The Political Compass is inaccurate and/or misleading

Justification Con has claimed that there is no justification for the political compass to match the alternative chart I made. This is false; the chart I made uses the oxford definitions of left, right, authoritarian and libertarian. In the last round Con ceded that the oxford definitions were correct, but claimed that the Political compass only focused on part of the platform of the right, the left, the authoritarians, and the libertarians. If this chart was accurate they would match up with the oxford definitions, but they do not. The fact that the chart shifts to the left indicates deception through a semantic shift. Con has not addressed this point, but has rather danced around it. Authoritarianism Con claims that the political compass is not calling conservatives authoritarian, but rather social authoritarians. No-where on the website does it differentiate between the two; rather their own website associates authoritarianism and libertarianism with social issues. If one is a sociocultural collectivist, the political compass equates you with authoritarianism. If you are a socioeconomic collectivist the political compass equates you with the Left Wing. This semantic shift makes right wing nationalists, left wing authoritarians. It is for this very reason, the compass is inaccurate. If Con is correct, and the political compass is only focusing on part of the platform, than the compass suffers from selection bias. When creating a political spectrum chart; if you create arbitrary axes, the chart becomes pseudoscientific. Science is not arbitrary, and you cannot create a scientific chart with arbitrary axes. The chart is inaccurate for these very reasons; the chart is deceptive due to the semantic shift. Economic Left and Social Libertarian Con claims that it would be redundant for the political compass to use labels such as “Social Libertarian” or “Economic Left”. Not only is this false, as the website equates authoritarianism with sociocultural collectivism, but this does not address the point I made, about the non-authoritarians being labeled as “authoritarian”, and authoritarians being labeled as “libertarian”. The political compass’s authoritarian left are the only real authoritarians, and the political compass’s libertarian right are the only real libertarians. Labeling all Progressives as “Libertarian” and all Conservatives as “Authoritarian” is not only deceptive, but false. Strawman My opponent is falsely accusing me of straw manning the political compass. He claims that the political compass never used the words “collectivism”, “Left wing”, or “right wing”. According to the political compass’s own website, and I quote; “In the introduction, we explained the inadequacies of the traditional left-right line. If we recognise that this is essentially an economic line it's fine, as far as it goes.… That deals with economics, but the social dimension is also important in politics. That's the one that the mere left-right scale doesn't adequately address. So we've added one, ranging in positions from extreme authoritarian to extreme libertarian. Both an economic dimension and a social dimension are important factors for a proper political analysis…. While the former involves state-imposed arbitrary collectivism in the extreme top left, on the extreme bottom left is voluntary collectivism at regional level, with no state involved.” According to the political compass, those who favor socioeconomic collectivism and sociocultural collectivism are Authoritarian Left, but those who favor socioeconomic collectivism and sociocultural individualism are Libertarian Left. According to the political compass; because National-Socialists favor sociocultural collectivism when implementing socioeconomic collectivism they are authoritarian left, and since conservatives favor sociocultural collectivism when opposing socioeconomic collectivism, they are authoritarian right. The political compass does not take into account, that socioeconomic collectivism is also authoritarian. Contradiction In his rebuttal, con has contradicted himself. First he claims that the Right Wing does not refer to conservatism. To rebut the semantic shift he claims that the right wing of the political compass is conservatism, and due to the authoritarian-libertarian axis, conservatives are not being labeled right wing authoritarians. Not only is this a contradiction, but it is fallacious reasoning. Just because the political compass is labeled a certain way does not mean the results are accurate. Pro’s rebuttal did not address my point about inaccuracy; it only served to contradict his repetitive argument. Recap So far pro has not rebutted my arguments; he has just danced around them. The political compass is inaccurate, and pseudoscientific. By redefining words, and shifting the results, the compass has created a semantic shift. By semantically shifting political terms, the political compass is being deceptive.