Help with a PM-style graph?

[Adam Griffin]

So out of boredom and with the desire to outline more examples of social and economic systems, I sat down and tried to create a more 'elaborate' visual aid in the spirit of the Political Matrix for my own reference. I was wanting to see if anyone has any advice, criticism or suggestions as to how the economic and social polarities match up. For example, what is the true opposite of an oligarchy?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Why is socially centrist economic center-rightism called 'capitalist-leaning socialism'? I'm also not sure about the placement/naming of 'direct democracy/collectivism', and 'anarchist' might want to be 'anarcho-capitalist'.

[Adam Griffin]

Why is socially centrist economic center-rightism called 'capitalist-leaning socialism'?

I wasn't sure what to call them, hence the lackluster names. I tried to scale it based more on a world view than an American one or any another country where the systems are naturally tilted to the right. I think it's factually accurate to say that 'communism' and 'capitalism' in their actual forms are extreme economic ideologies and that for the most part, the economic systems of the world are all 'socialist', with the main emphasis falling on whether they are more capitalistic or communist.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Me either. It gets iffy at the left end of the social spectrum when it comes to labeling a government. Direct democracy & collectivism were the most 'liberal' forms of government/society I could think of that didn't take on element of right-wing ideology (anarchy).

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Just say 'communist-leaning' and 'capitalist-leaning'. Also 'anarchism' is not in its origins an ideology of the right at all. It's only in the past decades in some countries that it has become so. Before the Cold War and the advent of Murray Rothbard anarchism was distinctly associated with the radical left and still is in many places.

[Adam Griffin]

Just say 'communist-leaning' and 'capitalist-leaning'. Also 'anarchism' is not in its origins an ideology of the right at all. It's only in the past decades in some countries that it has become so. Before the Cold War and the advent of Murray Rothbard anarchism was distinctly associated with the radical left and still is in many places.

Interesting. I guess that makes sense based on the positioning of it according to the PM; it's mixed at least in how it's placed as socially liberal but economically conservative. I may make a second one to take that into account further. The positioning of 'Anarchist', along with all of the other larger-text ones (Liberal, Reactionist, Statist, etc) were based solely off of the PM.  

[Hatman 🍁]

Communism for one should be where statist is, and replaced with socialism. Liberal should be replaced with social democratic.

[Miles]

How about 'populist' instead of 'communitarian'?

[Hatman 🍁]

How about 'populist' instead of 'communitarian'?

Populism can mean anything, really. Same with "Liberal". Although in an American sense, both are in the right place.

[Adam Griffin]

Communism for one should be where statist is, and replaced with socialism. Liberal should be replaced with social democratic.

Could you further explain why statism should be replaced with communism? Communism is a solely economic system whereas statism is a system that incorporates communism (left-wing economics) with authoritarianism (right-wing social construct) that basically results in the maximum amount of government control over any given country (opposite of anarchism).

BTW, thanks for all the feedback, guys.

[Hatman 🍁]

Communism for one should be where statist is, and replaced with socialism. Liberal should be replaced with social democratic.

Could you further explain why statism should be replaced with communism? Communism is a solely economic system whereas statism is a system that incorporates communism (left-wing economics) with authoritarianism (right-wing social construct) that basically results in the maximum amount of government control over any given country (opposite of anarchism).

BTW, thanks for all the feedback, guys.

I guess you're right... it's just that communism in practice has been very statist. But, I suppose it's not statist in theory.

[Goldwater]

What's the difference between democratic republicanism & a republican democracy?

[Adam Griffin]

What's the difference between democratic republicanism & a republican democracy?

Good question. I wasn't and still am not quite sure. I started at the poles and worked my way in and just ended up making those two complement themselves in wording.

At least in the positions they currently are, I would imagine that 'Democratic Republicanism' would be a government like Canada or the US before the direct election of senators. 'Republican Democracy' would be more where we are at currently, with total representative democracy throughout the legislative branch.

[Hatman 🍁]

Canada is not a republic...

[RI]

How about 'populist' instead of 'communitarian'?

Populism is a style, not an ideology.

[Adam Griffin]

Canada is not a republic...

Of course not, but measuring on one axis makes it more difficult to pin down what it's called or to what countries it applies. Could we say Democratic Parliamentarism, running parallel to it?

I'm thinking where 'Democratic Republicanism' is should be a form of government where there's partial democratic representation (one house elected, one house appointed; part elected/part appointed) and 'Republican Democracy' would be full democratic representation (both houses elected; all elected).

[Antonio the Sixth]

The problem is that you're putting too many terms which aren't on the same theme. These can't fit in a two-dimension graph.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The vertical axis has mostly to do with forms of government according to the names you have there.  That's not the same as a social authoritarian/libertarian axis, which has to do with function of government.