New Political Spectrum

>>115243282
Have you not seen the millions of threads that have a "liberal" and "conservative" scale as well as a "authoritarian" and "libertarian" scale?

>>115243516

Most people misunderstand that scale though. Authoritarian vs. Libertarian is supposed to be the values scale, where Authoritarian is more conservative and libertarian is libertine, and Left vs. Right is supposed to be economic

>>115243516
those are simplistic and somewhat inaccurate

>>115243282
Communism and fascism are both socialist ideas, and are therefore leftist in nature.
It is important to remember that fascism was a response to communism, and tried to prevent the subversion of culture by advocating for an ethnic national socialism.

Both are still leftist ideas, for both rely on a powerful centralized government to enact their ideas. Loose, decentralized governments are a key to the right-leaning ideas of our modern time.
I specify "our" time because monarchies were considered right leaning around the rise of the populist movements.

"Left or Right" can be confusing unless you have the full context of the politics in question, though the trend seems to be
>left = change
>right = conserve

>>115244048
Oh, leaf brings up a good point I forgot about, in that economic preference also plays big into the "Left or right" archetype.

>>115244728
what in your opinion would be an effective shape or chart to more accurately depict the different schools of thought?

>>115243282
>Fascism opposite of communism
fucking hell

what do you all want a spectrum ? can't you assume there just cannot be a spectrum ? it's fucking IDEAS, you can't do it.

>>115244867

I just bring it up because I find myself in that seemingly-rare group (on /pol/ and in mainstream politics anyway) that is economically left-wing but conservative. Being pro-labour doesn't necessarily make you a socialist, a communist, or a shitlib.

>>115245111
Autists run on spectrums.

>>115245290
What makes you economically liberal? You believe workers are entitled to the profits?

I'm pretty ignorant about this so I'm just curious.

>>115244928
The dichotomy is good enough, it is just important to understand the relavence these ideas have towards each other. Typically the two sides will form naturally due to some current event that dictates how people want the problem solved.
For instance, our current left vs right in the US was started with FDR. A lot of our political leanings can be traced directly back to his controversial New Deal policies. Another one would be the civil rights movement, though that was a lot more artificial in nature, and that is why the Democrats are losing the black vote.

Overall, it is just important to remember that there are always two sides, and never really more. "Third partiers" typically lean one way or the other, and just have some minor disagreements with their established "side".
>Left looks to change while the right looks to preserve
>There are two sides to an issue, and everyone else is waiting to be convinced of one side or the other
I think this is why our two party system seems to work well enough in spite of the popular complaints. If you look to other countries thay have multiple parties, they form coalitions usually, so it always devolves back to the 2 party system.

>>115245551

Yes, workers need to receive a fair compensation for their work. Just think of how horribly this has degenerated over the years, most families can't even live off of a single income anymore.

And I base my views off of Catholic social teaching, not off of Marx or whatever. You can see the most well-known encyclical on labour issues here:

http://w2.vatican.va/content/leo-xiii/en/encyclicals/documents/hf_l-xiii_enc_15051891_rerum-novarum.html

>>115245290
>that is economically left-wing
What of your economic beliefs that you consider left-wing? Worker's rights are an extension of individual rights, and individual rights is not really a "left-leaning" idea anymore.
It was left-leaning in the classical liberalism days, but we are long past those times.

From my observations, the "leftist" ideas of old (the ones with merit) become the "right-leaning" ideas of today. That is just how the system trends, it seems. The child is more liberal than their father, but less liberal than their own child.
It seems it is a social phenomenon that developed as humans worked to make civilization work.

>>115245111
nice trips. I'm saying the same thing; a spectrum doesn't work and we need a new way of organizing and comparing them

>>115246044
>Yes, workers need to receive a fair compensation for their work. Just think of how horribly this has degenerated over the years, most families can't even live off of a single income anymore.
This belief is held by "both sides", no? The disagreements seem to form around deciding how to address these perceived issues, not necessarily on the belief itself.

For instance, today's "left" seems to be in favor of unions and "group rights", while the "right" seems to dislike giving rights to "groups", and instead wants to secure the rights of the individual, and believe in solving the issue at its roots.

>>115246432

It might just be in Canada because our Conservative parties are more in the tradition where they really obsess over libertarian economics and ridiculous things like that, and they're considered right-wing. So for that reason I would consider my economic views to be left-wing.

