Liberty Index: Difference between revisions

From IxWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
← Older edit
VisualWikitext
Kistan (talk | contribs)
4,111 edits
mNo edit summary
m Text replacement - "Ashkenang" to "Caracua"
 
(12 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
The '''International Liberty Index Foundation''' is a [[League of Nations]]-sanctioned NGO whose goal is the cataloguing of the nations of the world by their traits in relation to democratic norms and liberal values. Founded in 1958 in Cartadania in conjunction with the Organization for Democracy International, the ILIF manages a League-sanctioned set of indexes: the the Democracy Index, the Civil Rights Index, and the Perceived Corruption Index. Each is calculated relative to the global community yearly, with one nation scoring a 10 and setting the benchmark for the year. In addition, the ILIF manages a Global Liberty Index marking fluctuations in the quality of Index Benchmark Nations as well as a Composite Index.
The '''International Liberty Index Foundation''' is a [[League of Nations]]-sanctioned NGO centered on recording and comparing global survey and analytical data to produce comprehensive data for a number of metrics centered around the spread of political freedoms and systems, corruption in governments and societies, social values and norms, and civil rights. Originally founded in 1958 in Cartadania in conjunction with the Organization for Democracy International, the ILIF originally managed a League-sanctioned set of indexes: the the Democracy Index, the Civil Rights Index, and the Perceived Corruption Index. Individually, each is scored to a maximum value of 10, the highest of which sets the year's benchmark. Scores for these indices are also available comparatively between years to show the improvement of benchmark-setters year by year. These are typically shown compiled into a single score in the form of the Liberty Index, a {{wp|norm-referenced test|norm-referenced scoring system}} which provides a relative, simple view of a country's overall social and political freedoms.  


Over time, the ILIF has expanded to cover a number of analytical metrics, absorbing several related NGOs such as the Poverty Tracking Organization. As a result, the ILIF published a number of datasets on global GDP and wellbeing metrics which are used by the League of Nations and other international bodies through annual publications.
Each is calculated relative to the global community yearly, with one nation scoring a 10 and setting the benchmark for the year. In addition, the ILIF manages a Global Liberty Index marking fluctuations in the quality of Index Benchmark Nations as well as a Composite Index.
== Countries by Wealth ==
==== GDP ====
==== GDPPC ====
==== Poverty Rate ====
== Countries by Education and Health ==
==== Life Expectancy ====
==== Mean Years Schooling ====
==== Literacy Rate ====
==== Population Density ====
== Composite Liberty Index ==
Aggregate scores from each decade since 1960 and every five years since 2010 are shown below, and scores as well as individual indexes can be viewed in full on the International Liberty Index Foundation's [[website]].
Aggregate scores from each decade since 1960 and every five years since 2010 are shown below, and scores as well as individual indexes can be viewed in full on the International Liberty Index Foundation's [[website]].
{| class="wikitable sortable mw-collapsible"
{| class="wikitable sortable mw-collapsible mw-collapsed"
|+Composite Liberty Index Scores by Country (Quinquennial)
|+Composite Liberty Index Scores by Country (Quinquennial)
!Nation
!Nation
Line 112: Line 135:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Ashkenang]]
| [[Caracua]]
| -
| -
| -
| -
Line 150: Line 173:
|[[Burgundie]]
|[[Burgundie]]
|7.81
|7.81
|8.19
| 8.19
|8.50
|8.50
|8.84
|8.84
Line 196: Line 219:
|Scores extremely well in perceived corruption index and mediocre in other categories.
|Scores extremely well in perceived corruption index and mediocre in other categories.
|-
|-
|[[Carna]]
| [[Carna]]
|9.98
|9.98
|9.99
|9.99
Line 203: Line 226:
|9.86
|9.86
|10.00
|10.00
|10.00
| 10.00  
|9.98
|9.98
|
|
Line 292: Line 315:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Corumm]]
|[[Daxia]]
|
|
|
|
Line 309: Line 332:
|4.89
|4.89
|4.67
|4.67
|5.81
|5.81  
|5.83
| 5.83
|5.96
|5.96
|6.12
|6.12
Line 340: Line 363:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Etzil]]
| [[Etzil]]
|8.70
|8.70
|8.73
|8.73
Line 347: Line 370:
|8.84
|8.84
|8.85
|8.85
|8.85
|8.85  
|8.87
|8.87
|
|
Line 359: Line 382:
|6.73
|6.73
|6.94
|6.94
|6.88
| 6.88  
|6.91
|6.91
|7.03
|7.03
Line 412: Line 435:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Iriquona]]
|[[Netansett]]
| -
| -
| -
| -
Line 424: Line 447:
|Composite score reduced by arbitrary court system and lack of enfranchisement.
|Composite score reduced by arbitrary court system and lack of enfranchisement.
|-
|-
|[[Istrenya]]
| [[Istrenya]]
|
|
|
|
Line 470: Line 493:
|7.09
|7.09
|7.18
|7.18
|
|-
|[[Kloistan]]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
|-
Line 508: Line 519:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Lutsana]]
|[[Malentina]]  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
|[[Malentina]]
|
|
|
|
Line 533: Line 532:
|-
|-
|[[Maloka]]
|[[Maloka]]
|
| -
|
| -
|
| -
|
| -
|
| -
|
| -
|
| -
|
| -
|
|
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Metzetta]]
|[[Metzetta]]  
|
|
|
|
Line 580: Line 579:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[New Yustona]]
|[[New Harren]]
|
|
|
|
Line 648: Line 647:
|
|
|
|
|8.53
|8.53  
|
|
|
|
Line 671: Line 670:
|5.90
|5.90
|6.05
|6.05
|5.78
|5.78  
|6.01
|6.01
|
|
Line 748: Line 747:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Takatta Loa]]
|[[Loa Republic]]
|
|
|
|
Line 760: Line 759:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Talionia]]
|[[Lariana]]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|-
|[[Tanhai]]
|
|
|
|
Line 808: Line 795:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Telonaticolan]]
|[[Telonaticolan]]  
|
|
|
|
Line 917: Line 904:
|-
|-
|[[Vithinja]]
|[[Vithinja]]
|
|3.91
|
|4.78
|
|4.22
|
|5.42
|
|6.67
|
|6.12
|
|6.22
|
|6.77
|
|6.93
|
|
|-
|-
Line 976: Line 963:
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Yanuban]]
| [[Yanuban]]
|
|
|
|
Line 994: Line 981:
|8.20
|8.20
|8.30
|8.30
|8.36
| 8.36  
|8.40
|8.40
|8.42
|8.42
|8.45
| 8.45
|
|
|-
|-
|[[Zaclaria]]
| [[Zaclaria]]
|
|
|
|
Line 1,008: Line 995:
|
|
|
|
|2.66
|2.66  
|
|
|
|
|}
|}
==History==
==History==
==Controversies==
==Controversies==
The Liberty Index has a long history of dispute, mainly by nations with lower scores or non-Ocidental or Coscivian culture nations. Criticisms of the Liberty Index often center of accusing the ILIF of being biased towards Latin and Romance nations, unfairly boosting the scores of constitutional monarchies where the monarch retains real powers of government, and occasionally going as far as suggesting the Liberty Index is biased towards donor nations. Counterclaims often point to the inclusion of [[Carna]] in the upper echelons of scoring listings, as well as the fact that non-Latins can suck it.
The Liberty Index and other scoring metrics used by the ILIF have often been criticized as unduly favoring Occidental and Coscivian cultures over Alshari, Cronan, and Audonian nations, as well as opposing arguments from liberal nations decrying the institution of supposedly artificially inflating the scores of constitutional monarchies. In some cases, these arguments go so far as to suggest that the ILIF is little but a propaganda front for League donor nations.
 
