Left

Buddhist Socialism

A current that grounds socialism in Buddhist ethics, seeing compassion and the end of attachment as the basis of equality, common property and the rejection of caste, from Ambedkar and the Dalai Lama to Ne Win's Burmese socialism.

I want a society of compassion without castes, with common land and resources and a state that cares for all without attachment to profit.
Compare your own views

01 / The profile

Twelve axes, one perspective

How to read the percentages ↗
Federal 29.5%70.5% Unitary
Democracy 81.1%18.9% Autocracy
Security 49.6%50.4% Liberty
Assimilation 28.8%71.2% Multiculturalism
Militarist 19.4%80.6% Pacifist
Non-interventionist 78.1%21.9% Nationalist
Public 87%13% Private
Planning 79.3%20.7% Free market
Protectionism 74%26% Globalism
Irreligious 47.6%52.4% Religious
Progressive 60.6%39.4% Traditionalist
Technology 27.4%72.6% Biology

02 / What stands out

Three distinctive positions

30.5pt

Technology

27.4% Technology, compared with the ideology catalog’s 57.9% median.

How readily should technology reshape human life?

29.5pt

Economy

87% Public, compared with the ideology catalog’s 57.5% median.

Who should own productive assets and provide essential services?

25.9pt

Diplomacy

19.4% Militarist, compared with the ideology catalog’s 45.25% median.

When is armed force an appropriate political instrument?

The profile in detail

Government and accountability. Structure: 29.5% Federal, 70.5% Unitary (Leaning Unitary); Representation: 81.1% Democracy, 18.9% Autocracy (Strong Democracy). This combination separates where authority is located from how leaders are selected and constrained. It preserves those two choices even when a broad political label does not distinguish them. On Representation, the 877-profile catalog median is 57.5% Democracy; Buddhist Socialism sits 23.6 points above it. 274 reference profiles share this band.

Civil power and culture. Power: 49.6% Security, 50.4% Liberty (Balanced); Immigration: 28.8% Assimilation, 71.2% Multiculturalism (Leaning Multiculturalism). The first contrast concerns limits on civil life; the second concerns cultural adaptation and plural identities. Reading them together avoids inferring an immigration position solely from a preference about security. On Power, the 877-profile catalog median is 58.8% Security; Buddhist Socialism sits 9.2 points below it. 128 reference profiles share this band.

Force and foreign policy. Diplomacy: 19.4% Militarist, 80.6% Pacifist (Strong Pacifist); Intervention: 78.1% Non-interventionist, 21.9% Nationalist (Strong Non-interventionist). Military capacity and projection of national interests are distinct choices in this model. These coordinates show how the profile combines military means and external objectives, without assuming that they always move together. On Intervention, the 877-profile catalog median is 48.8% Non-interventionist; Buddhist Socialism sits 29.3 points above it. 105 reference profiles share this band.

Ownership, coordination and trade. Economy: 87% Public, 13% Private (Strong Public); Control: 79.3% Planning, 20.7% Free market (Strong Planning); Trade: 74% Protectionism, 26% Globalism (Strong Protectionism). These ask three different questions: who owns, how activity is coordinated and how the economy engages abroad. The economic profile of Buddhist Socialism depends on that combination, rather than a single left or right classification. On Economy, the 877-profile catalog median is 53.2% Public; Buddhist Socialism sits 33.8 points above it. 132 reference profiles share this band.

Belief and social norms. Religion: 47.6% Irreligious, 52.4% Religious (Balanced); Morality: 60.6% Progressive, 39.4% Traditionalist (Leaning Progressive). The model keeps religious influence separate from continuity in social norms. These values describe the reference profile; they do not assign a religion to someone who receives this match in the quiz. On Morality, the 877-profile catalog median is 38.8% Progressive; Buddhist Socialism sits 21.8 points above it. 151 reference profiles share this band.

Technology and limits. Technology: 27.4% Technology, 72.6% Biology (Strong Biology). This adds a perspective on innovation and biological continuity that cannot be inferred directly from the economic coordinates. For Buddhist Socialism, the 22.6-point distance from the center indicates the intensity of this particular position. On Technology, the 877-profile catalog median is 57.5% Technology; Buddhist Socialism sits 30.1 points below it. 60 reference profiles share this band.

03 / Connections

Nearby profiles

Closest countries & regions

Closest political figures

Associated references

Got Buddhist Socialism on the 12 Axes test?

Look at the other nearby profiles and the axes where you differ. A match is a starting point for exploring ideas, rather than a final identity.

Understand your result ↗

Frequently asked questions

What does getting Buddhist Socialism on the test mean?

Your twelve scores are relatively close to this reference profile. A match describes similarity inside the model; it does not imply agreement with every action, policy or belief associated with Buddhist Socialism.

Which ideology is closest to Buddhist Socialism?

Christian Social Democracy has 96.7% compatibility in the catalog. This score combines axis proximity, overall direction, intensity and the largest difference between the profiles.

Which axis stands out for Buddhist Socialism?

Economy is among the furthest from the center: 87% Public and 13% Private. Read all twelve axes to understand the full combination.

Your perspective, in detail

Where do your ideas stand?

Explore twelve dimensions and discover the combinations that make your perspective your own.

Take the 12 Axes test