I wouldn't say that I believe in individual rights per se though, there needs to be a balance between individual rights and your obligation as a member of a community. I find the old idea of privileges and duties to be superior to the idea of rights.

>>115246956

I'd say that at least in Canada the economic right only cares about individuals if big multinationals are considered individuals, and only cares about groups if the same multinationals are considered groups, and it's impossible to support that.

>>115247602

I like the horseshoe but it's hard to make it specify economic or social belief

that spectrum has been thorough debunk. far left has communism and nazism, far fright is anarchism.

>>115243282
Also, shouldn't the extreme right side be anarchy? Of course, that is by today's understanding of left vs right, specifically in the right's belief in smaller government.
>>115247304
>I wouldn't say that I believe in individual rights per se though, there needs to be a balance between individual rights and your obligation as a member of a community. I find the old idea of privileges and duties to be superior to the idea of rights.
Hmm, I think I have to disagree on this issue. I'm more of the thought that you can't expect an individual to willingly be dictated to without an obvious benefit to the individual in question, like fair pay for example.
I also am extremely skeptical of any group that pretends they have the authority to dictate someone's free will. No one has the right to suppress the will of another, and I find that groups feel entitled to suppress others if the majority is in agreement.

Groups also serve to mask individuals from accountability, another thing I do not like. A part of individual rights is personal accountability.
I believe a lot of the degeneracy we have been witnessing lately is purely due to people refusing to be accountable for their actions/choices.

>>115248212
Horseshoe is an oversimplified way of looking at reactionary authoritarianism. The far left is authoritarian in practice because of flaws in their beliefs, which pushes the right to react defensively--ultimately becoming more authoritarian too

But its not as simple as saying the right/left become the same at extremes. In some ways maybe

>>115243282

That particular illustration of the political spectrum is very inaccurate and should be discarded entirely. Neoliberalism as well as classical liberalism belong on the right wing scale in general. Its permissive view on social/cultural issues (which are mostly moderate) does not temper the fact that their economic policies are extreme and corrosive to everything that is good and wholesome. Liberalism is only considered "left wing" on the north american continent.

>>115244728

Jesus fucking christ, why does this stereotype of americans always prove to be true? A communist society is in theory a stateless society. A world without border organized through workers communes. It is not a form of government. Socialism can be both a form of government and a set of policies without being both. As a form of government, it is authoritarian, as policies enacted by democratically elected labour government they can range from everything between centralizing and decentralizing measures. There is no particular orthodoxy here. Fascism has its own principle brand of representation and organization through corporatism, but once again: that can mean very different things depending on whether the country is democratic or not. In Sweden, it was actually a way of decentralizing power to various interest groups after WW2 and allowing for strong and organized societal guilds.

>>115248455

The problem with that line of thought is that nowhere in the world do you find an individual who exists independently of everyone else. So sure, you have some respect for individuals, but you also have to take into account the individual's relation with society at large

>>115249662
That is where the accountability part is very important. You can have a society where the rights and choices of the individual are held in highest regard, and it can either have equally strong personal accountability or no accountability at all.
I think our reality is that the enshrinement of individual rights was accomplished long ago, but personal accountability has been becoming less and less important in the recent decades.

The core issue is that proper personal accountability opens the individual up to lawsuits headed by those who are only looking to take advantage of others. In an effort to protect themselves from liability, individuals have forsaken accountability. It is not sustainable social behavior, and the social turmoil we have been experiencing for decades is due to that.

File: 1471998361060.jpg (99KB, 400x388px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 400x388px

Bumpidy bump. /pol/ needs more discussion threads like this.

>>115250341

I don't think I understand what you're trying to get at with this

Isn't anarchism further left than communism?

>>115249503
>>115249662
>>115248748
so, how about two spectrums? economically conservative ideologies displayed on the top spectrum, and a parallel spectrum below displays economically liberal ideologies?

>>115250851
The proper counter-balance to your concerns with individual freedoms/rights is a society that holds personal accountability in high regard. Our society, in stark contrast, has forsaken personal accountability because of liability.

Liability originally was intended to reinforce this accountability, but in reality it has greatly hurt instead. Instead of the laws encouraging people to be personally accountable (for fear of liability suits), reality has developed in a way where people avoid personal accountability so that they may feign ignorance in a sort of preemptive defense against lawsuits.

