Very interesting reading! I definitely also agree that the original "Political Compass" is outdated and quite biased. There was another attempt made by John Nerst to update the Political Compass, which I also found interesting to read :
One suggestion is that I think re-appropriating the old terms might cause confusion. It might be better to label the axes of 2.0 differently: something like "innovation" and "tradition" for the Y axis, and "equity" and "hierarchy" for the X axis.
Admittedly, that would make the X axis a little more one-dimensional, but you seem to be using "left" as mostly synonymous with equity and "right" as mostly synonymous with hierarchy anyway.
I think this is an interesting way of classifying people but I am not sure it is the most useful way. I think the worst aspect of these scales is that too many people confuse the map for the territory and think of these things as reality instead of as a lens to try and understand reality. Reality is too complicated to fit on a 2d graph, as I suspect you know, but many people seem blissfully unaware.
Remarkably thoughtful piece! Love the term “right-wing progressive”, because it encompasses truly new ideas such as the Network State of Balaji Srinivasan, more than alternatives such as “neo-reactionary”.
t's a pretty good map. I really wish commentators would be more precise with the terms they use, and I hope this chart helps.
I wonder where George Galloway (Workers Party in the UK) would be. He is economically on the left, and he explicitly says he hates liberalism. But he is also vehemently "anti-woke" on almost all issues, dismissing it as stupid nonsense. However, he is deeply committed to the "oppressed-oppressor narrative" in relation to Islam.
The bottom two quadrants are terrified by him. The top-right quadrant has really gone on the warpath against him, and the top-left one hasn't said much, partly because they think he is one of them, which he really is not.
This was fascinating. I usually don't comment on stuff but this really grabbed my attention.
The original political compass is incredibly out of date for the new age of political discourse and online battling we are in now. I've taken that stupid test so many times and I've been plotted in about the same spot despite how much my worldview has expanded and grown.
Very interesting reading! I definitely also agree that the original "Political Compass" is outdated and quite biased. There was another attempt made by John Nerst to update the Political Compass, which I also found interesting to read :
https://everythingstudies.com/2019/03/01/the-tilted-political-compass-part-1-left-and-right/
https://everythingstudies.com/2019/03/25/the-tilted-political-compass-part-2-up-and-down/
Thanks! I'll check these out
This is really good, and I plan to revisit it.
One suggestion is that I think re-appropriating the old terms might cause confusion. It might be better to label the axes of 2.0 differently: something like "innovation" and "tradition" for the Y axis, and "equity" and "hierarchy" for the X axis.
Admittedly, that would make the X axis a little more one-dimensional, but you seem to be using "left" as mostly synonymous with equity and "right" as mostly synonymous with hierarchy anyway.
Again, great piece.
I think this is an interesting way of classifying people but I am not sure it is the most useful way. I think the worst aspect of these scales is that too many people confuse the map for the territory and think of these things as reality instead of as a lens to try and understand reality. Reality is too complicated to fit on a 2d graph, as I suspect you know, but many people seem blissfully unaware.
Definitly. Just meant to be a quick orientating tool for our new era.
Informative.
I don't have the brain space to read this now, but wanted to share my son Logan was a Wildland firefighter for 5 seasons as well. He's 31 now.
Remarkably thoughtful piece! Love the term “right-wing progressive”, because it encompasses truly new ideas such as the Network State of Balaji Srinivasan, more than alternatives such as “neo-reactionary”.
t's a pretty good map. I really wish commentators would be more precise with the terms they use, and I hope this chart helps.
I wonder where George Galloway (Workers Party in the UK) would be. He is economically on the left, and he explicitly says he hates liberalism. But he is also vehemently "anti-woke" on almost all issues, dismissing it as stupid nonsense. However, he is deeply committed to the "oppressed-oppressor narrative" in relation to Islam.
The bottom two quadrants are terrified by him. The top-right quadrant has really gone on the warpath against him, and the top-left one hasn't said much, partly because they think he is one of them, which he really is not.
This was a great read! Where did you source the plot of LLMs on the political compass?
Thank you! Link below
https://www.strangeloopcanon.com/p/google-had-a-very-bad-week
What of Thomas Sowells constrained vs unconstrained ?
A great heurtisitc to find where someone is on the left-right scale
So you would say that your liberals were unconstrained?
I would say unconstrained maps more closely with being leftwing, but could see how someone might say it maps with progressivism in general
https://open.substack.com/pub/vonwriting/p/the-gods-of-the-copybook-headings?r=6csnm&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
Have you ever read Kipling‘s poem the gods of the copybook headings?
This was fascinating. I usually don't comment on stuff but this really grabbed my attention.
The original political compass is incredibly out of date for the new age of political discourse and online battling we are in now. I've taken that stupid test so many times and I've been plotted in about the same spot despite how much my worldview has expanded and grown.