I Designed The Best Political Spectrum

[Daniel Balan]

I just designed the best political spectrum in the world. I think that this one explains all political movements the best. 

It is designed as a dual system. One side is authoritarian, one side is Liberal. Each side is separated in left vs right and a center. Have a look at it. @Leo Gura, give me your seal of approval if you agree with it or give to me the deserved criticism for my eventual stupidity. 

 

Edited 7 hours ago by Daniel Balan

[Daniel Balan]

The big bar in the middle is a wall, this means that the Liberal spectrum ends there, and on the other side there is something totally different with no connection with the liberal part of the spectrum. On the left side of the bar are the authoritarians, there begins a totally new spectrum, there is no continuation or correlation between the sides that are separated by the big bar in the middle. And the small bars in the middle of both the Liberals and Conservative means a so called centre for each side. 

[Daniel Balan]

Also the system only has the X axis, there is no Y axis, all the labels I put there is just for more explanation and because I had nowhere else to write them, also the lines and arrows I have drawn them wherever I had space on the whiteboard, if I drew them upward or downward, there is no difference. There is no Y axis. 

[Leo Gura]

I find it hard to comprehend. But maybe I'm just sleepy.

Why do you classify the USSR as conservative when it had many liberal policies like women's equality, atheism, unions, workers rights, economic equality, free education?

I don't think your model will pass empirical muster.

Politics is so complicated that a linear models will fail to capture it.

Edited 9 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

18 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

I find it hard to comprehend. But maybe I'm just sleepy.

Why do you classify the USSR as conservative when it had many liberal policies like women's equality, atheism, unions, workers rights, economic equality, free education?

I don't think your model will pass empirical muster.

Politics is so complicated that a linear models will fail to capture it.

Because all the communists of the past were conservatives. Stalin was a conservative, all the people in my country that are nostalgic after communism are conservatives and now vote fascists. Both Nazi Germany and the USSR were conservative, there is no doubt about that in my mind. The liberals were the west and America during the cold war, USSR was extremely conservative and atheism was a fad at that time the same way today's fascists are deeply orthodox. Take Putin, a staunch communist atheist KGB agent now is the biggest defender of Christianity. Atheism in the USSR was a middle finger showed towards the Old Tsarist past that enslaved the peasants, because the old corrupt oppressive force that enslaved ordinary Russians was deeply Christian and using the Orthodox Church they kept the peasants in that old slave condition, that's why the USSR adopted atheism. How do you square with the fact that all the oligarchs that today defend Orthodoxy and are backing Putin were the biggest atheists and the most ruthless individuals from the old communist elite? 

In my country all the dictatorship loving people are all conservative, anti lgbt, anti democracy, extremely pathriarcal and extremely aggressive to me ( a liberal). Those people are all wishing that communism hadn't collapsed and that the WEST colonized the country. Those people now vote fascist parties, and before 1944, guess what, they were the biggest supporters of Hitler. 

I think of my political spectrum as simply perfect. The way I placed the republicans I placed them with their before Trump image in mind. 

Edited 9 hours ago by Daniel Balan

[Alexop]

There are exceptions that will not fit those spectrums. You need to analyze each party/group or even individual in order to have the most accurate description. But this model is better than what most people have in their heads. They conflate leftism with socio-cultural progress, which is not true.

 

[Leo Gura]

7 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

Because all the communists of the past were conservatives.

This is factually and historically wrong.

You need to be much better researched on the historical facts, and much less biased if you wish to create a serious model that's not just a projection of your ego.

But it's good that you are doing something original vs just parroting people.

Edited 9 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Daniel Balan]

20 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

Why do you classify the USSR as conservative when it had many liberal policies like women's equality, atheism, unions, workers rights, economic equality, free education?

Thats why I put them on the left of the authoritarian world. The government dictates from where you work, to the way you have sex with your wife. But that left is still conservative. The liberal left has nothing to do with the conservative left. 

[Alexop]

@Daniel Balan Communists progressed society to the next level. Ceausescu turned the rural Romania into an industrial powerhouse. He relocated people into cities, built a school system so people could learn to read and write,  took women out of the house and into the workforce etc... He prepared Romania for Stage Orange. Orange could not happen in a uneducated peasant country, it had to go through Blue.

Edited 9 hours ago by Alexop

[Daniel Balan]

2 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

This is factually and historically wrong.

You need to be much better researched on the historical facts, and much less biased if you wish to create a serious model that's not just a projection of your ego.

I'm trying to explain that there are 2 types of leftists. The stage Green leftists which are liberal, and stage Blue leftists that are conservatives. It baffles me that you are unable to see that Stalin would send to the gulags all the Bernie Sanders of today. To Stalin who was as conservative as one can get, people like me or you or AOC would be tortured to death for being foreign agents of the west. ( The west being liberal).

[Daniel Balan]

2 minutes ago, Alexop said:

@Daniel Balan Communists progressed society to the next level. Ceausescu turned the rural Romania into an industrial powerhouse. He relocated people into cities, took women out of the house and into the workforce etc...

Then how come all his lovers vote today fascist? if he wasn't conservative. I'm not talking about what he did or what he didn't, Hitler did the same in Germany. Putin did the same in Russia, Franco did the same in Spain, this isn't something remotely attributed to communism. Except the nazis wanted women to be raising the children, but he took the peasants of of the house. 

