Political spectrum

{{significantly problematic}}{{Sources needed}}{{Politics}}
'''Political spectrums''' or '''political echiquiers''' are heuristic representations of different [[political]] [[ideologies]] and how they relate to one another.  It can function as a useful tool for understanding how different ideas, parties and people compare and differ but, like all heuristics, it is an over-simplification and one should be careful not to [[Mistaking the map for the territory|mistake the map for the territory]].

==The one-dimensional model==
At its most basic, the political spectrum consists of a continuum from left to right, with varying shades of opinion in between. Usually, there are five political positions described in the one dimensional model: [[far-left]], [[left-wing]], [[centrism|centre]], [[right-wing]], and [[far-right]], with the occasional inclusion of "centre-left" and "centre-right" groups.

A common way of characterizing the left-right spectrum is that the left tends to support [[equality]] while the right tends to support hierarchy, be it [[political]]ly, [[social]]ly or [[economic]]ally. Another common association is that the left tends to progress beyond the current status quo, while the right tends to preserve it. Historically, the origins of these associations came from the [[French Revolution]], where those in the National Assembly who upheld the revolutionary and [[egalitarian]] ideals sat on the left and those who supported the [[monarchy]] and the [[Aristocracy|nobility]] sat on the right.<ref>{{cite web |last=Eldridge |first=Stephen |date=Mar 7, 2025 |title=Political spectrum |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/political-spectrum }}</ref>

One way to place the ideologies in the political spectrum are as follows:

[[Anarchism|'''<font color=black>Anarchism</font>''']] — [[Communism|'''<font color=darkred>Communism</font>''']] — [[Socialism|'''<font color=red> Socialism</font>''']] — [[Liberalism|'''<font color=blue>Social Liberalism</font>''']] — [[Centrism|'''<font color=gray>Centrism</font>''']] — [[Libertarianism|'''<font color=orange>Classical Liberalism</font>''']] — [[Conservative|'''<font color=deepskyblue>Conservatism</font>''']] — [[Reactionary|'''<font color=indigo>Monarchism</font>''']] — [[Fascism|'''<font color=brown>Fascism</font>''']]

Typically, leftist ideologies will be more critical of unregulated [[capitalism]] and its perceived issues regarding inequality and exploitation, seeking to heavily regulate it or [[Abolition|abolish]] it altogether. Culturally, they tend to support various [[civil rights movement]]s and measures to end social inequality and discrimination.<ref>{{wpa|left-wing politics}}</ref> The right, meanwhile, tends to view capitalism and traditional cultural roles and notions more positively, believing them to be [[Appeal to nature|natural]], inevitable, or even beneficial.<ref>{{wpa|right-wing politics}}</ref> 

===Problems with a one-dimensional model===
There are a number of problems with this model. One is that it flattens differences between a number of very different political schools of thought. For example, it groups together the [[Stalinist]]s and anarchists on the left despite the former advocating for a repressive one-party [[state]] while the latter wanting the abolition of all forms of rulership and subordination. Similarly, [[libertarians]] who believe in bodily autonomy and are [[pro-choice]], pro-[[drug liberalization]], skeptical of the [[police]], and [[anti-war]], but otherwise firmly support a [[free market]] economy with minimal government intervention, can find themselves forced to rub shoulders with [[anti-abortion]], pro-[[War on Drugs]], cop-loving {{wpl|War hawk|war-hawks}} in the conservative right, which many of them resent. 

[[File:Political spectrum horseshoe model.svg|200px|thumb|left|The horseshoe theory.]]
Another problem is the similarities the two extremes can often have on the traditional model. For example, both fascism and Stalinism support an [[authoritarian]] regime which brutally suppresses its opposition. In response, the [[horseshoe theory]] was formulated, which argued the two extremes had more similarities with each other than they do with the moderates or centrists.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Mayer|first=Nonna|date=2011|url=https://spire.sciencespo.fr/hdl:/2441/eu4vqp9ompqllr09iem47ao04|title=Why extremes don't meet: Le Pen and Besancenot Voters in the 2007 Presidential Election|journal=French Politics, Culture & Society|location=New York|publisher=Berghahn Books|volume=29|issue=3|pages=101–120|doi=10.3167/fpcs.2011.290307|s2cid=147451564 |quote=}}</ref><ref name="convo"/>  

