Part 2 – the linear political spectrum







Politics & Economics – Beyond the Rhetoric


Part 2: The Linear Political Spectrum 

In order to properly understand the political parties, their policies, and the ensuing results we use the linear political spectrum 2-dimensional graph to accurately plot and define the attributes of each and the differences between them. Once learned these straight-line visual aids will help you to more easily remember and be able to reference the attributes of the various political positions. Your personal positions can become more focused and consistent as you find the the position that most accurately reflects your political views and mentally plot it on the chart. Once you have determined your position you will easily be able to plot any political or economic proposal so that your understanding and the consistency of your voting both increase dramatically.


As shown in Part 1, below is the initial graph showing the two competing forces, government and personal freedom. Your decision is to determine the best balance of the two but to be fair that decision should be made from a large enough perspective to include the entire population, not just your own viewpoint which may be self-centered. Given that larger perspective you can begin the attempt to discover what the best balance of the competing political forces.



Begin with a line on a graph beginning at the top on the left. It declines in a straight line at a 45 degree angle until it ends at the bottom of the graph. Up the left side it is labeled 0-100% government control. Across the bottom it is labeled 0-100% freedom toward the right side.



Going in different directions: Another way to look at it is from today’s perspective. We are in the center now. From this narrower perspective of where we are today to the left there is less freedom, toward the right there is more. The graph above vividly portrays this optional way to look at it for those who struggle with the concept of “Where do we need to go from here?” The best balance of personal and economic freedom is located at a point 75% of the way to the right.


If you consider the center as far left as is tolerable, then one on the left side would be considered a minus, not just partially ok. Since one on the left is the opposite of one on the right that is a fair system and when comparing two candidates with one from either side it is acceptable to make a personal choice that labels the candidate on the left side as -60% and the right side candidate as +60% instead of +30% and +60%. If they are not going in the same direction, then the more diverse method is more accurate.


McCaine is near to the center of the LPS, drifting a little to the right, not firmly ensconced in the tough but productive policies of the right side. He makes up for it in the fact that he is not beholding to any person or group, able and willing to target corruption and accept the value found in a wide range of people.


By comparison Obama is located about 20% from the left, if that, and JM is about 55% from the left. Both of them have a ways to go but one is significantly closer and going in the “right” direction than the other. There is a legitimate argument that the Right is right, and the Left is just wrong. At least for the people being governed.


We have two candidates now who profess change, and both are believable that they will be different than the present administration. One changes in a positive direction and one changes in a negative direction.


BELOW: The political parties of the far left and beyond are most often represented by massive government dictatorial powers. If you think that a little left leaning politics is ok, look where it leads. The left is justifiably included within the Marxist grouping of political parties.


The above graph adds popular political parties to the political spectrum. Notice and be sure to understand how and why each position is located where it is plotted on the spectrum. The farther Left you look on the political spectrum the more the size of government is used as a weapon against the people. Against our people. Against us. The organized plan to weaken America calls for reduced military readiness and a shift in priorities away from national defense toward a gut-rotting increase in social programs. Both take us in the direction of weakness  against foreign aggression and from foreign economic competition. Not to mention the huge reduction in the quality of life verses the national economic potential.


Fascists and Marxists (including communists and socialists) are two different factions of the same part of the political spectrum. They are similar state-centric political movements that in large part fight over the same turf. Marxism is based upon atheism and upon the leaders personal self-interest with little or no actual duty to the people.


Often a politician will not have a focused position on all subjects and will be spread out on the political spectrum. In such a case take a weighted average position. The problem of inconsistency is then attributed to that person as an additional red flag to be wary of.


Beware of falsehoods attempting to put political spin on these relationships and positions, often if not always the left must use propaganda to spin the logic of their position. Since the left usually presents themselves in more glowing terms than the reality of the situation suggests, the misleading presentation of their positions (which is second nature to them by now) means that they are not bound by restrictions of accuracy in their observations and presentations. The propaganda needed to coat and misrepresent their policies to voters has become the reality to many of them. Understanding that purposeful misdirection is a necessary part of their process to drag society to the left and that most people would never go along with them if they knew the truth, they regularly change the meaning of anything that opposes them as well as that of the usual results of leftist policies, in true Marxist fashion. Voters beware! Those are mis-leading smokescreens, meant to mis-Lead America.


Classic Liberalism has been hijacked as part of the campaign to mis-Lead America. The Classical Liberal was a conservative and an independent thinker, not reliant and abhorring the abuses of a strong government power. Now a modern liberal is a leftist, not to be confused with the historical position. Classic Liberalism is on the right, promoting freedom. The Marxists have hijacked the term to the point where “liberal” means leftist.


A neo-con is a centrist, a conservative who has drifted too far left into the mire of too much government and as such doesn’t really stand for anything anymore. They try to meld the left and the right which does not work, freedom and controlling people are incompatible as is this position that has one foot on either side of the fence.


An uncivil tongue. You will know them by their lack of civility. There is a great difference in the civility and class of the two sides of the spectrum if you listen to the blogs or radio remarks of the far left. There lies the home of the screamers who make no sense. They inject the maximum emotion and the least logic into the picture in order to push their harmful agendas down the throats of the often unaware public. Beware of any diatribe from the left, it lacks the foundation of truth.

%d bloggers like this: