I can't seem to figure out how to go in and check the weighting and modify things...
how is anarchy supposed to support that?
Anarchy as a political doctrine isn't just random chaos, you know. Private citizens and worker's syndicates are perfectly able to engage in construction projects, provide maintenance, and engage in economic transactions.
I KNOW that most of my answers were authoritarian, and the rest very centrist, so I should definitely not be heavily skewed to anarchy and communism.
Well, I didn't necessarily orient around those paradigms, but that's still odd. Unfortunately I can't really access any data from responses or get in and check things to make sure everything's working right. I did go through and test it and found that I was easily able to get strongly monarchist/fascist results when trying to, so it's not like the thing is bugging out. It may be an issue of specific questions.
#6: Do you mean by ability or some inherent worth of their person?
It was designed with the intent that people bring their own meaning there, and many folks consider the two to be pretty well entwined.
#9: Um. Nether. I think whatever applies my morals to society is correct. In a soceity that doesn't follow my morals, Revolutionary is correct, in a society that does follow my morals traditionalism is correct.
Obviously, you prefer your own morals. The question intentionally doesn't deal with that, because it's not what the question is asking.
#12: I think I answered this one wrong, although it probably gave me the right score anyway. A very broad question ether way.
Broad is fine. There is no wrong answer.
#14: Although I'm not firm on my position here, something I see people say they want is often a middle ground between the first two options. In that people can own a limited amount. I feel like perhaps that should've been in there in some way.
Well, the last option is actually a middle ground between the two, though perhaps not of the sort you're talking about.
#15: I feel like some of the answers, or even all of them, should be able to be used together
Yeah, this is the question to which the second sentence of the second paragraph up top most directly applies.
#16: No issue with the question. But the first answer is funny. Lol.
It's a long enough quiz, gotta have some levity where it can fit nicely.
#17: I feel like this question doesn't even make sense. What even is a truly free market? Edit: To me that seems like it'd be only possible in some post apoclyptic hellscape where the only law is that the strong take from the weak in some mad maxesk setting. But I'm not sure if that's what the question actually means.
You've more or less got it. It's just a "more regulation" vs "less regulation" question, really.
#18: I feel like these are not totally mutually exclusive. Strive for your best but have some realism
Yeah, they're not mutually exclusive at all. It's just a matter of which one is the highest priority.
#19: Er. Well, I'll avoid thoughts on this too much, but I think perhaps more choices are needed.
Yeah, I suppose it's sort of a false choice these days, now that we can just subsidize sperm or egg picking. I'm not sure there's much more nuance besides that though, which isn't just "I want that choice but not all the way", which isn't useful for the purposes of the quiz.