Politics

Summary

• The traditional Left-Right political paradigm is insufficient at representing all political viewpoints. Left and Right are two different forms of socialism.
• The degree of socialism is not established by the Left-Right paradigm. This is represented by the Libertarian-Socialist paradigm, with anarchy (no government, total freedom) at one end and totalitarianism (total government, no freedom) at the other end.
• The true political paradigm can be represented as a diamond, with the long axis representing the degree of socialism, and the short axis representing the form of socialism.
• There is an inherent tendency for government to become larger and more powerful over time.
• By focusing merely on the Left-Right axis, we have allowed government to become more and more totalitarian.

Contents

- The Traditional Left-Right Paradigm
- The True Left-Right Paradigm
- The Libertarian-Statist Political Paradigm
- The Two-Dimensional (Diamond) Political Paradigm
- The Road to Totalitarianism
- Positions on the Diamond Political Paradigm
- Appendix: The Nolan Chart


The Traditional Left-Right Paradigm



Traditionally, political candidates are categorized as having either Left or Right-wing views. Whatever a politician is described as - a liberal, a socialist, a communist, a conservative, a fascist, a Nazi, a radical, a progressive, a green, etc - they are usually placed somewhere on this one-dimensional Left-Right axis. Mainstream political parties are usually "moderate Right" or "moderate Left" and they "fight for the Center ground".

But if you were to ask a hundred people to define these terms, you will likely get a hundred different definitions. Everyone has their own definition; political conversations often sound like they are from the Tower of Babel. The terms are labels, used to conjure up either a negative or positive emotion within the mind of listeners. The terms become meaningless.

Likewise, the terms Left and Right have no well-understood and agreed-upon definitions.

Left usually includes liberals, socialists, progressives and greens, and extreme or radical Left is said to be communism. The Left usually has the following characteristics:

• They tend to prefer higher taxes and spending.
• They tend to prefer nationalized industries to private industries.
• They tend to promote free speech, wealth redistribution, democratic processes, and “social freedom”.

Right usually includes conservatives, nationalists, and extreme or radical Right is said to be corporatism, fascism and Nazism. The Right usually has the following characteristics:

• They tend to prefer lower taxes and spending.
• They tend to prefer regulated private industries to nationalized industries.
• They tend to promote moral values, patriotism, tradition, national security/defense and “economic freedom” for big business.

Clearly, not everyone can fit on the Left-Right paradigm. What about someone who:

• Prefers no taxes and no government (or extremely limited)?
• Prefers free markets to both regulated private and nationalized industries?
• Prefers freedom of all kinds – “social” and “economic” – for example, freedom to hold firearms and also freedom of expression?

There are many areas where the Left and Right are always in agreement: for example both sides support nationalized money, central banking, government education and healthcare, state-owned roads and land, and state-run police, courts and military.

The deficiency of the Left-Right political spectrum is clear when one considers the extremes: Nazis (far-Right) and Communists (far-Left).

• Nazism (or National Socialism) was totalitarianism which promoted race conflict and race hatred to motivate loyalty and the blind obedience of their followers.
• Communism (or International Socialism) was totalitarianism which promoted class conflict and class hatred to motivate loyalty and the blind obedience of their followers.

How can one take seriously a political paradigm which classes these two forms of totalitarianism as polar opposites?


The True Left-Right Paradigm



Upon further analysis, it is clear that Left and Right, and Centre, are all forms of socialism. In particular, we may call them “social-democratic socialism” (the Left) and “conservative socialism” (the Right). They are both socialism because they both share the principle that the government should “run” and “mould” society, by using force and intervention to transfer property.

The differences are only in the particular ways the government should run society – the methods it should use, and who, exactly, should be the recipients of government wealth transfers and who should pay. In particular:

• Social democrats tend to prefer heavy taxation, large wealth transfers to the poor, and nationalized industries, and oppose price controls, regulations and behavioural controls.
• Conservatives tend to prefer lower taxation, a smaller welfare state, regulated (cartelized) industries, price controls, product controls and behavioural controls.