Edited 9 hours ago by Daniel Balan

[Leo Gura]

6 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

It baffles me that you are unable to see that Stalin would send to the gulags all the Bernie Sanders of today.

Sure, he would send his own mother to the gulag.

But this is much more complex than that.

The USSR was legit progressive in policy in many ways.

Edited 8 hours ago by Leo Gura

[Schizophonia]

2 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

Thats why I put them on the left of the authoritarian world. The government dictates from where you work, to the way you have sex with your wife. But that left is still conservative. The liberal left has nothing to do with the conservative left. 

The USSR was actually quite liberal for its time. Some people on the right are only so because the right wing has a monopoly on the fight against immigration, on a strong state, and things like that in the collective unconscious, but are actually more left-wing; or simply in opposition to a random, more or less centrist government lacking vision, sometimes corrupt.

Most communist movements are very liberal (Trotskyism, Luxemburgism, Titoism, Austro-Marxism...).

[Daniel Balan]

Just now, Schizophonia said:

The USSR was actually quite liberal for its time. Some people on the right are only so because the right wing has a monopoly on the fight against immigration, on a strong state, and things like that in the collective unconscious, but are actually more left-wing; or simply in opposition to a random, more or less centrist government lacking vision, sometimes corrupt.

Most communist movements are very liberal (Trotskyism, Luxemburgism, Titoism, Austro-Marxism...).

Yes for its time, but time evolves and what was progressive once now in hindsight seems conservative. It was progressive relative to feudalism, not relative to liberal democracy

[Schizophonia]

Just now, Leo Gura said:

Sure, he would send his own mother to the gulag.

But this is much more complex than that.

And one can be quite conservative without being authoritarian. It's possible to implement policies that favor family, work, sports, that are anti-drug, anti-unskilled immigration etc without persecuting anyone or becoming illiberal.

[Alexop]

4 minutes ago, Daniel Balan said:

Yes for its time, but time evolves and what was progressive once now in hindsight seems conservative. It was progressive relative to feudalism, not relative to liberal democracy

dude, "progressive" and "conservative" are relative terms. You compare the communists of the 60s with today's standards.

Even today, communists might look quite progressive compared to the Taliban gov.

Edited 8 hours ago by Alexop

[Daniel Balan]

3 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

The USSR was legit progressive in policy in many ways.

Was progressive compared to Nazism, which is why I put Communism on the left side of the authoritarian spectrum and Nazism on the right side of the authoritarian world. My spectrum acknoledges 2 different worlds. 2 different realities. One is Conservative and one is Liberal. The conservative worldview is worlds apart of the liberal worldview which you correctly assesed in your videos about conservative/liberal worldview.

[Daniel Balan]

30 minutes ago, Alexop said:

dude, "progressive" and "conservative" are relative terms. You compare the communists of the 60s with today's standards.

Even today, communists might look quite progressive compared to the Taliban gov.

I don't compare, I firmly put them on different planets on my spectrum. The big bar in the middle represents the outer space between 2 totally different planets. 2 totally different planes of existence and of perceiving reality. Progressives leftists of today are liberal as I correctly pointed on my model, but the communists and socialists of the 20th century were conservative and totalitarian. They were in the same world as the Nazis. But the authoritarian world also has left and right, the right is fascist, backwards, looking to restore an once glorious traditional past, and the left of the authoritarian conservative world was a vanguard movement that looked to eliminate inequalities and to reform old robust systems of opressions. But they were conservatives, as Leo said in one of his blog posts, conservatives were colectivists and liberals are individualists, you could also place the label collectivist in the autoritarian world side of the spectrum and the world individualist in the liberal side of the spectrum, today's progressives are extrmely individualistic, their approach is to make sure that each individual in society is represented and taken care of, whereas the collectivist left of the authoritarian world doesn't give 2 flying fucks about the rights of the individual. In the authoritarian world each individual must give his life away for the betterment of the collective, whereas in the liberal world the collective goes above and beyond so that each individual is taken care of.@Leo Gura, I think this is a great explanation of my model, please read it. I couldn't encapsulate using words the whole meaning behind my spectrum, I have a crystal clear image of what I mean in my head, but I can't really articulate it the way I should so that you guys have the whole picture that is inside my head.

Edited 8 hours ago by Daniel Balan

[Daniel Balan]

@Leo Gura if the communists were liberals, how do you square with the NKVD secret police that tortured and killed everyone that had different opinions of how society must function? 

@Alexop The securitate was almost a gestapo like paramilitary secret police, the NKVD looked like child's play compared to what the North Korea of Europe had, how is that liberal? Only conservatives want to squash and kill those who oppose them. This is a conservative feature, not liberal.

[Daniel Balan]

35 minutes ago, Schizophonia said:

And one can be quite conservative without being authoritarian. It's possible to implement policies that favor family, work, sports, that are anti-drug, anti-unskilled immigration etc without persecuting anyone or becoming illiberal.

You have that on the right side of the liberal world. I literally put republicans before Trump appeared there. But those are liberal measures with a healthy conservative bias. Me personally I would place myself a bit more close to the center, near the republicans on the right side of the liberal world. You would be near Bernie Sanders and Leo would be where Biden/Obama is placed.

Edited 8 hours ago by Daniel Balan