Best "Political Compass" so far. And where I stand on the left-right political-economic plan

You should do this 'politiquiz' (particularly if you are already a politician/ decision maker or consider a career in this direction :-)). There are lots of things that can still be improved in it, but it is the best "where you stand on the political/ economic dimensions" questionnaire I've encountered so far.

Here's a fragment from the intro to the 'Political Compass' to convince you:

Welcome to The Political Compass™.
There's abundant evidence for the need of it. The old one-dimensional categories of 'right' and 'left', established for the seating arrangement of the French National Assembly of 1789, are overly simplistic for today's complex political landscape. For example, who are the 'conservatives' in today's Russia? Are they the unreconstructed Stalinists, or the reformers who have adopted the right-wing views of conservatives like Margaret Thatcher ?
On the standard left-right scale, how do you distinguish leftists like Stalin and Gandhi? It's not sufficient to say that Stalin was simply more left than Gandhi. There are fundamental political differences between them that the old categories on their own can't explain. Similarly, we generally describe social reactionaries as 'right-wingers', yet that leaves left-wing reactionaries like Robert Mugabe and Pol Pot off the hook.
That's about as much as we should tell you for now. After you've responded to the following propositions during the next 3-5 minutes, all will be explained. In each instance, you're asked to choose the response that best describes your feeling: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree or Strongly Agree. At the end of the test, you'll be given the compass, with your own special position on it.

And you can see below where I stand: somewhat more libertarian and much closer in longitude to the center than the far (economic) rightist Milton Friedman; but a (moderate) libertarian rightist I am indeed, as you can see from the picture (click on it to enlarge). Among the examples of personalities discussed at the above link, good old professor Friedman is my only quadrant neighbour :-).

Update, some minutes later: I am being notified that my political/economic position is very close to Tchaikovsky's and Chopin's, among the 'grande musique' composers. So this is it, now you have it, I've just discovered myself: I am a complex combination of Tchaikovsky and Chopin. Unfortunately, in terms of their economic and politic views and not their music. But still...

Song of the day: "Madness", by Marlango

Enter Marlango, possibly the best Spanish jazz band ever! Since today I declare myself their biggest fan. Now, of course I've already seen and admired Leonor Watling, the actrice,- wiki, IMDb- playing Alicia in "Hable con Ella", one of my top 10 movies of all times (set to stay in top 10 for quite some time...). Nevertheless- shameful, unbelievable, ignorance- I seem to have ignored Marlango so far... Until now!

But without further ado (very little time), here's the simply perfect song of today, "Madness". Wait, make it song of the week. Or perhaps, of the month! I'll see... An obvious influence from Tom Waits in the melodical line, but nonetheless, a very personal style in interpretation. Lyrics are here. Next to that, other personal favourites from Marlango, absolutely brilliant musical pieces: "It's All Right" (great videoclip and a splendid live 'velvet' version); an awesome "Pequeño Vals" (superb live and excellent videoclip) "; the masterpiece "Shake the Moon" (videoclip version, live- and very much alive!- version, live duet version, with Miguel Bosé); a beautiful live version of "Enjoy the Ride"; "Once Upon a Time" (excellent videoclip); "Automatic Imperfection" (videoclip); Gran Sol (videoclip). Then some superlative songs sang in Spanish- my favourite is Vete (videoclip with sequences from the movie "Malas Temporadas" where Leonor played as well, and a live version). See and listen also to the very interesting, personalized, version of "El último habitante del planeta".

You can also watch some other interesting material with Marlango on YouTube, such as a presentation/interviews with Marlango on Euronews (Euronews seems to agree that Madness is an amazing piece, by the way!) or an introduction/ interview (in Spanish) with Leonor or the "disco del oro" ceremony (with Almodovar present as well).

Muchas gracias, Marisa! Looking forward to learning much more about real Spain, music and beyond. If it goes like this, I'll definitely move there :-).

How intelligent should leaders be?

