Dan Mitchell: "Notwithstanding My WSJ Quiz Results, I Am Not a Conservative'

Source:Cato Institute fellow Daniel J. Mitchell.

Source:The New Democrat

"Some online quizzes and tests about policy and philosophy produce very accurate results.

I’m a “hard-core libertarian” according to Professor Bryan Caplan’s 130-question quiz.

I’m “not communist” on a test to determine Marxist sympathies.

I’m a “minimalist” according to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget’s fiscal quiz.

Some tests, however, produce illogical results.

I am a “moderate” according to a social attitudes test.

Today, I’m going to share some more results that are not very logical. The Wall Street Journal posted a quiz a few days ago to ask “What Kind of Voter Are You?”

To may dismay, they decided that I’m a traditional conservative rather than a libertarian.

Here’s a breakdown of my results.

As far as I can tell, I’m as pro-free market as possible. Which makes sense since another quiz labelled me a “minarchist.”

But if you look at the second category, the quiz thinks I’m a social conservative.

Since I’m largely abstemious in my personal life (the boring kind of libertarian), I would not object if someone concluded I’m a social conservative as a person.

But I firmly believe I’m a libertarian with regards to policy and philosophy.

I don’t support laws against drug use.

I don’t support laws against prostitution

I don’t support laws against gambling

I don’t support laws against whatever consensual adults want to do in a bedroom.

So why did the WSJ decide I was a social conservative?

I would argue that some of their questions are poorly worded.

For instance, they apparently think the libertarian view is that any and all abortions should be legal. I’m sure some libertarian have that point of view, but there are also lots of pro-life libertarians.

I based my answer on the fact that I would not favor unlimited and unrestricted abortions way past the point of viability. Call me crazy, but I don’t think that makes me non-libertarian... 

From Dan Mitchell

Before I get into what Dan Mitchell is saying here and I agree with him on how he describes his own personal politics, but what you are about to read here gives you a pretty good idea of a what a Conservative is in the political sense. 

The great conservative political humorist P.J. O'Rourke (RIP) I think when he was being interviewed by Reason Magazine, or some other right-wing publication was talking about conservatism and he gave I believe a pretty good definition of it when talking about his own personal life and this is a paraphrase: 

"I'm straight, 

I've been married with the same woman for a very long time. 

I don't gamble. I don't use marijuana or any other illegal narcotic. 

I don't have abortions. 

I don't cheat on my wife. 

I don't watch porn. 

I've never been a romance with a man. 

I've never been married to a man. 

I'm not a party animal."

He just gave the interviewer a long list of things that today's so-called social Conservatives are supposedly not just against, (even if they actually do these things in private) but what separated him from the "social Conservatives" was that he didn't think these personal choices should be illegal, simply because he disapproves of them. I think abortion is the only exception to that because he did believe abortion should be illegal, at least in most cases. 

If you go by the so-called mainstream definitions of what it's supposed to be a Conservative and Liberal in America, the most conservative people are MAGA, or some other right-wing authoritarian. And the most liberal people, at least in a democratic sense, are the so-called Squad in the House of Representatives, or the Green Party, Democratic Socialists of America. 

But the one thing that these two fringe factions have in America, is that they're both collectivists and in some cases even authoritarians, especially if you were to look at the Communists on far, far-left and the MAGA militants, the right-wing, anti-U.S. Government radicals on the far-right. So they have a lot more in common then you would think. They're actually not that different at all. A few differences in economic policy and some social issues. 

When I think of Conservative, I think P.J. O'Rourke has an excellent definition. But I would add someone who believes in conserving what works in American society and politic: 

Things like the U.S. Constitution, separation of powers, checks and balances, devolution of power, the rule of law, individual rights, strong national defense. 

Government should move conservatively, meaning cautiously when it comes to reform and that the government closest to home is the best government when it comes to social and welfare policy. 

Someone like a Ronald Reagan as President of the United States, other than the high deficits and debt, the expansion of the War On Drugs, the high crimes rates of the 1980s, is an excellent example of what it means to be an American Conservative, at least far as tone and rhetoric and what he got done as President. 

But when I look at the Dan Mitchells's of the world, who I've been following online the last 10 years or so, which is most of my blogging career, I have him down as a Libertarian, in the classical sense. Not in the antigovernment, Anarcho sense. Those folks are really just right-wing Anarchists. But he's someone who believes in limited government, which is not no government. He's someone whose even praised the flat tax before. Which means he's not anti-tax all together. And he's someone who believes in a good deal of personal and economic freedom, personal responsibility, the rule of law, etc.