What this axis measures
The world axis asks where your primary political loyalty and focus lie: with humanity and international cooperation, or with your own nation and its sovereignty. At the Global pole are views favouring international institutions, open trade, freer movement of people, foreign aid and the idea of world citizenship. At the Nation pole are views that national sovereignty, secure borders, national identity and the interests of citizens should come first.
For much of the twentieth century, this dimension was overshadowed by economic left–right politics. In recent decades it has become one of the most important divides in many democracies, shaping debates over immigration, trade agreements, the European Union, international courts and globalisation. Some analysts describe it as a divide between "open" and "closed", or "anywhere" and "somewhere", though these labels are themselves contested.
The Global pole
People scoring towards Global tend to believe that problems like climate change, pandemics and financial crises require international solutions, that immigration and cultural exchange enrich societies, that free trade benefits everyone over time, and that people's moral obligations extend beyond borders. Items such as "Immigration enriches a country's culture" and "International law should bind every country, including powerful ones" sit here.
Cosmopolitanism sits at the far Global end. Neoliberalism also scores strongly Global, mainly for economic reasons such as trade and investment. Libertarian socialism, green politics, progressivism and Georgism also lean Global. As this shows, people can reach a global outlook from very different starting points: market efficiency, human rights, environmentalism or working-class internationalism.
The Nation pole
People scoring towards Nation tend to believe that the nation-state is the natural home of democracy and solidarity, that citizens have special obligations to each other, that immigration levels should be controlled democratically, and that international organisations can undermine self-government. Items such as "National identity is worth protecting" and "Borders should be tightly controlled" sit here.
Historical fascism sits at the extreme, defined by ultranationalism. National conservatism sits clearly towards Nation within democratic politics, followed by state capitalism, theocratic traditionalism and conservatism. Economic views again vary; some nation-focused positions are protectionist, others favour markets.
The middle
Many people hold a middle position, valuing their national identity and wanting some control over immigration while also supporting trade and international cooperation. This is common among centrists, Christian democrats, social democrats and paternalistic conservatives. Mixed patterns are also common, for example supporting free trade but limited immigration, or generous refugee policy but scepticism of international organisations.
A short history of the debate
The modern nation-state system is often dated to the Peace of Westphalia (1648), which recognised state sovereignty. Nationalism grew powerful in the nineteenth century, helping to unify Germany and Italy and fuelling independence movements. The catastrophes of two world wars led to new international institutions, including the United Nations and, in Europe, the institutions that became the EU. Globalisation accelerated from the 1980s. Since the 2008 financial crisis and the 2016 UK referendum on EU membership, the debate between national sovereignty and international integration has intensified in many countries.
A common misreading
A Nation score is not the same as hostility to foreigners, and a Global score is not the same as indifference to one's own country. Many people with Nation-leaning results support generous foreign aid or refugee protection but want decisions made by national parliaments. Many people with Global-leaning results feel strong patriotism but believe their country's interests are best served through cooperation. The axis measures where you think authority and priority should lie, not how warmly you feel towards people elsewhere.
How the test measures it
Items address immigration, refugees, trade, foreign aid, international law, sovereignty, national identity, multinational taxation and cultural exchange. Scenario questions ask how you'd balance national interests against international commitments in specific situations. Items are worded in both directions.
How to read your score
Scores run from −100 (Nation) to +100 (Global). A strongly negative score means you consistently prioritise national sovereignty and identity; strongly positive means you consistently favour international openness and cooperation. Scores near zero suggest a balance between the two, or different views on different issues, such as trade and immigration.
Openness can mean different things
Because the world axis bundles several issues, two people with the same score can disagree on specifics. A free-trade economist and a human rights activist might both score strongly Global, but disagree about the role of corporations or international financial institutions. Similarly, a protectionist trade unionist and a cultural conservative might both score towards Nation for different reasons. Your full results page shows the individual items so you can see which parts of the axis drove your score.
Questions to reflect on
- Do you owe more to fellow citizens than to people in other countries? How much more?
- Should international courts be able to overrule national governments?
- Is cultural diversity mainly a strength, a challenge, or both?
- Who should decide immigration levels, and on what basis?