Although I think there is more to the story, quite insightful thoughts from Richard Posner and Gary Becker on the relationship between intelligence and leadership. A few potential caveats I'd point out very rapidly:

• the examples considered are clearly selected to fit the theory advanced (though it is far from clear that if one considered, say, all -succesful and unsuccesful - political leaders within the last century, from all over the world, not just the USA, the correlation between intelligence and leadership would turn positive)
• "leadership failure" is far from easy to define. What if we are talking about more dimensions to leadership and the leader in question has been highly succesful in some but has made a total fiasco out of others? Would it be sufficient to simply consider whether her last 'leadership spell' coincided with an upturn/downturn in public support? Hence, that last very moment- glory or disgrace- would be the (one and only) proxy?
• I tend to agree that one might not want to have leaders from either the top or bottom percentiles of the (true) IQ distribution, but I also think that the vast majority of these people are very unlikely to ever consider accepting such jobs (for different reasons when comparing the top with the bottom of the IQ distribution, of course). And the example of Einstein refusing the presidency of Israel springs immediately to my mind. Hence, we are probably talking about a truncated "intelligence" distribution from where leaders are sampled, to start with.
• Linked to the previous point, I am rather dubious about placing "cognitive" and "non-cognitive" skills on adverse (or even mutually exclusive) positions for this particular context. If the leader's sampling IQ distribution is indeed truncated (particularly at the top end), I'd conjecture that cognitive and non-cognitive skills can still mix fine in the leader's "intelligence" portfolio without crowding each other out :-).

Below two representative fragments from each of the posts:

Economists have been emphasizing in recent years that that while cognitive abilities of individuals certainly raise their education and earnings, many non-cognitive skills are often more significant. These skills include simple factors like finishing one's work on time, to more complicated ones like good judgments in making decision, or effectiveness at using talents of subordinates. Posner argues convincingly that non-cognitive talents may be of greater importance in determining success at top-level government leadership positions than analytical brilliance and other cognitive skills. (Becker)

What is required at the top levels of government is not brilliance, but managerial skill, which is a different thing, and includes knowing when to defer to the superior knowledge of a more experienced but less mentally agile subordinate. Moreover, so specialized is management as a job that success in managing a business may not translate at all into success in managing a government agency. The firm-specific human capital that a person acquired in a career of management in a business firm may have no value for the management of a government agency, or for that matter a university, a private foundation, or an international organization. Indeed, an experienced manager of a firm may falter and have to be fired if a change in the firm's environment requires a different type of management skill.

(Posner)

Update, 22nd of June '07: It is quite ironic that some people hold the opposite view, ie. "a brainiac for president" (via Greg Mankiw). So just wait now, looking at the approaching USA presidential elections, if Becker and Posner have it right, both Romney and Obama should be out of the election race. And, au contraire, they should be the candidates in the decisive Republican-Democrat face-off if Mankiw's got it right :-). What if I am right? Then all presidential candidates are sampled from a truncated intelligence distribution :-).

Quote for the week 17th - 23rd of June '07 (and for all the previous weeks without quotes)

This is nothing. This is nothing. Piece of cake, walk in the park. This is nothing.

Stanley Motss (aka Dustin Hoffman in "Wag the Dog")

Previous quote of the week (a few weeks before).

Roblosfera sub lupa

Via Sorin Matei pe pagini.com. Vezi si articolul corespondent din Adevarul. E o analiza incompleta si superficiala (astept cu nerabdare articolul in detaliu promis de autor...), dar unele conjecturi emise sunt interesante (cele care nu au vreo legatura directa cu "subiectii" analizei, marginali discutiei- dar unii sunt amuzati, animati, motivati de furtuna din paharul cu apa). O singura observatie: "narcisismul similaritatii" nu e decat un eufemism pentru perenul "efect de turma"; presupun ca termenul precedent (si idem, "gregaritate") e considerat nomina odiosa de autor, ergo betia de cuvinte :-).

Quote for week 27th of May- 2nd of June '07

Cum se construieste o cariera universitara in domeniul stiintelor politice? In Romania, reteta este simpla. Iti declari un interes stiintific, curtezi un coordonator de doctorat, scrii o teza, publici carti si articole utile castigarii in grad, scrii cronici la lucrarile superiorilor ierarhici, mai faci cate un gest de curtoazie citandu-le productiile, iei o jumatate de norma la o facultate particulara.

Adrian Gavrilescu, "Noii precupeti. Intelectualii publici din Romania de dupa 1989"

Quote for the previous week.