This article is my view on how political views are labelled.
I start off by displaying and criticizing four different "political spectrum" charts I found online, and then I present my own chart.
I hope you all enjoy, but please note: I am NOT a political scientist. I am a nineteen-year old dweeb who is not even majoring in political science, history, or philosophy. Therefore, I don't even consider my own opinion to be "expert" opinion. This was mostly for fun.
I start off by displaying and criticizing four different "political spectrum" charts I found online, and then I present my own chart.
I hope you all enjoy, but please note: I am NOT a political scientist. I am a nineteen-year old dweeb who is not even majoring in political science, history, or philosophy. Therefore, I don't even consider my own opinion to be "expert" opinion. This was mostly for fun.
This first spectrum here is the most basic political spectrum I could find.
It demonstrates a basic difference between left and right, and an example of extremism at the ends of each.
However, as the bottom of the image indicates, this really isn't enough to explain countless political philosophies such as anarchy or theocracy, as they could often be considered left or right.
People aren't just simply "left" or "right", so this graph didn't quite satisfy me.
Graph B: Left-Right Model Enhanced
This model was a little bit better. It does demonstrate that people's political views are more complicated than just "left" and "right".
However, this model is still quite flawed. Take the right side for example. I don't know about you, but to me, there isn't really any difference between "fascism" and "Nazism". The latter was basically just the Nazis' name for the former.
The far left side is even more absurd. Generally, as you move along the graph from the center to the ends, the more government control there is. So, why is it that as you move to the left of the communism, where government controls all or nearly all, you get "anarchism", where there is no government? It makes no sense.
This model was a little bit better. It does demonstrate that people's political views are more complicated than just "left" and "right".
However, this model is still quite flawed. Take the right side for example. I don't know about you, but to me, there isn't really any difference between "fascism" and "Nazism". The latter was basically just the Nazis' name for the former.
The far left side is even more absurd. Generally, as you move along the graph from the center to the ends, the more government control there is. So, why is it that as you move to the left of the communism, where government controls all or nearly all, you get "anarchism", where there is no government? It makes no sense.
This one is almost there. Seriously. However, it was obviously made by some right-winger, because it indicates that conservative automatically means smaller-government and that anything left of moderate is automatically tyranny. It also ignores moral and personal philosophy. Fascism and Communism are both extremes that represent a totalitarian government, but they are very different. In fact, fascism is considered by most political scientists to be an extreme right-wing philosophy, not left wing, because of how it promotes nationalism, militarism, and often appeals to religion.
Graph D: The Nolan Chart
Here is the first one on this page to the break the typical left-right binary. It was created by Libertarian Party founder David Nolan, and the Libertarian Party uses it a lot (including in their infamous "World's Smallest Political Quiz"). A very similar chart is used for each politician on the website Ballotpedia. ("Here" is an example using Jim Cooper of Tennessee.)
I find it quite accurate, but not detailed enough. For example, where are the anarchists? In this case, Mr. Nolan may have been using the word "libertarian" as a big-tent, cover-all word meaning "small-government", but more likely is that he was trying to pretend they didn't exist. Also, like many libertarians, he didn't make much of a distinction between the different types of totalitarian governments.
The Nolan chart is very close to what I'm looking for, and in a way, it served as my model, but I just wasn't quite satisfied with it.
Here is the first one on this page to the break the typical left-right binary. It was created by Libertarian Party founder David Nolan, and the Libertarian Party uses it a lot (including in their infamous "World's Smallest Political Quiz"). A very similar chart is used for each politician on the website Ballotpedia. ("Here" is an example using Jim Cooper of Tennessee.)
I find it quite accurate, but not detailed enough. For example, where are the anarchists? In this case, Mr. Nolan may have been using the word "libertarian" as a big-tent, cover-all word meaning "small-government", but more likely is that he was trying to pretend they didn't exist. Also, like many libertarians, he didn't make much of a distinction between the different types of totalitarian governments.
The Nolan chart is very close to what I'm looking for, and in a way, it served as my model, but I just wasn't quite satisfied with it.
My Graph: The Dillon Chart
So here's my graph. Some political scientists (or even some political junkies) might find fault with it, but hey, I'm no political scientist.
None of my terms are necessarily original, but they way I define them might be.
I give a more detailed analysis of each category below, but basically here's what makes my graph more distinct:
1. I flipped it so that authoritarianism/ statism is at the top, because it seemed easier to say "as you go up the graph, the more government is involved; as you go down the graph, the less government".
2. I split the anarchists into two separate categories that better explain their moral philosophies for having no government.
3. In the end, I came up with fourteen categories to put peoples' political views in, and really, it still isn't enough.
(If you're counting thirteen sections, you're right. But I think of two different types of centrists who really occupy the same space on the graph, hence the asterisk.)
So here's my graph. Some political scientists (or even some political junkies) might find fault with it, but hey, I'm no political scientist.
None of my terms are necessarily original, but they way I define them might be.
I give a more detailed analysis of each category below, but basically here's what makes my graph more distinct:
1. I flipped it so that authoritarianism/ statism is at the top, because it seemed easier to say "as you go up the graph, the more government is involved; as you go down the graph, the less government".
