Last time, we saw that the Traditional U.S. spectrum was not only flawed but also divisive. How do we fix it?
If you like our content and support our goal of serious discussion without division and name-calling, please join us on Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/c/IntoTheDesert
Purchase your copy of Preserving Democracy by Elgin L. Hushbeck Jr. today: https://amzn.to/3C3oTGO
00:00In Part 1, we saw that the traditional U.S. political spectrum, based on equality versus control, was not only flawed, but divisive.
00:11Yet, if the spectrum doesn't work, how do we fix it?
00:18The Political Spectrum Part 2. Fixing the Spectrum.
00:23Welcome to Into the Desert, exploring the wilderness of ideas.
00:27Don't forget to hit those like and subscribe buttons.
00:30And if you want to support our channel and our mission of encouraging discussion, not division, please join us on Patreon.
00:37The link is in the description.
00:40In the Political Spectrum Part 1, we looked at a common U.S. political spectrum that spanned between the far left, focusing on equality, and the far right, focusing on control.
00:52We saw that not only did the spectrum not match the U.S. political landscape, but it had a number of errors, was divisive, and thus counterproductive to an effective democracy.
01:07If you haven't seen Part 1, we highly recommend checking it out first, and then coming back to this video.
01:13The link is in the description.
01:17If the common political spectrum is so broken, how do we fix it?
01:21This question has no easy answer.
01:26The core problem is that the more accurate the depiction, the less useful it is in discussions.
01:33Depictions involving more than a one-dimensional left-right spectrum may be more accurate, but are hardly practical in most real-world political discussions.
01:43Outside of academia, political discussions in the U.S. occur on a left-right spectrum, and that is unlikely to change.
01:54Here, we will try to change the spectrum to something that is, one, more accurate, and, two, less demonizing.
02:03The first step is to drop the groups that don't have any appreciable impact on U.S. politics.
02:09This would remove communism, authoritarianism, and fascism.
02:16However applicable to discussions about world or historical politics, these groups play an insignificant role in modern U.S. politics,
02:25except as negative terms used when attacking opponents.
02:29Socialism stays because, while a small minority, there are a significant number of socialists,
02:35and even some candidates and elected officials who call themselves socialists.
02:41Next, we need to add those groups that play a notable role in U.S. politics that were left out.
02:49Progressives, moderates, and libertarians.
02:53We saw that the equity versus control spectrum didn't make sense.
02:57So, what spectrum would?
02:59While a concern for equality accurately describes the left, a desire for control is found across the spectrum.
03:09In addition, control gives a negative connotation to the right as opposed to the more positive value, equality.
03:17A better counterbalance to equality would be liberty.
03:22While both liberty and equality are positive values, they are also mutually exclusive.
03:27The more you have of one, the less you have of the other.
03:33To see this, consider economic equality.
03:36Assume for a moment that one could wave a wand, and in an instant, everyone had exactly the same amount of money and property.
03:43That everyone is, at that moment, economically equal.
03:48What would happen?
03:50Some would save it.
03:52Some would spend it.
03:53Some would invest it.
03:55And some would gamble it and win.
03:57Others would lose.
04:00In short, before long, economic equality would disappear.
04:05As time went on, the inequality would grow.
04:09The only way to prevent this inequality would be to have laws against any activity that could lead to inequality.
04:18In short, to restrict liberty.
04:20A political spectrum based on equality versus liberty makes much more sense.
04:26Starting on the left, equality is valued strongly over liberty.
04:31As you move to the right, concerns for equality reduces, while concerns about liberty grows.
04:39By the time you reach the right, liberty is strongly valued over equality.
04:43This also lines up nicely with the country's real-life political situation.
04:50At the far left are the socialists who push the hardest for equality.
04:54As you move towards the center, you come to progressives, and then liberals, with increasing emphasis on liberty at the expense of equality.
05:04Moderates, in the center, would then value equality and liberty equally, striking a balance between these ideas.
05:12As you then move to the right half of the spectrum, you have conservatives, who value liberty more than equality, and finally libertarians, who push the hardest for liberty.
05:24Such a spectrum would also work for secondary characteristics.
05:29For example, equality requires the government to enforce it at the expense of liberty.
05:36Thus, it is unsurprising that the left generally wants a larger, more centralized government, while the right wants a smaller, more decentralized one.
05:47Such a spectrum also meets the second goal, in that it does not require one to demonize those on the other side.
05:57Both equality and liberty are positive values.
06:01Most would agree that in a perfect world we would want both.
06:05Yet, they are mutually exclusive.
06:09Different people can and do have different views as to their relative value, without being in some fashion bad.
06:17Such a spectrum also leads to a better understanding of the two parties, not as monoliths, but as coalitions of various groups.
06:28The Democratic Party consists of some socialists, progressives, liberals, and more left-leaning moderates.
06:37More right-leaning moderates, along with conservatives and libertarians, make up the Republicans.
06:42It is true that not everyone fits into this two-party structure.
06:48On the far left, there are socialists and others who form other parties.
06:54Likewise, on the right, there are many libertarian and others who are not Republican and have also formed other parties.
07:02Yet, these other parties are small and insignificant at the national level.
07:06They play little, if any, significant role in elections, except occasionally as a possible spoiler.
07:15But even that is unclear, as it assumes those who vote for a third-party candidate would have voted for the two-party candidate closest to them.
07:23Yet, there is also the possible option of not voting at all.
07:28Still, if one wanted to include them, they could be added to the far left or far right.
07:34But there remains a third group, which is of significant size to have an impact, the independents.
07:41These are people who, for a variety of reasons, are not part of any political party.
07:48While they can be found throughout the political spectrum, many are moderates who could vote for either party depending on the candidates running.
07:56While the equality versus liberty political spectrum is not perfect, it is far superior than equality versus control.
08:06It gives a better understanding of the real-world political differences without resorting to the demonization that is, unfortunately, so common.
08:16Next time, we will look at some objections that have been raised.
08:21So, what do you think?
08:23Do you agree that an equality versus liberty spectrum makes more sense?
08:28Do you disagree?
08:29And if so, why?
08:31Perhaps your objections will make it into part three.
08:34We do read the comments and often post replies.
08:37If you made it this far, consider watching one of our other videos and supporting our channel on Patreon.
08:44Thank you for watching Into the Desert, Exploring the Wilderness of Ideas.
Be the first to comment