The Political Spectrum – Politics 101

What does it mean to be a conservative? What does it mean to be a liberal? What do the left and the right on the political spectrum represent? What about the up and down (authoritarian to libertarian)? Where am I on the political spectrum? These were all questions that I was asking only 4 years ago.

Don't get me wrong, I was always interested in politics. Mostly due to my religious background, my disregard for controversy, and my desire to make a difference in the world. However, before 4 years ago, I was clueless when it came to understanding political philosophy.

I often refer to a "political awakening" that occurred four years ago (the summer before I left for Bible college). It started when I was talking to a mentor of mine, who is very politically involved, and I decided to ask him about the political spectrum. The conversation cleared up so many questions that today I call it my "Politics 101".

Spectrum of Government Control

If you google "political spectrum", there are many different versions out there. Everyone has their own opinion, and I have mine. This one, simply makes the most sense. The political spectrum that I use is one axis which measures the amount of government control. On the far left, there is totalitarianism, which is where the government controls virtually everything it can. On the far right, is not crazy Republicans like Rush Limbaugh, but instead those who believe there should be no government: anarchists.

In fact, this spectrum can be boiled down to five major positions: (left to right) totalitarianism, progressivism, liberalism, libertarianism, and anarchy. Totalitarianism is about virtually total government control. Progressivism is about progressing towards more government control. Libertarianism (for the purpose of this post) is about progressing towards less government control and presence (anarchy). Liberalism is about having a proper amount of government and personal freedom.

For some reason, virtually every spectrum that I found puts fascism on the far-right. However, if we are measuring the amount of control the government has, fascism is on the far-left, as a form of totalitarianism like communism. Fascism, communism, and socialism differ in style, but at their core they all rely heavily on government regulation.

Slippery Slope

I like to say that "Progressivism is a slippery slope to totalitarianism, and libertarianism is a slippery slope to anarchy." Not only that, but anarchy is a slippery slope to tyranny, which loops us right back to totalitarianism. Anarchy (having no government) could only work if everyone behaved and and no one violated their neighbors rights.

This notion goes against all of human experience (not to mention my Christian views of the nature of mankind). We know that the strong, if left unchecked, will terrorize the weak.

Liberalism

Liberalism is founded on the idea of individualism: the idea that all people are created equal. We may not all be equal in circumstances, but we are all equal in essence, before the Law. We all have the right to be left alone. For instance, three of your basic rights include the right to life (to not be killed), to liberty (to not be enslaved), and property (to not be robbed). In order to maintain these rights, we must have justice, and we must have an institution to facilitate justice.

Liberalism is about giving the people as much personal liberty as possible, without violating the rights of others. In order to do that, we must have a government that is properly limited. In America, our founders set up a contract between the people and the government, called the Constitution, to ensure both justice and liberty.

Conservatism

Here in America, those who we call "conservatives" are about conserving the philosophy of liberalism, through a strict (conservative) interpretation of the Constitution. These conservatives, also called conservative-liberals, are interested in conserving the balance of power, to give the people maximum liberty to pursue happiness.

Some of you may be shocked. Some of you probably disagree with what I am saying. Conservatives are not about freedom. "Conservatives are not liberal." We must remember that not everyone who calls himself a conservative is one. In my next blog, I want to spend some time writing about true conservative philosophy. Conservatism is about having the freedom to do what you want, so long as you don't infringe on anyone's basic rights.

So What Do You Think?

Please share this post if you liked it. Also, tell me what you think. Tweet at me @frank_perseo or comment on the Frank Talks Facebook page. Where do you line up on this spectrum? Do you think that I am wrong to characterize conservatives as the true liberals. 

Who Should You Vote For?

How do you determine who to vote for? Some people wouldn't dare to tell you who to vote for, but if you're reading this, I'm assuming that you are looking for a set of criteria to determine which candidate to pick. This set of criteria works for any elected office, in federal, state or local politics. I am arguing that these criteria are in the best interest of any person from any political position.

Here are the two criteria, you want someone who:

1. Will abide by and enforce the Laws
   and
2. Will represent the people

You see, we live in a nation of laws, and a nation of, by, and for the people.

The Law

Any candidate, for any office, must be someone who agrees to abide by and enforce the laws. At the federal level, this would be the US Constitution. At the state level, it would be the state's constitution, and at the local level, it would be the local laws. "What if the laws are unjust?" you may ask. Well, there is a system to change that, and we will get to this in the next point, but you want to work within the system.

If you have a candidate who is willing to break some rules to push an agenda, then you have a deal-breaker. You may even agree with their agenda, but think of it this way: you wouldn't want someone to break the rules to push an agenda that you disagree with. Remember, it goes both ways. What goes around comes around.

The Constitution prevents government officials from infringing on your rights. Among such rights are life, liberty, property, free speech, free religious exercise (meaning the ability to believe what you want and do what you want, without infringing on the aforementioned rights of others). These rights are basic, because they don't cost anything to recognize.

Bottom line: you want a candidate who will agree to be bound to the Constitutional restrictions. It is in everyone's best interest to elect a candidate who will not be his or her own arbiter of what rules to follow.

The Representative

We do not live in a pure democracy. Instead, we live in a Constitutional-Republic, where leaders rule by consent of the governed. In a pure democracy, there is simply a majority rule. Majority rule sounds nice, but then it sucks when you happen to be in a minority. Ideally, we want our leaders to represent all of their constituents, not just those in their party.

Our leaders need to represent both the majority and the minority. If they only represent the majority which voted them in, we will have a country which neglects (or worse) oppresses those in minority groups. Our representatives should promote greater liberty, while at the same time protecting all citizens from having their rights infringed.

You can also vote for a candidate who will work within the system (not infringing on the rights of others) to bring about a change that is necessary in our society. The best example of this would be Lincoln, who represented the abolitionist movement. The newly formed Republican party believed that slavery went against the philosophy of America, and were taking political action to end it.

Lincoln is the best example of this, because he made the change within the Constitutional perimeters.

*****

So there you have it. Two simple criteria. They must follow the Constitution, acting within it's perimeters; and they must represent all their constituents, not infringing on the Constitutional rights of any to push an agenda.

So, tell me what you think. Tweet at me @frank_perseo or comment on the Frank Talks Facebook page. Do you agree or disagree with these criteria? What would be your criteria for picking candidates? And based on this, who do you think that I support?