2. I split the anarchists into two separate categories that better explain their moral philosophies for having no government.
3. In the end, I came up with fourteen categories to put peoples' political views in, and really, it still isn't enough.
(If you're counting thirteen sections, you're right. But I think of two different types of centrists who really occupy the same space on the graph, hence the asterisk.)
"Communism" "In order to achieve true human equality without the evils of capitalism, a set of wise leaders is necessary." Example: Joseph Stalin, communist dictator of Soviet Union | "Fascism" "Our nation is the most superior nation on the planet; it's wealth and philosophy should be spread to all corners of the globe. In order to do this, we need to listen to our military leaders who will conquer inferior nations in order to improve them." Example: Adolf Hitler, fascist dictator of Nazi Germany |
"Majoritarianism"
"The best way to achieve peace and prosperity is to listen to the majority of the citizens. If the majority says it should be done, it should be done. The minority opinion is simply out of luck unless they become the majority."
Example: well, most Americans
"The best way to achieve peace and prosperity is to listen to the majority of the citizens. If the majority says it should be done, it should be done. The minority opinion is simply out of luck unless they become the majority."
Example: well, most Americans
"Democratic Socialism" "The state that we the people created should do everything it can to make every citizen safe, healthy, and successful, regardless of how much wealth needs to be taken away from the citizens in order to do it." Example: Bernie Sanders, US Senator from Vermont "Paleoliberalism" (Note: I didn't use "liberalism" because just about anything that isn't fascism gets called liberalism by political scientists.) "The best way to make our nation successful is to separate church and state, have some regulation on the free market, and make decisions based on the current majority opinion." Example: Cory Booker, US Senator from New Jersey | "Progressive Conservativism" "The state should do everything it legally can do to promote and enforce the values of the majority religion. Some wealth redistribution programs are necessary. A strong, central government with a strong military and police force is needed in order to do this." Example: former US President George W. Bush "Conservativism" "Above all, a culture of morals based on the majority religion is needed. Some basic wealth distribution is necessary, as is a government with military and police, but a close eye on government affairs is important." Example: Rick Santorum, former Senator from Pennsylvania |
Centrism View #1: "Compromisism" (Note: I felt there were two views of centrism which occupy the same space on the political spectrum.) "The best way to achieve human greatness is through compromise. With most political issues, there is an option for diplomacy and compromise." Example: (only sort of) former US Senator Henry Clay "Green Libertarianism" "We need decentralization because religion and businesses are corrupting the state and therefore the people. I fight for free-market solutions to today's top problems: climate change and inequality." Example: logician and philosopher Noam Chomsky | Centrism View #2: "Rational Ignorance" (Note: I felt there were two views of centrism which occupy the same space on the political spectrum.) "I honestly don't know much about politics, and I have plenty of rational reasons as to why I don't need to vote or familiarize myself with politics." Example: anyone in a democratic society who doesn't vote, and even some who do vote "Conservatarianism" "I believe religious texts and capitalism should be the first two places we look to for any solution. However, a moral government is needed to protect against capitalism's major flaws of allowing abortion, drugs, and illegal immigration." Example: former Alaska governor Sarah Palin |
"Libertarianism"
"The key to peace is to promote a culture of unrestrained freedom and capitalism. Only a miniscule government is needed to arbitrate on private contracts and protect the rights of the citizens it represents. Equality is promoted through the free market, not government."
Example: author and former presidential candidate Harry Browne
"The key to peace is to promote a culture of unrestrained freedom and capitalism. Only a miniscule government is needed to arbitrate on private contracts and protect the rights of the citizens it represents. Equality is promoted through the free market, not government."
Example: author and former presidential candidate Harry Browne
"Anarcho- Communism" "Every person owes the rest of society everything, and therefore can be counted on to contribute to the world without the incentives of personal wealth. Rules are completely necessary, but no rulers are needed to enforce them. Example: revolutionary Nestor Makhno | "Anarcho-Capitalism" "No person owes anyone anything, but human society can advance through voluntary mutual cooperation. Any act causing an individual to do something against his own will should be considered criminal." Example: 19th century philosopher Lysander Spooner |
So there you have it, my views on views.
I hope you noticed that I tried to put a mostly positive or at least neutral spin on all views.
So what are mine? Well, like you're probably thinking to yourself, I don't fit very well into any of my categories. And I'm okay with that.
I came up with fourteen categories, and there are seven billion people in this world. Generally, my political views are libertarian, but somedays I feel more like a centrist-compromisist and other days I feel like an anarcho-capitalist. Part of being nineteen is that I know my political views are still developing, so I'm comfortable in the fact that I don't really know what to call my set of views right now.
I hope you noticed that I tried to put a mostly positive or at least neutral spin on all views.
So what are mine? Well, like you're probably thinking to yourself, I don't fit very well into any of my categories. And I'm okay with that.
I came up with fourteen categories, and there are seven billion people in this world. Generally, my political views are libertarian, but somedays I feel more like a centrist-compromisist and other days I feel like an anarcho-capitalist. Part of being nineteen is that I know my political views are still developing, so I'm comfortable in the fact that I don't really know what to call my set of views right now.