Center
Liberal Developmentalism
The East Asian Tiger model (Singapore, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong): champions free markets, foreign trade and private enterprise as engines of growth, paired with an active technocratic state that plans infrastructure, education and strategic industrialization, stopping short of closed protectionism or hard authoritarian control.
I want free markets and foreign trade as engines of growth, guided by a technocratic state that plans infrastructure and education.Compare your own views
01 / The profile
Twelve axes, one perspective
02 / What stands out
Three distinctive positions
34.2pt
Trade
27.5% Protectionism, compared with the ideology catalog’s 61.7% median.
How open should the economy be to international exchange?
26.3pt
Economy
31.2% Public, compared with the ideology catalog’s 57.5% median.
Who should own productive assets and provide essential services?
19.4pt
Religion
38.8% Irreligious, compared with the ideology catalog’s 58.2% median.
What place should religion have in individual and public life?
The profile in detail
Government and accountability. Structure: 26.2% Federal, 73.8% Unitary (Strong Unitary); Representation: 70% Democracy, 30% Autocracy (Leaning 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; Liberal Developmentalism sits 12.5 points above it. 124 reference profiles share this band.
Civil power and culture. Power: 38.8% Security, 61.2% Liberty (Leaning Liberty); Immigration: 60% Assimilation, 40% Multiculturalism (Leaning Assimilation). 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; Liberal Developmentalism sits 20.0 points below it. 151 reference profiles share this band.
Force and foreign policy. Diplomacy: 53.8% Militarist, 46.2% Pacifist (Balanced); Intervention: 37.5% Non-interventionist, 62.5% Nationalist (Leaning Nationalist). 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; Liberal Developmentalism sits 11.3 points below it. 187 reference profiles share this band.
Ownership, coordination and trade. Economy: 31.2% Public, 68.8% Private (Leaning Private); Control: 50% Planning, 50% Free market (Balanced); Trade: 27.5% Protectionism, 72.5% Globalism (Strong Globalism). These ask three different questions: who owns, how activity is coordinated and how the economy engages abroad. The economic profile of Liberal Developmentalism depends on that combination, rather than a single left or right classification. On Economy, the 877-profile catalog median is 53.2% Public; Liberal Developmentalism sits 22.0 points below it. 179 reference profiles share this band.
Belief and social norms. Religion: 38.8% Irreligious, 61.2% Religious (Leaning Religious); Morality: 42.5% Progressive, 57.5% Traditionalist (Leaning Traditionalist). 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; Liberal Developmentalism sits 3.7 points above it. 197 reference profiles share this band.
Technology and limits. Technology: 72.5% Technology, 27.5% Biology (Strong Technology). This adds a perspective on innovation and biological continuity that cannot be inferred directly from the economic coordinates. For Liberal Developmentalism, the 22.5-point distance from the center indicates the intensity of this particular position. On Technology, the 877-profile catalog median is 57.5% Technology; Liberal Developmentalism sits 15.0 points above it. 132 reference profiles share this band.
03 / Connections
Nearby profiles
Right-Wing Pragmatism
94.4% compatibility
Atlanticism
93.8% compatibility
Conservative Liberalism
92.8% compatibility
Zionism
91.1% compatibility
Conservative Centrism
91% compatibility
Islamic Democracy
90.7% compatibility
At the other end of the catalog
Closest countries & regions
Closest political figures
Associated references
Got Liberal Developmentalism 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 Liberal Developmentalism 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 Liberal Developmentalism.
Which ideology is closest to Liberal Developmentalism?
Right-Wing Pragmatism has 94.4% compatibility in the catalog. This score combines axis proximity, overall direction, intensity and the largest difference between the profiles.
Which axis stands out for Liberal Developmentalism?
Structure is among the furthest from the center: 26.2% Federal and 73.8% Unitary. 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.





