Political Circle
Home
Start new test
Explore
About
"Society needs clear rules and reliable standards to function well"
At 12 o'clock, you sit at the top of the political circle — prioritising order, stability and clear national standards above all else. You believe that strong authority and consistent rules are essential for a safe, fair and cohesive society. Chaos and drift worry you more than the occasional bit of heavy-handedness.
You're comfortable with robust policing, uniform regulations and decisive government action when needed. You see authority as a protective force rather than a threat, and you value predictability over radical change. For you, freedom flourishes best when there's a firm foundation of order beneath it.
Your position at 12 o'clock tells us your direction, but how far you are from the centre tells us the strength of your convictions. The Political Circle recognises three levels:
"Order matters, but heavy-handedness has costs"
Close to centre, you value order but you're pragmatic about enforcement. You support strong institutions and clear rules, but you'll tolerate some flexibility when rigid enforcement causes problems. You want authority to be firm but fair, maintaining order without unnecessary oppression.
Historical example: David Cameron — valued law and order, but within democratic norms and with sensitivity to civil liberties.
"Strong authority prevents chaos and protects the vulnerable"
At medium distance, you have clear convictions about needing strong authority. You want robust policing, tough enforcement and minimal tolerance for disorder. You believe weak authority leads to crime, chaos and social breakdown. Order isn't optional; it's foundational.
Historical example: Singapore under Lee Kuan Yew — strict laws, strong enforcement, social order prioritised, but within broadly functioning system.
"Order and stability justify strong state control"
Far from centre, you're uncompromising about order. You want powerful state authority suppressing disorder, dissent and deviation. Individual rights take second place to social cohesion and stability. Strong leadership should act decisively to maintain order, without being hampered by excessive democratic constraints.
Historical example: Authoritarian regimes prioritising order above all else — though results vary dramatically in quality and legitimacy.
The "Iron Chancellor" (1864–1871)
Bismarck unified Germany through war and Realpolitik — practical power politics over ideological purity. Once unified, he built a strong centralized state. Bismarck's genius was combining authoritarian governance with social welfare. He introduced the world's first old-age pensions (1889), accident insurance (1884) and health insurance (1883) — not out of progressive sentiment, but to bind workers to the state and undercut socialist appeal.
Louis XIII's chief minister
Cardinal Richelieu transformed France from a weak, decentralized kingdom into Europe's dominant power through centralization and ruthlessness. He suppressed rebellious nobles who challenged royal authority, destroyed Protestant fortifications (while tolerating Protestant worship — he cared about political power, not theology), created a network of spies and informers throughout France, and established the bureaucratic state apparatus that would last centuries.
The new book, 'Beyond Left and Right: Understanding the Political Circle' is now available on Amazon.
Containing a wealth of information, the book explores all of the 12 philosophical positions with detailed analysis on each of the three levels.