In 2002, [[Varshan]] attempted unsuccessfully to sue the ILIF into in League courts on a number of accusations amounting to vexatious litigation. Several of these cases remained in limbo until Varshan's expulsion from the League of Nations.
[[Category:Bureau of International Statistics]]
[[Category:Bureau of International Statistics]]
[[Category:IXWB]]
[[Category:League of Nations]]
[[Category:League of Nations]]

Latest revision as of 10:39, 24 June 2024

The International Liberty Index Foundation is a League of Nations-sanctioned NGO centered on recording and comparing global survey and analytical data to produce comprehensive data for a number of metrics centered around the spread of political freedoms and systems, corruption in governments and societies, social values and norms, and civil rights. Originally founded in 1958 in Cartadania in conjunction with the Organization for Democracy International, the ILIF originally managed a League-sanctioned set of indexes: the the Democracy Index, the Civil Rights Index, and the Perceived Corruption Index. Individually, each is scored to a maximum value of 10, the highest of which sets the year's benchmark. Scores for these indices are also available comparatively between years to show the improvement of benchmark-setters year by year. These are typically shown compiled into a single score in the form of the Liberty Index, a norm-referenced scoring system which provides a relative, simple view of a country's overall social and political freedoms.

Over time, the ILIF has expanded to cover a number of analytical metrics, absorbing several related NGOs such as the Poverty Tracking Organization. As a result, the ILIF published a number of datasets on global GDP and wellbeing metrics which are used by the League of Nations and other international bodies through annual publications.

Each is calculated relative to the global community yearly, with one nation scoring a 10 and setting the benchmark for the year. In addition, the ILIF manages a Global Liberty Index marking fluctuations in the quality of Index Benchmark Nations as well as a Composite Index.

Countries by Wealth

GDP

GDPPC

Poverty Rate

Countries by Education and Health

Life Expectancy

Mean Years Schooling

Literacy Rate

Population Density

Composite Liberty Index

Aggregate scores from each decade since 1960 and every five years since 2010 are shown below, and scores as well as individual indexes can be viewed in full on the International Liberty Index Foundation's website.

