The Political Compass (page 4 of 6)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Our civil liberties are being excessively curbed in the name of counter-terrorism.

U.K context: Disagree. U.S context: Agree

A significant advantage of a one-party state is that it avoids all the arguments that delay progress in a democratic political system.

Strongly Disagree. Fascism is immoral and vile.

Although the electronic age makes official surveillance easier, only wrongdoers need to be worried.

Loaded Question

The death penalty should be an option for the most serious crimes.

Strongly Disagree.

In a civilised society, one must always have people above to be obeyed and people below to be commanded.

Loaded Question

Abstract art that doesn't represent anything shouldn't be considered art at all.

Strongly Agree (half a cow pickled in a big jar isn't "Art". Unless "con" is added in front of art...)

In criminal justice, punishment should be more important than rehabilitation.

Disagree

It is a waste of time to try to rehabilitate some criminals.

Strongly Agree

The businessman and the manufacturer are more important than the writer and the artist.

Strongly Disagree.

Mothers may have careers, but their first duty is to be homemakers.

Loaded Question

Multinational companies are unethically exploiting the plant genetic resources of developing countries.

Strongly Agree.

Making peace with the establishment is an important aspect of maturity

You guessed it... another Loaded Question!

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Last time I took the Political Compass, there wasn't a "Loaded Question" option.

Should be

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Agree. Making peace is important, and there's a big difference between making peace and agreeing. One can respectfully disagree without having to be violent about it. The reality is that the establishment is usually right; that's why they are the establishment. That doesn't mean that they are always right, by any means, and authority should always be questioned, but should also be given the benefit of the doubt, assuming a position that they hold is held by the majority of all people. Most people are reasonable. So I'd say that one should make peace with the establishment, but still respectfully and strongly disagree if one is so inclined. But peace is the key word; violent, radical change is unlikely to win approval from enough people to get adopted, and smaller, more mainstream steps first in order to test the potentially unknown effects of the change before moving on to more radical change is what mature, responsible, prudent, pragmatic people do.

More-or-less my line of thinking (though I think the question is loaded and could mean other things).
Great post, BTW