Communism is simply social democracy where the size and power of government is great. Robert Kennedy referred to communism as being when government controls business.

Nazism and fascism are simply conservatism where the size and power of government is great. Benito Mussolini believed that fascism should really be called corporatism, because it is when government and business are intertwined.


The Libertarian-Statist Political Paradigm



Since the one-dimensional Left-Right paradigm represents merely two different forms of socialism, the extent of the socialism is not depicted. The extent to which someone is in favor of socialism is a more important measure of a political viewpoint than the form of socialism they prefer.

The extent of socialism can be depicted on a line with totalitarianism (total government, no freedom) at one end of the scale, and anarchy (no government, total freedom) at the other end. The position on the line is determined by simply the size of government, or, the amount of freedom. As government increases in size, it becomes more and more socialist (or statist), and less and less libertarian. Fascism, Nazism and communism, all forms of totalitarianism, are at the same end of the scale.

Individualism is the ethic that underpins a libertarian political viewpoint. Collectivism is the ethic that underpins a socialist political viewpoint.


The Two-Dimensional (Diamond) Political Paradigm



A true political paradigm will therefore be two-dimensional. On one axis will be the extent of socialism, and on the other the form of socialism. The extent of socialism is the more important measure and is therefore shown as the longer axis of a diamond, with the form of socialism as the shorter axis.


The Road to Totalitarianism



In The Road to Serfdom, F.A. Hayek showed how governments, supported by a collectivist mindset, always tend towards totalitarianism. Arrows on the diamond political paradigm depict this tendency, the size of the arrows depicting the varying likelihoods of shifts towards totalitarianism.

A government of the extreme Right or of the extreme Left will tend to lead to totalitarianism faster than a government using a mixture of Right-wing and Left-wing forms of socialism. This is how the extreme Left-wing Bolsheviks were able to quickly turn the Soviet Union into a totalitarian regime, and why the extreme Right-wing Nazis were able to do the same in Germany. Fabian socialism – a mixture of Right-wing and Left-wing forms, used in the US, the UK and France – is slower at reaching totalitarianism, but always proceeds incrementally towards it.

Historical evidence suggests that the speed of the tendency towards totalitarianism increases as the goal becomes closer. A government that is already very large, dominating a society of mostly collectivists, will find it easier to move further towards totalitarianism than a small government that is largely libertarian.

However even the most libertarian government thus far created, the government of the United States, has slipped incrementally towards totalitarianism over the past two centuries. This is because it is an inherent trait of a government.

Only a pure libertarian – or anarcho-capitalist – society will be able to prevent the slide towards totalitarianism. In this type of society, there is no (involuntary) government, and the emergence of one will be obvious as it will be an institution breaking the Rule of Law and not being brought to justice for it. It will be almost impossible to establish a government where one does not exist. It is always possible to expand the powers of even the smallest government.


Positions on the Diamond Political Paradigm

By making subjective estimates of the positions of various historical and contemporary political parties and individuals, it can be seen that by focusing purely on the traditional Left-Right paradigm and ignoring the Libertarian-Socialist axis, we have allowed society to gradually become more and more socialist, and now we are dangerously close to totalitarianism.


Communist Soviet Union



In 1917, Russia was already moderately statist.  The Bolshevik Revolution caused a sudden jump to the left and closer to totalitarianism.  Over a short space of time in the following years, the Communist government of the Soviet Union became more powerful and closer to totalitarianism.


Nazi Germany



In 1933, Germany was already moderately statist.  When the Nazi Party came to power, they quickly caused a sudden jump to the right and a swift path towards totalitarianism.


The Fabian United States



The Declaration of Independence (1776) was written in a spirit of libertarianism.  The government subsequently established in the United States was to be strictly limited by the U.S. Constitution (1783) to the role of protecting life, liberty and property.  For several generations, the United States prospered from having a largely libertarian society.

However, all governments naturally tend to become more powerful over time due to the inherent nature of what government is - an organisation that assumes for itself a monopoly on force.  In the early 1800s, when government was small, it was relatively easy to keep it in check.  The United States became considerably more statist during the Civil War (1861-5), though it remained one of the most libertarian societies in the world for the rest of the 19th century.

