Political compass for the21st century

[Eric the Green]

(03-24-2020, 04:29 PM)David Horn Wrote:

(03-24-2020, 12:34 PM)Blazkovitz Wrote:

(03-24-2020, 11:25 AM)David Horn Wrote:

(03-24-2020, 08:50 AM)Blazkovitz Wrote: Now I see a sixth sector is necessary, one for strongman types who aren't either theocrats or ethnocentrists. Let's call it statism. Neoreactionaries who aren't into ethnocentrism such as the blogger Mencius Moldbug, dictators like Lukashenko, Maduro and Assad. Stalin would also be quite close, as his interest of revolutionary Marxism was negligible since the late 1930s.

It would be located between Communism and Nationalism, making it the exact opposite of market-worship.

You think 2-dimensionally.  If you add an extra axis or two to your chart, it makes placing all factors in separate (and orthogonal) dimensions.  My choice of axes are:

1. Anarchy   <-(Authority)->   Oppression
   
2. Communal   <-(Social)->   Individual
   
3. Atheism   <-(Faith)->   Religiosity
   
4. Socialism   <-(Economy)->   Capitalism
   
5. … add others as needed.
   

Adding an axis to describe Thinking v Feeling, or any other atypical measure, has no impact on the other axes. They are fully independent.  

My $0.02

You can do it in 2D, it'll look like a spider web:



Thinking vs Feeling is not really relevant for politics, Marx was a rationalist and Rousseau was more emotion-based, but politically they are quite similar and part of the same sector.

True enough, but you actually made my point.  An array of orthogonal vectors can be as large and varied as desired.  Ignoring some (if that's your preference) has no impact on the others, though others may find some value you are free to find irrelevant.

In physics, there is an argument for an 11-dimensional universe, though we only live in four of them.  Havin no need of the other 7 doesn't invalidate their existence.

I have observed that philosophical and psychological views like solipsism are on a different wheel than political views.