Map My Politics

THE MILITARISM DIMENSION – Hawks, Doves and Moderates

The primary objective of the Map My Politics website is to place users within one of the political ideologies that populate the two-axis chart of relative economic and social freedom. Choices in our political quiz are designed with that goal in mind. There are some issues, however, that do not correlate particularly well with some or most of the chart’s ideologies. Accordingly, we also use our quiz to indicate a user’s political ideology on three additional dimensions, one of which is relative military hawkishness.

Broadly speaking, the dimension of ideological militarism relates to how inclined someone is to believe that the government should maintain a strong military capability and whether it should use that capacity aggressively to serve national interests and values. Those holding a more militaristic viewpoint are said to be military “hawks” while those holding a contrary position are said to be military “doves,” with moderates falling somewhere in the middle.

Apart from neoconservatism, which is unique among the ideologies on the Map My Politics chart for its identification with military hawkishness, the dimension of relative militarism does not necessarily correspond with a particular political ideology. For example, there are liberals and democratic socialists who believe in a large defense budget and a relatively interventionist foreign policy, just as there are conservatives and neoliberals who advocate for lower defense spending and a relatively isolationist foreign policy. While it is often true that an ideology on the more authoritarian side of the y-axis of social freedom – such as fascism – might be more militaristic than one on the less authoritarian side – such as anarchism – this is not uniformly so. For instance, a paleoconservative might advocate for strong state involvement in matters of personal morality, like abortion and same-sex marriage, but she might also prefer the country stay out of foreign wars as much as possible. Similarly, a social libertarian might believe the government has no business regulating personal behavior, but he might be sufficiently concerned about overseas human rights abuses to support a strong military presence to deter – or even intervene to thwart – such abuses.

Those who are more moderate in their relative military hawkishness or dovishness tend view matters as more situational. In other words, the particular facts in a given situation might indicate the correct course of action rather than an ideological disposition. Historically, Americans have tended to be more hawkish when the nation’s economic and political interests are perceived as being jeopardized. But as with any such analysis, defining the key terms and weighing the competing factors is complex and subjective, meaning one person’s “national interest” might not correspond to another’s.

Just as there is little correlation between military hawkishness (or dovishness) and one’s position on the MMP Two-Axis Chart, military doves, hawks and moderates can be found in both of the main political parties. While the Republican Party might have been viewed as more isolationist than the Democratic Party for much of the 20th century, especially immediately prior to America’s entry in both of the World Wars, that was not the case in the Cold War era, nor is it in the 21st century. At Map My Politics we believe that political preferences are ultimately more about ideology than party. For that reason, our quiz includes in a user’s results their position on militarism, this important additional ideological dimension.

For further reading about the militarism dimension, click here.

To return to your Results page and the Map My Politics Ideology Chart, where you can learn more about other ideologies, click here.

THE MILITARISM DIMENSION – Hawks, Doves and Moderates

Further Reading