EFBP

Economy · Freedom · Belonging · Power

Public profiles

Open methodology

How EFBP estimates public profiles

EFBP is a discussion framework, not a scientifically validated political test. Public profiles are transparent editorial estimates. They describe four narrow dimensions and do not measure a person’s morality, competence, methods or historical impact.

Central rule

When words and actions conflict, actions take priority.

A neat quotation should never outweigh a government record, parliamentary vote or use of institutional power.

Evidence hierarchy

What the estimates use

  1. 1
    Actions in office

    Enacted policy, use of executive power, appointments and treatment of institutional checks.

  2. 2
    Voting and parliamentary record

    Recorded votes, legislative sponsorship and consistent conduct over time.

  3. 3
    Published policy

    Manifestos, official programmes and detailed policy documents.

  4. 4
    Public statements

    Speeches and interviews provide context, but rank below observable action.

  5. 5
    Historical research

    For historical rulers, reputable archives and specialist historical institutions are used.

People who have governed are assessed mainly on their record. People without a governing record are marked as a platform estimate and normally receive lower confidence.

Visible labels

Basis, confidence and uncertainty

Basis

Shows whether the estimate rests on a government record, parliamentary record, platform or historical research.

Confidence

High means substantial consistent evidence. Medium means mixed evidence or interpretation. Low usually means a platform proxy or limited record.

Counterweight

Each dimension includes evidence or uncertainty that could pull the estimate in another direction.

Review date

Every profile displays when it was last checked. Corrections are logged when they materially change a coordinate.

Why four dimensions?

EFBP and the Political Compass ask different questions

Two axes

Political Compass

Separates economic Left and Right from a social Libertarian and Authoritarian scale. It has used this model since 2001.

Read its own explanation
Four coordinates

EFBP

Separates Economy, personal Freedom, Belonging and institutional Power. Someone can favour personal liberty while also favouring concentrated government, or favour open belonging while supporting market economics.

EFBP does not claim to have invented multidimensional political mapping. Its contribution is keeping these four particular questions separate.

Historical profiles

Context, never equivalence

Historical rulers are excluded from the automatic closest-coordinate result and placed behind an explicit warning. A shared coordinate describes only a position on one coarse scale. It cannot represent atrocities, coercive methods, scale of harm or moral responsibility.

Changing a historical score merely to avoid an uncomfortable numerical overlap would make the method less honest. The safer response is to explain the limit and keep historical material separate.

Review and corrections

Challenge the evidence, not just the number

Each public profile links to its evidence and offers a correction template. Useful corrections identify the dimension, propose a different coordinate and include a reliable source. Scores are not decided by public vote.

The profiles are currently editorial estimates. Cross-partisan review is the next stage; until independent reviewers have assessed them, the site does not describe them as neutral or authoritative.

Send methodology feedback

Change log

Material revisions