<-------------------THE Z AXIS------------------->
Last summer some of our regular readers went with us to PoliticalCompass.org and took their online test. A Chief Source field trip of sorts (see pic).
The point of the political compass site is to point out the inadequacies of the current, 1-dimensional, left-to-right political spectrum.
The point of the political compass site is to point out the inadequacies of the current, 1-dimensional, left-to-right political spectrum. After answering a few questions, each person is plotted on a 2-dimensional grid with separate economic and social dimensions. Good times. If you haven't done this yet, check it out.
This exercise was the defining moment in my transformation from a Buddhist to a Libertarian. [For those of you keeping tabs on the Bob-cycle, so far it goes like this: Rich Know-it-all> Goth Nihilist > Anti-Christ > Optimist > Constitutionalist > Pessimist > Buddhist > Libertarian > Voice of Dissent > Poor Know-it-all]
Anyhow, at the time I thought that this 2-dimensional spectrum still didn’t quite do enough to classify all breeds of political animal. I had developed an idea of a 3 dimensional spectrum, scribbled it down, tucked it into a desk drawer and forgotten about it. In light of the recent back-and-forth between Pete and myself, I dug out this doodle and would like to share it with you now. Here is what I had jotted down:
Conventional Political Spectrum in America:
X-AXIS: Conservative to Liberal
Political Compass Political Spectrum:
X-AXIS: Economic freedom
Y-AXIS: Personal freedom
Bob's Political Spectrum in Practice:
X AXIS: Economic control
(from Socialism to Laissez-faire Capitalism)
Y-AXIS: Behavioral control
(from Collectivism to Individualism)
Z-AXIS: Implementation
(from Idealism to RealPolitik*)
*The best way though to think about this Z-axis is that one end represents "the ends always justify the means" and the other represents "the ends never justify the means."
This exercise was the defining moment in my transformation from a Buddhist to a Libertarian. [For those of you keeping tabs on the Bob-cycle, so far it goes like this: Rich Know-it-all> Goth Nihilist > Anti-Christ > Optimist > Constitutionalist > Pessimist > Buddhist > Libertarian > Voice of Dissent > Poor Know-it-all]
Anyhow, at the time I thought that this 2-dimensional spectrum still didn’t quite do enough to classify all breeds of political animal. I had developed an idea of a 3 dimensional spectrum, scribbled it down, tucked it into a desk drawer and forgotten about it. In light of the recent back-and-forth between Pete and myself, I dug out this doodle and would like to share it with you now. Here is what I had jotted down:
Conventional Political Spectrum in America:X-AXIS: Conservative to Liberal
Political Compass Political Spectrum:
X-AXIS: Economic freedom
Y-AXIS: Personal freedom
Bob's Political Spectrum in Practice:
X AXIS: Economic control
(from Socialism to Laissez-faire Capitalism)
Y-AXIS: Behavioral control
(from Collectivism to Individualism)
Z-AXIS: Implementation
(from Idealism to RealPolitik*)
*The best way though to think about this Z-axis is that one end represents "the ends always justify the means" and the other represents "the ends never justify the means."
Put yet another way: To what extent should we be bound by the letter of the law?
Surprisingly in my metamorphosis from a rich know-it-all to a poor know-it-all many of my core values have stayed the same. Even in the midst of my favorite Chomsky book, I have always rejected the idea of a planned economy and I have never wavered in my defense of self-expression and tolerance and personal liberty.
This brings us to the slip-and-slide I like to call the Z-axis. Or as Kyle, posed it ‘the disconnect btw. theory and practice.’ I have written tons of posts discussing the ends and the means in regards to U.S. foreign policy and find myself, more and more, refusing to accept that ideological ends can justify the bloody means we are witnessing.
Determining where people stand on the Z-axis is most apparent in the debate between national security and civil liberties, and so in our post-Sept 11th-world (God, I hate that saying) it has been as divisive as the other, better-known axes.
