Thinking politics across two axis

SirStai

SirStai

Member
So most people think politics (at least here in Norway) in one axis, left to right. Conservatives on the right, liberals/social democratic parties on the left. But, something I just heard of (and had never really thought of before), is a two axis political "map", looking something like this (British version):

1056_partier_england.gif


It's not revolutionary, but it's kinda interesting, because seeing things like this really illustrates some things.

The most remarkable thing to me is how parties that claim the greatest concern for personal freedom, when you think of it, often at the same time can be those wanting to control some of the things that are most personal in our lives, like choosing whom to marry. It also illustrates, at least I think so, the need for a broad spectrum of political parties. Here in Norway we are seeing that those parties found in the chaotic middle of the traditional left/right thinking are losing votes and getting smaller for each election, which basically means we are seeing a radicalization of society, and that is a very dangerous tendency.

So, what do you think? Interesting?
 
The far right should be anarchy and the far left should be authoritarian. The top should be a republic approach and the bottom should be direct democratic approach.

In the OP graph the far bottom left does not make sense. Authoritarian anarchy. . . wut?

 
still a weird graph.. for example why is communism way over next to authoritarianism? it may happen that the "communist" countries we've seen have really been authoritarian but the theoretical idea of communism in it's true form is about the dissolution of the state..?
 
Interesting? Yes. New? No.

Political Economists have been using spatial models along these two axes for decades. Read any paper by Prof. Simon Hix or Dr. Abdul Noury from the mid-1980s, and you'll see they use this spatial distribution, to great effect.

It does however model very nicely the difference between economic and social axes. I define myself as a social liberal, but at the same time, I'm a fiscal socio-conservative, a post-Chicagoan, and a post-Blairite, the two of which do not sit well together on one axis.

 
Lets be honest here. Communism = State controls EVERYTHING. Obviously it authoritarian. What it preaches is one thing, what it is is another. I mean, the whole basis for communism is having a strong state (although it's supposed to be "of the people") to "provide equally to everyone".

This graph is obviously simplified, and it can't possibly be 100% right, but it's way better than the traditional left/right one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top