Different definitions of the political spectrum

TV media has a different spectrum.

Another definition pits leftist liberty against conservative order. On the surface the US republican party seems to be about order - more military, more police and more prisons, more morality - yet their opposition to the UN, support for guns and general tactics of getting the poor to blame everything on each other doesn't look too orderly. Basically they're for order towards the aristocracy and theocracy, but for chaos in regards to other nations and the working classes. This makes sense, as chaos keeps these groups divided.

One definition of left versus right is individualism versus "collectivism". Does a corporation looks like a bunch of wild individualists? Does a chaotic hippy commune remind you of a monolithic army brigade?

The "neither left, nor right, nor moderate..."

The frighteningly right-wing "libertarian party" tries to make itself neither left nor right by making its own definition of left and right. According to "libertarians", right means "economic freedom" (In the "libertarian" sense: freedom to own slaves) while left means "personal freedom" (In the "libertarian" sense: freedom to molest kids). This absurdly simplistic drivel divides the entire human experience into two halves, with economics taking 50%! Maybe economics is 50% of life to the extremely rich...

What's the diff?

Where is the difference between left and right according to "libertarians"? What's the big difference between using crack and selling it, or soliciting a prostitute and being one? Are these really such opposing poles?

In the words of a CATO think-tanker, "you can have wealth controlled by those with money or those with guns". The idea of wealth controlled by the people (you know, those guys who vote!) isn't even considered - nor is the hypocracy. Those with money need guns to defend it, while those with guns tend to rapidly become those with money. In conclusion, there's no bleedin' difference.

So what's actually "neither left nor right"?

If we take the above assumptions, we get these definitions:

· Right: Authority by those with property (which is defended by violence)

· Left: Authority by those with violence (governments - though these usually make things their own property, like in communism)

· Moderate: Both property authority and government authority

· Center: Opposition to authority (Anarchism)

Left----------------Moderate--------------Right

(Anarchism is nowhere near this scale)

The right is hypocritical claim that it is against government, while authoritarian left is hypocritical in its claim that it is against property. The liberal "left" (centralists) are not hypocritical, just wrong.

Anarchism is moderate?

If we use all of the above assumptions, anarchism becomes moderate. But then, the key term is "if". See the world's shortest political quiz (Not to be confused with the world's second shortest political quiz)