Follow

Does this 2x2 (based on my old death-and-taxes 2x2) of the 4 main political ideologies make sense to people without further commentary? (take a few minutes to process)

@vgr Each corner progresses toward the center as Threat, Virtue, Ideology, Gift, except liberalism, which is in Threat, Ideology, Virtue, Gift order. Intentional or accidental?

Each Threat, Ideology, Virtue, Gift combination makes sense to me in and of itself.

I can get some work out of the quadrants and the oppositions along the axis.

The arrows seem decorative to me, as they are completely symmetrical, and so create no differentiation of information.

@anielsen Accidental... the arrows simply indicate the direction of the gifts/threats towards the other 3 in each case

@vgr I can't see any meaning in the arrows since they point from everywhere to everywhere else.

Does the "Primary Threat" of Libertarianism being "Steal" mean that libertarianism threatens to steal from you? Or does it mean that libertarians feel threatened that other people will steal from them?

Trying and failing to understand what it means for an ideology to be on the life/death side or the death/taxes side. i would probably need to review your old death-and-taxes post to get it.

@nindokag Expropriation of public wealth into private hands. Privatization of everything basically.

The DandT 2x2 overlay is optional extra and ignorable.

@vgr oof, not sure how "parasitize" is a progressive threat and not a libertarian/conservative one. Presumably it's because of the idea progressivism might let poor people subsist apart from the labor market...much like rich people do?

@vgr
The descriptions of the ideologies with their threats and gifts made sense to me.
Then I started to think about the axes (I had studied slideshare.net/vgururao/death- a while ago).
I do not understand why progressivism ended up where it did. I went back to look at the slide deck and now i understand it even less, as it is clear there that it is the "shitty quadrant".
For example I would think that one underlying principle behind Sharing is Abundance, the opposite of Scarcity.

@alec No the principle behind sharing is definitely scarcity, not abundance. If there is abundance there is no need to share. We can each have our own planet.

It is the "shitty" quadrant in a way, but it is also the most inescapable truth quadrant (death and taxes are the great constants). It is the "dealing with inescapable shittiness" quadrant.

@vgr
Sounds like meritocratic-libertarian abundance: "Everybody can make it, its all there for the taking."
I was thinking about win-win abundance: "The more you give, the more there is for everybody."

@alec example redistribution via progressive taxation is a sharing-under-scarcity progressive policy objective. 1%/99% is a zero-sum scarcity framing of wealth.

Justified in the medium term. Nonzero sum abundance takes generations to work. But you have to eat today. Everyday.

@vgr @alec this explanation makes sense but I still don't really understand the axes

@vgr Word order diverges from the key in the upper right and it took me a minute to realize I was reading them wrong until I picked up on the color cues.

@vgr Thinking about it more, I can't tell what "primary threat" means in this context. Presumably it is "what the other quandrants percieve this as", but I could also see it as "this quandrant is threatened most by" or "threats to their beleif system include being framed as".

So a conservativim considers the primary threat of progressiveism as being parasites to protect against... Or progressivism's desire to share is threatened the most by being overwhelmed by parsites.

Could be both?

@vgr i’m reading it as core differences in attitudes towards life. Top is about finding a reason to live while bottom is about surviving. Left is about “other”, right is about “self”.

Counterclock, core neuroticisms could be:
1: optimism
2: narcissism
3: idealism
4: pessimism

@vgr also counterclock wise, dies by the hand of: Future, Self, World, Past

@vgr It makes sense. But the matrix itself seems too embodied in one particular perspective. Axes not included include: Male/female, young/old, intellectual/manual labor...

@johnhenry @vgr Interesting to think about it in terms of how one moves thru this space as we age.

Western culture's children starting out in the sharing/parasites quadrant and moving toward protect/oppress as they age and start to accumulate wealth vs being dependent. Or perhaps moving to other quadrants circumstantially?

Illustrating something like that would need something interactive to do that well?

@vgr What do the arrows add? If you removed them you may be able to space out the 4 aspects of each square to increase readability.

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Refactor Camp

Mastodon instance for attendees of Refactor Camp, and members of various online/offline groups that have grown out of it. Related local groups with varying levels of activity exist in the Bay Area, New York, Chicago, and Austin.

Kinda/sorta sponsored by the Ribbonfarm Blogamatic Universe.

If you already know a few people in this neck of the woods, try and pick a handle they'll recognize when you sign up. Please note that the registration confirmation email may end up in your spam folder, so check there. It should come from administrator Zach Faddis.