However, there are additional problems with this model. In general, academic findings have disagreed with the horseshoe's conclusions, showing that there are, indeed, some major differences in positions between the left and right extremists.<ref>{{cite journal|last=Van Hiel|first=Alain|date=2012|title=A Psycho-Political Profile of Party Activists and Left-Wing and Right-Wing Extremists|journal=European Journal of Political Research|location=Hoboken, New Jersey|publisher=Wiley-Blackwell|volume=51|issue=2|pages=166–203|doi=10.1111/j.1475-6765.2011.01991.x|hdl=1854/LU-2109499|issn=1475-6765|url=https://biblio.ugent.be/publication/2109499 |hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hanel|first1=Paul H. P.|last2=Haddock|first2=Geoffrey|last3=Zarzeczna|first3=Natalia|date=2019|title=Sharing the Same Political Ideology Yet Endorsing Different Values: Left- and Right-Wing Political Supporters Are More Heterogeneous Than Moderates|journal=Social Psychological and Personality Science|location=Thousand Oaks, California|publisher=SAGE Publications|volume=10|issue=7|pages=874–882|doi=10.1177/1948550618803348|issn=1948-5506|s2cid=52246707}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|last1=Hersh|first1=Eitan|last2=Royden|first2=Laura|date=25 June 2022<!--2023-->|title=Antisemitic Attitudes Across the Ideological Spectrum|journal=Political Research Quarterly|location=Thousand Oaks, California|publisher=SAGE Publications on behalf of the University of Utah|volume=76|issue=2|pages=697–711|doi=10.1177/10659129221111081|issn=1065-9129|s2cid=250060659}}</ref><ref name="Pavlopoulos 2014">{{cite web|last=Pavlopoulos|first=Vassilis|date=20 March 2014|url=http://users.uoa.gr/~vpavlop/papers/invited/2014_Birkbeck.pdf|title=Politics, Economics, and the Far Right in Europe: A Social Psychological Perspective|series=The Challenge of the Extreme Right in Europe: Past, Present, Future|location=London|publisher=Birkbeck, University of London}}</ref> In other words, it only further exacerbates the issue of oversimplification inherently present in a one-dimensional spectrum by not only grouping the ideologies of the same extreme, but of ''all'' the extremes. It also ignores the similarities the ''centrists'' have with the extremists, including cases where the centrists helped fascist and other far-right regimes in cases where the far-left was ardently opposed to them.<ref name="convo">{{cite web|last=Choat|first=Simon|date=12 May 2017|url=https://theconversation.com/horseshoe-theory-is-nonsense-the-far-right-and-far-left-have-little-in-common-77588|url-status=live|title='Horseshoe theory' is nonsense – the far right and far left have little in common|website=The Conversation|location=Melbourne|issn=2201-5639|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170619000828/http://theconversation.com/horseshoe-theory-is-nonsense-the-far-right-and-far-left-have-little-in-common-77588|archive-date=19 June 2017}}</ref>

==The two-dimensional models==
[[File:Nolan-chart.svg|thumb|right|300px|The Nolan Chart]]
[[File:Compass.png|thumb|right|300px|The Political Compass]]
Some contend that a full variety of opinions can be better represented by two-dimensional diagrams where the (economic) left-to-right spectrum is balanced with another (social) axis representing a varying level of restriction on civil and social freedoms, both of which can be either left and right-wing. Two examples of such a representation are the [[nolan chart]] and the political compass, where political opinions can be plotted anywhere in a square grid based on the two axes. However, the theoretical merit of a two-dimensional political compass is a separate issue from its actual implementation in practice. Given that the actual political compass website classifies [[Bernie Sanders]] as a centrist,<ref>[https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2020 US Election 2020]</ref> its accuracy is questionable.

Two dimensional models like the political compass and the nolan chart ''are'', however, a marked improvement on the one-dimensional model. At the very least, they are capable of distinguishing neo-Nazis from libertarians and [[DPRK]] supporters from [[Libertarian socialist|libertarian socialists]].

=== Problems with the two-dimensional models ===
While we can now make more satisfactory distinctions between liberals and libertarians, there are still ways in which these spectrums mislead us and misconstrue the nature of political difference. 

Under these models, both anarchists and right wing libertarians are described as "libertarian" despite the fact that they have very different ideas about what that word means. Anarchists tend to support a more positive form of liberty that includes rights to things like food, medical care, education, and participation in decision making. For right-wing libertarians, their conception of liberty is more "negative" and is primarily a freedom from external interference. Right-wing libertarians typically do not believe that you have a right to food, medical care, education, or participation in decision making at your place of work. Yet despite these massive conflicts in their desired outcomes, intended policies, and contradictory understandings of what the word liberty entails, both the Nolan chart and the political compass understand both these movements as "libertarian"... which skips over a lot of important distinctions.

Another problem that should be considered is the way in which these models position "authoritarianism" as though it were a value that is actively endorsed. For Marxist Leninists (who typically score as authoritarians), quickly crushing the opposition is important to defeat the forces of reaction, who may be [[Pinochet|just as or even more tyrannical]]. Anarchists (who typically score as libertarians) during the [[Spanish civil war]] also imprisoned political opponents, established labour camps, and engaged in terrorism and summary execution: actions which are often defended across much the same lines that they were necessary to prevent fascists from getting the upper-hand.<ref>[https://www.jstor.org/stable/27672986 Casanova, J. (2005). Terror and Violence: The Dark Face of Spanish Anarchism. International Labor and Working-Class History, 67, 79-99. doi:10.1017/S0147547905000098]</ref> In these cases, similar measures and methods are endorsed in practice, but because Marxist Leninists are typically more open about what their [[revolution]] will involve, they get classed as "authoritarian", whereas the anarchists don't. The difference being not so much in what each group values, but in what they are willing to admit. 

It is also worth noting that terms like "economic freedom" could be considered politically weighted.<ref group=note>It could also be argued that the idea of "complete economic freedom" tends to collapse into [[:Category:Misnomers|a farce]] in practice, as unrestrained businesses may engage in underhanded tactics to get ahead, making life ''very difficult'' for the lower classes and new businesses.</ref> Leftists might refer to it as "corporate authority" instead.

==See also==
{{collist|3|
*[[Liberalism]]
*[[Centrism]]
*[[Wingnut]]
*[[Moonbat]]
*[[Fundamentalism]]
*[[Communism]]
*[[Libertarianism]]
*[[Anarchy]]
*[[Hard green]]
*[[Nazism]]
*[[Fascism]]
*[[Alt-right]]
*[[Horseshoe theory]]
*[[Conservative]]
}}

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|90%}}

[[Category:Political terms]]
[[Category:Political philosophies]]
[[Category:Political theory]]

Categories: Political terms, Political philosophies, Political theory