For example, take the Oroville Dam situation. In the initial days that the problem was realized, officials refused to acknowledge that it was an administration failure in the prioritization of funding. The funds to improve the dam system were collected, but then spent on things completely unrelated.

Now, the officials will never admit to this, as if they confirm that the administration misused their funds, the lawsuits will pile up fast. Not only does this risk their political carriers, they also risk facing negligence charges or something similar.

So the end result is that no one will admit that the issue is rooted in the state's misuse of funds, so the reality of the situation will never be acknowledged.

This is what I mean in saying how personal accountability is very important to our individual rights, and how accountability has degraded in recent decades, and why

File: current year political spectrum.png (59KB, 929x272px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 929x272px

>>115243282
>not updating your spectrum for 2017

>>115243282
Libertarianism supports with economical arguments, cultural marxism's tesis. For instance, open borders.

>>115249503
>A communist society is in theory a stateless society.
>in theory
And how is the communist society realized again? Oh right, socialism.

Communism is just a centralized authority government that forsakes national identity in favor of global integration.

>>115243282
>libertarianism suddenly hits fascism
literally cancer

sage, hidden, reported

>>115251450

I'd say that the moral dimension to politics is more defining than the economic dimension though.

>>115251972

I think the things you're saying about liability and lawsuits are more of an American-specific thing, and to be honest I don't know what you mean by Oroville Dam at all. It sounds more like a problem of corruption than anything else, I recognise it because there is a lot of corruption here and it sounds similar.

>>115243282
Don't think of it as a line, it's a circle. Commies become tankies and tankies become commies. Join the majority of the world on the other side of the circle

>>115243282
Don't Fucking post you fucking newfag

>>115252268
did you even read the thread? we're trying to make a new version that makes sense, retard.

>>115252132

According to Marx that is, although it was also used as a historical concept to describe archaic societies by Engles. Marxist dialectics are however not an ideological promulgation as such, they are, more accurately, the processes of historical materialism, i.e. a proposed empirical model which argued that history progresses when societies change as a result of the relations of productions change. This has long since proved to be wrong and is therefore completely primitive as an example with no bearing on the modern world. Socialism (as used by Marx mind you, and not the historical concept which predates him by about 250 years), is the antithesis of a capitalist system where this centralization you speak of occurs. In a communist society, all government has withered away. Karl Marx was vehemently opposed to the state arguing that its existence was inseparable from slavery.

>>115251450
Conservatism is antithetical to the dogmatic sentiments of market-liberalism and consumption culture of the right as much as it is antithetical to leftist garbage. It is based on the principle of an organic social order (consider the nation as a body, where everything has a place and function which gives it inherent value and purpose). Modern conservatism is syncretic in nature and is neither pragmatic, liberal or radical. If everything has its constrained place in a proposed organic societal order, that would include markets and individuals.

>>115244728
>Communism and fascism are both socialist ideas, and are therefore leftist in nature.
Communism is stateless. Men govern themselves but they take care of society because they're smart enough to know it's in their best interest to do so.

It's closer to civilized anarchy than any leftist ideology of a nanny state or right wing theology of Darwinian eugenics.

>>115243282
How does this stuff fit onto a single gradient.

>>115251972
>So the end result is that no one will admit that the issue is rooted in the state's misuse of funds,

The real problem is that corporations within the state apply undue pressure on legislators to divert public funds to their pet profit-driven projects.

https://www.revealnews.org/article/big-oils-grip-on-california/

>>115257733
>Communism is stateless
it's never been done right

Fuck off faggot. The Vanguard never steps down

Already done
https://youtube.com/watch?v=VogzExP3qhI

>>115260454
Communism is stateless
>I have no clue what it is but I hate it
The Soviet Union was state capitalist. China is 3 different kinds of capitalist plus varying degrees of socialism.
>it's never been done right
It's literally never even been close.
>But I like to label anything I don't like "Communist"
Yeah, I was getting that illiterati vibe from you.

>The Vanguard never steps down
The Vanguard should have passed 9th grade civics before embarrassing itself on /pol/ like this.

>>115247602
you spelled center rong

File: 1276561779899.png (47KB, 657x657px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 657x657px

>>115243282
This scale is garbage.

>>115262078
>1276561779899.png
>This scale is garbage.
Then why did you post it?

>>115261656
>i-it wasn't real communism
embarrassing post