the world is unstable and uncertain, so they have to prepare for war to avoid destruction. We must be strong where it is warranted, but military reductions are the default, and arms control agreements can secure some stability. Bush-41, Waltz, Rice. (45%)         

Marxist
Emphasis on socialism, exploitation, racism; capitalist countries are either false democracies or outright fascist states, socialist countries are more just (or at least less dangerous). Capitalism and racism are evil institutions spreading Western hegemony and propping up decadent empires, either historical processes or street protests (perhaps revolutions) will bring about more humane world. Trotsky, Molotov, Marx! (30%)         

Pacifist
Emphasis on violence, injustice, war; states spread war, disease and famine. We must encourage an end to all violence, dismantling of al nuclear stockpiles, and eliminate the causes of division, conflict and violence, perhaps including capitalism or business. Thoreau, Tolstoy. (30%)         

Realist
Emphasis on power, strength, realpolitik; all states are aggressive and warlike and any chance to improve relative strength will be seized. We must judge our interests and do whatever is necessary to advance them, lest our country be destroyed. Nixon, Morgenthau, Kissinger! (20%)         

Nationalist
Emphasis on self-determination, ethnicity, bigotry; large states oppress and slaughter ethnic/national minorities. We, as an aspiring country, must use any means necessary to (re)establish our homeland, even as racists and imperialists. Though normally a broader group, this variant is the violent nationalist, sometimes (but not always!) creeping into terrorism. Arafat, Ceku, Adams. (0%)   

[H. Ross Peron]

1. Social liberalism (100%)            
2. Christian democracy (98%)            
3. Social democracy (97%)            
4. Classical liberalism (93%)            
5. Green anarchism (81%)            
6. Conservative social democracy (78%)            
7. Neolibertarianism (78%)            
8. International communism (77%)            
9. Religious anarchism (74%)            
10. Eco-socialism (73%)            
11. Democratic socialism (72%)            
12. Liberal conservatism (72%)            
13. Fascism (70%)            
14. Neoconservatism (69%)            
15. Anarcho-socialism (68%)            
16. Libertarianism (66%)            
17. Theocratic Socialism (63%)            
18. National communism (60%)            
19. Anarcho-capitalism (51%)            
20. Paleoconservatism (29%)   

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

Neoliberal
Emphasis on cooperation, consensus, free trade; cooperative, democratic states are more advantageous than rogue autocracies. To secure our own borders, we should make sure other countries are democratic, free-trading, and participate in international organizations: a much more pragmatic version of Liberal. Clinton, Fukuyama, Marshall. (100%)          

Radical
Emphasis on social justice, cooperation, democracy; the best states are peaceful and democratic, as well as moderately egalitarian. We must stop attacking countries for oil and focus on larger threats; beating up little countries that never hurt anyone is a grave threat to spreading democracy. Basically Neoliberal with a dash of Marxist. Dean, Gore. (90%)          

Liberal
Emphasis on freedom, markets, democracy; free democratic states are good and fair, but autocratic states are immoral. We must push for democratization and liberalization around the world using open trade and international organizations: all people should be free. Wilson, Reagan, Kant, Shultz. (80%)          

Libertarian
Emphasis on defense, small government, vital interests; states by and large don't attack you if you don't attack them. Governments should have little or no relations with each other as open commerce and mutual respect can maintain peace in most (or all) situations, only attack them when they attack us. Badnarik, Rothbard. (80%)          

Pacifist
Emphasis on violence, injustice, war; states spread war, disease and famine. We must encourage an end to all violence, dismantling of al nuclear stockpiles, and eliminate the causes of division, conflict and violence, perhaps including capitalism or business. Thoreau, Tolstoy. (80%)          

Neoconservative
Emphasis on civilizations, democracy, strength; states act through civilizational and cultural means for their own advancement. We must spread democratic institutions and markets to other countries, but also include a very strong military establishment, democracy is a tool of diplomacy and war, ultimately democracies will side with us and we must side with them, although some of our allies may be non-democratic. Bush-43, Kristol, Wolfowitz. (50%)          

Marxist
Emphasis on socialism, exploitation, racism; capitalist countries are either false democracies or outright fascist states, socialist countries are more just (or at least less dangerous). Capitalism and racism are evil institutions spreading Western hegemony and propping up decadent empires, either historical processes or street protests (perhaps revolutions) will bring about more humane world. Trotsky, Molotov, Marx! (40%)          

Nationalist
Emphasis on self-determination, ethnicity, bigotry; large states oppress and slaughter ethnic/national minorities. We, as an aspiring country, must use any means necessary to (re)establish our homeland, even as racists and imperialists. Though normally a broader group, this variant is the violent nationalist, sometimes (but not always!) creeping into terrorism. Arafat, Ceku, Adams. (10%)          

Neorealist
Emphasis on power, certainty, stability; states wish to be at peace but the world is unstable and uncertain, so they have to prepare for war to avoid destruction. We must be strong where it is warranted, but military reductions are the default, and arms control agreements can secure some stability. Bush-41, Waltz, Rice. (0%)          

Realist
Emphasis on power, strength, realpolitik; all states are aggressive and warlike and any chance to improve relative strength will be seized. We must judge our interests and do whatever is necessary to advance them, lest our country be destroyed. Nixon, Morgenthau, Kissinger! (0%)