The Progressive Movement of the early 1900s transformed the United States from largely libertarian, to a considerable degree of socialism.  Industries were nationalized or more commonly cartelized.  The degree of socialism in the United States increased substantially after the establishment of the Federal Reserve System (1913) and the measures taken during the Great Depression (1929-46) which it created.

Ever since the early 1900's the United States has had a two-party system dominated by socialists.  The Republican Party has always advocated conservative socialism.  The Democratic Party, which in the 19th century favored libertarianism, advocates social-democratic socialism.  The Left-Right political paradigm was created to exclude libertarianism from mainstream politics.  Within a generation, politicians and people in public life who advocated traditional American libertarianism and constitutionally-limited government were rare exceptions, who were marginalized and labeled radicals.

The party of the U.S. President changes frequently at elections.  Democratic (left-wing socialist) presidents displaced a Republican president in 1913, 1933, 1961, 1977, 1993 and 2009.  Republican (right-wing socialist) presidents displaced a Democratic president in 1897, 1921, 1953, 1969, 1981 and 2001.

So long as people are divided by Left and Right, Democratic and Republican, the leaders of the socialist movement, who transcend party politics and control the United States from behind the scenes, are able to maintain their power over public opinion and hence over the course of government.  Steadily, the United States has been traveling down the road to totalitarianism, and many people have not noticed because they are only looking at the position on the Left-Right paradigm.


The U.S. Democratic Party



The modern Democratic Party is Center-Left on the Left-Right paradigm.  This obscures the huge range of views Democrats hold on how powerful and how much control the State should be allowed.  Barack Obama strongly favors socialism.  While he seems to be in the same position as his Party and supporters on the Left-Right paradigm, when his position (the white circle) is compared to that of his Party (the blue area) on the true paradigm, it can easily be seen that he does not represent the views of his Party or his supporters.  He is leading the country towards totalitarianism.


The U.S. Republican Party



The modern Republican Party is Center-Right on the Left-Right paradigm.  As with the Democratic Party, this obscures the huge range of views Republicans hold on how powerful and how much control the State should be allowed.  Their 2008 presidential nominee John McCain, like Barack Obama, strongly favors socialism, though with a Right-wing flavor. 


The 2008 U.S. Presidential candidates



Barack Obama (blue circle) and John McCain (red circle) both favor socialism.  Thus, the two main candidates at the 2008 Presidential election represented a false choice - really no choice at all. 

One candidate, Ron Paul (yellow circle), stood in stark contrast to the candidates favored by the mainstream media and political establishment.  His strong libertarian views gained him a huge following and he won up to 25% of the vote in some Republican primaries.  Though he was not successful in gaining the Republican nomination, his campaign was largely one of education about the long-forgotten libertarian political, economic and ethical viewpoint.  His Campaign For Liberty continues the grassroots movement for libertarianism that he has played such a pivotal role in during his many years as a Congressmen always advocating liberty. 




Appendix: The Nolan Chart

Various attempts have been made to make two-dimensional representations of political viewpoints, some attempting to combine the traditional Left-Right paradigm with the Libertarian-Statist paradigm.



The best known of these is the Nolan Chart, which makes a distinction between economic freedom and personal freedom. It ranks conservatives (the Right) high on economic freedom but low on personal freedom, and liberals (the Left) low on economic freedom but high on personal freedom. Statists (sometimes called socialists, populists or communitarianists) are low on both, while libertarians are high on both axes.

However, as many libertarians and Austrian economists such as Murray Rothbard and FA Hayek have demonstrated, economic freedom is the basis for all other freedoms. This invalidates the axes on the Nolan Chart. The Right should not be defined as being a high level of economic freedom, it should defined as that form of socialism which promotes regulated private industries, and strict price, product and behavioral controls. The Left should not be defined as being a high level of personal freedom, it should be defined as that form of socialism which promotes nationalized industries, heavy taxation and large wealth transfers.