The Political Compass is inaccurate and/or misleading

My opponent still fails to grasp my argument. My opponent claims that the political compass is not creating a new definition for left wing, right wing, authoritarian, and libertarian, but rather the compass focuses on the sociocultural aspect of authoritarianism and libertarianism and the socioeconomic aspect of the left and right. Even if they do not intent to give misleading results, they are creating a semantic shift with the results. You cannot arbitrarily choose the axes, because it screws up the results. The Oxford Right (sociocultural Traditionalism) includes; 1.) Nationalists 2.) Traditional Conservatives 3.) Liberal Conservatives 4.) Classic Liberals The Oxford Left (sociocultural Reformism) includes; 1.) Socialists 2.) Populists 3.) Social Liberals 4.) Anarchists The Compass’s Right (Socioeconomic Individualism) includes; 1.) Traditional Conservatives 2.) Liberal Conservatives 3.) Classic Liberals 4.) Anarchists The Oxford Left (Socioeconomic Collectivism) includes; 1.) Nationalists 2.) Socialists 3.) Populists 4.) Social Liberals Nationalists are listed as left wing because they are socioeconomically collectivist. Anarchists are listed as right wing because they are Socioeconomic Individualists. By definition Nationalists are Right Wing, and it is fallacious to claim that they are Left Wing simply because Economic Nationalism is Collectivist. Conservatism is not socioeconomic Con claims that the political compass does not equate conservatism with authoritarianism, because Conservatism is a socioeconomic scale, and authoritarianism is a sociocultural scale. This is false; by definition conservatism is a sociocultural scale, and authoritarianism is sociopolitical. Con agreed with these definitions back in round 2. Just because the political compass redefines conservatives as socioeconomic, does not make them socioeconomic. All that does is create a semantic shift. “How many legs does a dog have if you call the tail a leg? Four. Calling a tail a leg doesn't make it a leg.” ~ Abraham Lincoln Bias If you wanted to poll a population to determine how many people are conservative, but you only counted those who agreed with the economic platform of conservatives, than you are engaging in selective bias. Other than selection bias, the political compass also suffers from information bias. Due to the faulty axes, people are placed in the wrong categories. http://www.healthknowledge.org.uk... Strawman Pro keeps claiming that I am straw manning the political compass, and taking the compass out of context. Yet I have provided a quote from the compass that proves otherwise. It is Pro who does not understand the compass, and who has not bothered to read the explanation of the compass on their website. Instead of addressing my arguments, Pro is just resulting to ad hominem attacks while dismissing my arguments. Left Wing and Right Wing My opponent keeps claiming that the political compass does not reference left wing and right wing. Simply because the compass does not say “wing” does not mean they are not referring to the “right wing” when they use the word “right”. My opponent has already claimed that the compass’s “economic right” refers to “conservatives”, thus associating “conservatism” and “progressivism” with a socioeconomic scale. By definition “conservatism” and “progressivism” are not socioeconomic, but rather sociocultural. Once again, the two are not synonymous. If the “economic right”, refers to conservatism, than the compass is semantically shifting the definition of conservatism. Mantra Pro claims I am not making any arguments, but rather reaping a mantra. In actuality it is the opposite; I made sound arguments, and Pro dismissed them due to X. I pointed out that X is not a justification for dismissal, but Pro keeps repeating his mantra of X. My argument has yet to be rebutted, as Pro has done nothing but dismiss it.