Now the response I should have given Kyle…
The Z-axis is tricky. Personally, I have chosen to stay down towards the idealistic end because I believe that this unwavering, unapologetic, often naïve idealism is a crucial counter balance these days. From a distance, it seems like the motto in D.C. should be changed to “Abandon Ideals All Who Enter Here.” While the capitol (and the nation) may be polarized along the X and Y axes, on the Z-axis, there is little deviation: and when the ends don't serve to justify the means, they're swaped-out with ends that do! Be they conservative or liberal, all of these sell out stuffed-shirts in Washington added together are worth less than a single unwavering idealist like Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi.
So, is there a disconnect between theory and practice?
To quote a display case in the Revere High School Cafeteria, circa 1995:
This brings us to the slip-and-slide I like to call the Z-axis. Or as Kyle, posed it ‘the disconnect btw. theory and practice.’ I have written tons of posts discussing the ends and the means in regards to U.S. foreign policy and find myself, more and more, refusing to accept that ideological ends can justify the bloody means we are witnessing.
Determining where people stand on the Z-axis is most apparent in the debate between national security and civil liberties, and so in our post-Sept 11th-world (God, I hate that saying) it has been as divisive as the other, better-known axes.
Now the response I should have given Kyle…
The Z-axis is tricky. Personally, I have chosen to stay down towards the idealistic end because I believe that this unwavering, unapologetic, often naïve idealism is a crucial counter balance these days. From a distance, it seems like the motto in D.C. should be changed to “Abandon Ideals All Who Enter Here.” While the capitol (and the nation) may be polarized along the X and Y axes, on the Z-axis, there is little deviation: and when the ends don't serve to justify the means, they're swaped-out with ends that do! Be they conservative or liberal, all of these sell out stuffed-shirts in Washington added together are worth less than a single unwavering idealist like Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi.
So, is there a disconnect between theory and practice?
To quote a display case in the Revere High School Cafeteria, circa 1995:
“Shoot for the moon, if you miss you’ll still be amongst the stars."
By Robert - 1/29/2006
18 Comments:
Nice reference to the RHS cafteria. I wonder what grade's showcase has the "spirit stick."
And as far as rallying people...
Which type of rally cry is more likely to engage an apathetic public?
(A) "To the moon!!!"
(B) "Let's travel towards the moon, while always keeping in mind that although landing there is theoretically possible, it is in reality, highly improbable."
NOTE: Since posting this, I have been informed that it was actually a 'bulletin board' and not a 'display case.' Can anyone confirm or deny this?
Bob, I like your motto for DC. One of the hardest decisions for a lawmaker has to be compromising one of your core principals so that another core principal can be advanced. More polution in exchange for better schools. Protecting a woman's right to choose in exchange for cuts in medicaid benefits for the poor. Being at peace with those decisions must be difficult.
Another tough decisions - "Shoot for the terrorists, if you miss it will land amongst the civilians."
Bob,
Very interesting post. I love the idea that this measurement is three-dimensional. It does make sense to account for involvement.
I remember that RHS quote being on the wall of the cafeteria in the "seniors' room". I could be wrong, but I don't remember it being in a display case. That thing was up for ages.
It was most definitely in a display case. It was on the wall outside of the senior section to the right (by the windows). Yes, definitely a display case.
One last explanation of this graph:
In the simplest terms, the X and Y are how you think things should be, and the Z is the limit of what you're willing to do (or condone) to see things move in that direction.
This is an absolutely crucial criteria to consider in light of these polarized times, this 'rule of law optional' executive branch and this War of Terror on Terror.
I would like to take one second to recommend Ayn Rand's book, Virtue of Selfishness.
She is the only voice that I know of who's at the extreme capitalism end of the X, the extreme individualism end of the Y and the extreme idealism end of the Z. And she does a great job of defending all three. It's a really short, concentrated, thought-provoking read. (In one of my earlier rants, when I listed the 'great men of history,' I failed to mention her. This was an oversight, sorry Ayn.)
Running total...
Bulletin Board:1
Display Case:2
Wall:1
(Come on Minutemen, dig!)