Composite Liberty Index Scores by Country (Quinquennial)
Nation 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2015 2020 2025 Notes
Aciria
Algoquona - - - - - 2.35 2.34 2.34 4.88 Algoquona was subject to regime change in 2025 as part of the Final War of the Deluge.
Allaria
Alpachnee -
Alstin 9.33 9.35 9.46 9.50 9.68 9.87 9.86 9.91 9.92
Anglei
Anta Carda
Arcerion
Caracua - - - - - - - -
Battganuur 6.95
Bulkh
Burgundie 7.81 8.19 8.50 8.84 9.12 9.08 8.98 9.17 9.18
Caergwynn
Canpei
Caphiria 7.93 7.95 8.00 8.13 8.02 8.40 8.33 8.44 Scores extremely well in perceived corruption index and mediocre in other categories.
Carna 9.98 9.99 9.94 10.00 9.86 10.00 10.00 9.98 Consistent top competitor in all categories.
Cartadania 9.85 9.84 9.46 9.97 10.00 9.96 9.98 10.00 9.99 Consistent top competitor in all categories.
Ceylonia 8.54
Chakailan
Chenango - - - - - - - -
Copacaban - - - - - - - -
Copake - - - - - - - -
Corcra
Daxia 3.94 3.91
Duōmachāha 4.23 5.02 4.89 4.67 5.81 5.83 5.96 6.12 5.93 The Duama Sovereign Socialist Republics was replaced by the People's Republic of Duōmachāha in 1994.
Ehemo 4.12 4.28
Eldmora-Regulus
Etzil 8.70 8.73 8.80 8.85 8.84 8.85 8.85 8.87
Faneria 4.33 4.22 5.67 6.40 6.73 6.94 6.88 6.91 7.03 Composite score reduced by effective one-party state status. Score rising due to increasing liberalization.
Fiannria
Grajnidar
Hendalarsk 7.96
Hollona and Diorisia
Netansett - - - - 4.33 2.04 2.10 2.16 Composite score reduced by arbitrary court system and lack of enfranchisement.
Istrenya
Kandara
Kartejya
Kiravia ? 3.43 3.92 3.89 3.86 6.91 7.12 7.09 7.18
Kronesia
Loresia
Malentina
Maloka - - - - - - - -
Metzetta
New Archduchy
New Veltorina
New Harren 2.68 7.88
Orclenia
Oyashima 6.78 3.65 In 2022, Oyashima's government suffered a coup related to civil infighting between the Danehong and Mutsutorine ethnicities.
Pankara - - - (1.88) - Pankara has made efforts to prevent accurate Index reporting since 2019.
Paulastra
Pelaxia 8.53
Peshabiwar
Porlos 5.88 5.90 6.05 5.78 6.01
Pukhgundi
Pursat
Quetzenkel
Rusana
Sabnaki 2.98 3.10 3.21 3.30 3.32 3.31 4.83 Beginning in 2024, Sabnaki began a liberalization campaign as part of a rapprochement with Occidental powers.
Stenza
Loa Republic 5.47
Lariana
Tapakdore 7.26
Telokona
Telonaticolan
the Cape 5.68 5.64 4.03 6.38 6.32 6.99 6.98 6.33 6.73 Attempted coup caused a noticeable drop in 2020. Composite score reduced by effective one-party state status.
Titechaxha
UAE Composite score reduced by status as a hereditary absolute monarchy.
Umardwal
Urcea 10.00 9.98 9.97 9.85 9.87 9.93 9.93 9.94 Extremely good scoring in corruption and democracy indexes as a constitutional monarchy. High scores in civil rights are disputed.
Varshan 2.13 2.01 3.46 2.49 0.76 1.27 1.38 1.36 1.98 Consistent low scores in all categories; 2025 defeat in the Final War of the Deluge shows promise for improvements.
Verecundia
Vinesia
Vithinja 3.91 4.78 4.22 5.42 6.67 6.12 6.22 6.77 6.93
Volonia
Vorenia
Washakara
Whiteglen
Yanuban
Yonderre 8.05 7.98 8.03 8.20 8.30 8.36 8.40 8.42 8.45
Zaclaria 2.66

History

Controversies

The Liberty Index and other scoring metrics used by the ILIF have often been criticized as unduly favoring Occidental and Coscivian cultures over Alshari, Cronan, and Audonian nations, as well as opposing arguments from liberal nations decrying the institution of supposedly artificially inflating the scores of constitutional monarchies. In some cases, these arguments go so far as to suggest that the ILIF is little but a propaganda front for League donor nations.

In 2002, Varshan attempted unsuccessfully to sue the ILIF into in League courts on a number of accusations amounting to vexatious litigation. Several of these cases remained in limbo until Varshan's expulsion from the League of Nations.

Retrieved from "https://ixwiki.com/index.php?title=Liberty_Index&oldid=79338"