Radial Scale of Political Convergence

Posted October 12th 2009 12:42AM

Richard

I had an idea recently about the relationship between different political parties so I charted it out see if visualizing it would help make sense of anything. I came up with this Radial Scale of Political Convergence. According to this chart each political faction has three motivating factors.

The factors are:
Trust: (Ideology - Altruism)
This is a belief that people are inherently compassionate. Withstanding any operating forces that may prevent them from helping each other, people will go out of their way to alleviate suffering experienced around them. Contributing to the common good is rewarding and people will extend themselves if they believe what they are doing is beneficial to the greater society.

Distrust: (Ideology - Egotism)
This derives from the fundamental belief that people are inherently selfish. Whenever possible people will opportunistically take advantage of each other, so they can't be relied on for support unless there are personal gains rewarded for their actions. Ultimately everyone is responsible for fulfilling only their own needs.

Capitalize: (Ideology - Laissez-faire)
A person's worth and subsequent wealth should be determined by their ability to secure resources for themselves according to the operating forces of the price system. Individual ownership of goods, services, property, and ideas is paramount. Any intervention to the free market is considered counterproductive and all earnings within the market are perceived to be deserved.

Communalize: (Ideology - Communism)
All societal resources should be commonly owned and the resulting production made available to everyone according to their needs. Efficiency and the true value of goods is maintained because outside of the profit motive there are few incentives for overproduction or inflation.

Preserve: (Ideology - Positive Liberty)
Belief that the current mode of government is effective when operated with sufficient competence. Through marginal reforms according to the prescribed democratic process, politicians are responsible for enacting legislation that strengthens the government while serving (placating) the needs of the people.

Revolt: (Ideology - Negative Liberty)
Whenever there are conditions that segregate, disenfranchise, or disproportionately empower people action must be taken to overthrow those systems. Any institutionalization of injustice is intolerable and will be absolutely opposed.

Posted November 27th 2009 7:28AM

skip sievert

People have been trying to reform the Price System since the very beginning of the Price Systems existence... Reforms of Urukagina in Sumer.
All of these old systems of thinking (political/religious/belief systems) are throwbacks to antique concepts from a time of low energy conversion... that we are still using nonsensically currently and equality and secular thinking does not really connect with them... we need something new... energy economics N.Y.Times article on Systems Ecology
A new type of government will remove money from the operating/governmental system.
Systems ecology as in this NewYorkTimes article is interesting and relates directly to industrial ecology... all of which is a modern throwback to the Technocracy technate concepts and ideas of sustainable resource use, however, it does not go as far as the technate design does... which does not use money but thermodynamics in energy accounting. More info. Technocracy Think Tank Project and Contact information T.T.T. more information A Forum and information site TechnocracyTechnate.org.

made some changes

Posted January 10th 2010 1:14AM

o00o0o0o0o0o

suggestions:

preservation, change to "compromise", meaning:
-When disfunctional, the system will resolve conflict through adaptation and reform.

Since "revolt" seems to be that:
-Conflict is resolved through conflict, in which either those in power are overthrown, or those rebelling are overthrown.


Then, after making the above changes change "Anarchy" into "Authoritarian/Anarchy"

Since socialism now tends to be more government controlled, while liberatarian tends to be more like anarchy.

Also, because both Anarchy and Authoritarian stem from the belief in "only the aftermath of revolt will destroy/bring about the system." Taking China's emperor system as an example of an Authoritarian system which believes in Revolt.

Anyway, those are my suggestions:
-"Compromise" instead of "Preserve"
-"Authoritarian/Anarchy"

I obviously really like this chart