Political compass for the21st century

[Captain Genet]

(06-21-2021, 11:55 AM)Eric the Green Wrote: It is clear that Trump is a cusp between yellow and brown on your diagram. The only way you can make your chart work is to make it three-dimensional in the area of nationalism and theocracy.

Impossible in our reality, but the best way would be to make the diagram a pentatope so that any sector borders all others. For example there are some people who combine Inclusivism with lefty civic Nationalism.

Quote:But yes, I don't think that matters. The larger issue is social conservatism, and theocracy and nationalism are just two ways in which one social group can claim the right to rule over others. But fascism in many places embraces both, as in Italy and Spain. Hitler just created another version of theocracy by championing his pagan religious roots instead of the Bible and the Vatican. And if Nazis called the Bible Jewish, then it shows Nazis are theocratic bigots who hate those of other religions like Jews. Indeed, since the main tenet of Nazism is anti-semitism, and their main enemy was the Jews, that shows that Hitler and Nazism is a religious doctrine. They were fighting over religion, and the Nazis wanted to impose their Aryan religion on others. All nationalists and all theocrats are alike in wanting to set up one world ruled by their own group.

In this way you can argue any political doctrine is a theocracy. Ayn Rand wanted to set up a theocracy where people worship money as a god. Antifa wants everybody to embark a religious mission of discovering their true identity and helping others to do the same thing.

I use the word "theocrat" in the sense of "advocating organizing society along the lines of a traditional religious code of conduct". In a way traditional religion and feudalism are more idealistic than capitalism, because they are not based on selfishness. Don't get me wrong, I support a capitalist economy with robust welfare sector, but we must not allow capitalism to rule our hearts and minds. To an extent I find theocratic criticism of modern societies illuminating.

Quote:Your world view probably influences your larger picture and your diagram. You being a modernist are going to take particular interest in theocracy, because you are basically anti-religion and see it as feudal, whereas nationalism is modern and nations were originally vehicles for the propagation of modernism. You also put a lot more moralism and cultural values in your diagram compared to the Nolan or political compass, which is more strictly political.

Broadly correct. Though I'm opposed to the supernatural part of religion, I still value some religion's moral codes. So I find Catholicism or Anglicanism more consistent with my moral ideas than Evangelicalism, and Evangelicalism more than Islam.

Quote:My view of spiral dynamics (planetary dynamics) takes account of the historical difference. Are you familiar with Spiral Dynamics? Interestingly they also use Blue to designate their "traditional authoritarian meme" which is basically religious and theocratic. For the capitalist democracy orientation they use Orange instead of yellow for their "competitive" meme. In planetary dynamics I use Brown for secular, monarchical statism, which is similar to your use of brown. Spiral Dynamics merges together the socialists and the greens under the color Green, which is similar to your red and purple sectors. They use yellow for the most recent meme, integral, which is also similar to your purple inclusivist sector. More on these ideas here: http://philosopherswheel.com/planetarydynamics.html

Is communism ever discussed in Planetary Dynamics?

Quote:I agree Saddam is different from the Wahhabis, the IS, Iran, etc. in that he was using the state for modern purposes like economic development and women's rights. Religion was less important for him and his type. He was a statist. As I see the diagram, statists are not necessarily social conservatives. They are in between the socialist and social conservative areas somewhere, opposite to libertarians. But you are welcome to develop your own view which distinguishes between nationalism and theocracy which makes the point of the difference.

Statism is basically civic nationalism. For ethnic nationalists, the nation is the sum of all people descended from a common ancestor (real or imaginary). For civic nationalists, it's the sum of all people living in a specific area. That's why Stalin could talk about the "Soviet nation" and Saddam could make up an "Iraqi nation", putting swarthy Arabs and blue-eyed Curds together.