When I was in HS, it went like this:
Shoot the moon and you will face indecent exposure charges
I will never forget this cat hanging a pressed ham in the metal shop window!
But seriously, most Americans have no idea where they stand politically. This is because terms like conservative, liberal, Democtrat, Republican, moderate, extremist...have no real meaning anymore thanks to our pay to play corrupt Government.
No political party represents the people anymore and both major parties are so full of shit they don't even pretend to represent same.
In light of the above, this may be the ripe time for the Democratic Party to show some balls and put forth an agenda that the common American can dig. Unfortunately with the corruption into everything (both Parties bought and paid for) this probably won't happen soon.
Another moon ref. "To the moon , Alice" - Ralph Crambden
KA: nice avatar....Take a look at Kyle's pink & yellow avatar
PS: Revere must be a very good school -- turning out responsible grads that obviously give a shit
Oorah! Revere
Senior display case, just to the right of where you would walk into the Senior Section. But, it is a bulletin board of sorts that is within the display case I think. Still, display case.
I will pony up $10 to whomever can capture visual evidence that said quote exists in a display case.
Anyone care to raise the stakes?
Warm fuzzies to all, Stuco.
I meant to say "existed"...although I wouldn't be surprised if it was still up there.
It goes without saying that The Chief Source will proudly display said evidence. And I'll personally throw $5 on the bounty.
Hey, anyone have any criticism of my 3-dimensional political spectrum? (It doesn't even need to be constructive.)
Bob, sorry i took so long to add my two cents.
interesting post. i think i am an idealist. however, i think the scary thing is that our two-party system, amongst other restraints, probably make a true "idealist" on the outside.
now you just need to come up with a series of questions, and we could judge ourselves.
Hahaha...word Minutemen...I remember when Sammy Polsky almost lost his admission to Duke for using the Stuco keys to put beer in the pop machines for our senior prank.
It's hard to criticize a 3 dimensional spectrum when it's being compared to a two dimensional spectrum; an obvious improvement, and certainly worth using for certain types of measurements...reality, however, has infinite dimensions, which is why we have to be ready for anything. I'm afraid that how far one would go on the Z axis depends on what end one wants to reach, and how important one views that particular end. Certainly there is a proper place on the X axis, and a proper place on the Y axis, but what level of means to what end does this Z axis measure?
Pete, thanks for the question,
We all have a personal vision of how we would like thing to be; an ideal set of economic conditions (X-axis) and social conditions (Y-axis) for our countrymen. This is the ends.
Now the means:
As I said, the Z-axis is about what you are willing to do (or condone) to arrive at this ideal economic and social situation. Let me be more specific though: it is not a measure of how much effort you are willing to put forth to move the country in that direction, it is how much deception and illegality and violence are you willing to condone to move the country in that direction.
(Maybe Idealism isn’t the best term after all since ideals are so subjective. ‘Pacifism’ is too narrow and the term ‘morality’ is such a meaningless weighted term.
Can you think of a term that is diametrically opposed to Realpolitik that’s better than Idealism?)
And yes, you are right. There are infinite dimensions, but trying to get people who “don’t follow politics” to think like this is pointless. The best we can hope to do is break down this insanely polarized red and blue gang war and I think my model isn’t a bad place to start.
Can't wait to take a break from work(as opposed to whatever it is I'm doing now) and see where I fall(althought I can garuntee its gonna be pretty far left).
As far as that quote, it is/was absolutely posted somewhere in a very visible display case at RHS(possibly the Senior section) but difinitely somewhere near the auditorium or cafeteria. I remember it with abolute certainty.
OK, here's where I fit in, according to how I chose to answer the posed questions.
Economic Left/Right: -6.13
Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -6.15
Bob, I like where you're trying to take this because, to me, anything that adds dimensions and recognizes non-linear thought is worth examing. So the 3 dimensional chart could probably more accuratley map some of us who feel limited by the simple left or right traditonal structure
Bob,
I emailed Mrs. Gina Pappano from RMS to confirm the location of the inspriational qoute. Hopefully the question will soon be put to rest.
Post a Comment
<< Home