ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Relativity and the ideological spectrum

I've designed a nine-point ideological scale for reasons that will be readily apparent soon, and I'm in need of some clarifying examples. Here is what I have so far, but I feel as if there could be better examples. Ideally, the more famous the individual, the better; accuracy is far less important than familiarity.

One is extreme left, nine is extreme right. The goal is to clarify, not obscure or start arguments, so leave Hitler and anyone else likely to spark debate out of it.
  1. Vladimir Lenin
  2. Karl Marx
  3. Angela Merkel
  4. Bill Clinton
  5. John F. Kennedy
  6. George W. Bush
  7. Ronald Reagan
  8. Thomas Jefferson
  9. Ayn Rand
Another idea would be to provide multiple examples from different fields, from economics, from politics, and from philosophy. I'm entirely open to suggestion here, with one caveat: I am not at all open to suggestions of multiple axes or anything more complicated than a single 9-point scale.

And if you know what this is concerning, please resist the urge to demonstrate as much. When I want to make an announcement, I will make an announcement. In the meantime, keep an eye on your emails tomorrow.

Labels: ,

280 Comments:

1 – 200 of 280 Newer› Newest»
Blogger Al From Bay Shore March 29, 2016 9:54 AM  

1) Kenneth Galbraith
2) Alexander Hamilton
3) John Maynard Keynes
4) Benjamin Bernanke
5) Paul Volcker
6) Milton Friedman/ Thomas Sowell
7) Walter E. Williams
8) Murray Rothbard
9) David Friedman

OpenID marsascendant March 29, 2016 9:55 AM  

Seems to me your scale would be better served by an additional axis.

Anonymous VFM#1819 March 29, 2016 9:56 AM  

I would remove GWB for the same reason as Hitler, too controversial. Maybe consider Pat Buchanan, I have watched him for yeas and have found him reliably on the right of every issue, and he is very well known and respected.

Blogger TontoBubbaGoldstein March 29, 2016 9:57 AM  

Difficult for me to meaningfully differentiate among #4, #5 and #6.
A racing analogy : You've 1st, 2nd 3rd, three-wide racing for 4th, then 7th, 8th and 9th.

OpenID basementhomebrewer March 29, 2016 10:00 AM  

Smith, Hobbes, Locke if you want to go old school and at least a couple of those are recognizable to the average person since they are still briefly covered in High School History. Plato and Cicero would be interesting additions but most people have no idea who they are anymore.

The main problem is based on today's political environment it would be hard to split any of them into a different level on a 9 point scale.

Blogger White Knight Leo #0368 March 29, 2016 10:01 AM  

Your scale works for me. I'd say we might need more axes though.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 10:01 AM  

1. Lenin
2. Sanders
3. Obama
4. Hill Clinton
5. W.
6. Eisenhower
7. Reagan
8. Falwell
9. Rorshach...the comic. Hard right is hard to find.

Blogger bob k. mando March 29, 2016 10:05 AM  

any scale that does not go to 11 is weaksauce.


2. marsascendant March 29, 2016 9:55 AM
Seems to me your scale would be better served by an additional axis.



*facepalm*

i've already explained multi-axes political systems in excruciating detail here. that's why Vox calls himself a "Libertarian Nationalist".

if Vox wants to ignore alternative axes, there's a reason ( MPAI ) for it.


would not Mao or Pol Pot be to the Left of Lenin?

OpenID paworldandtimes March 29, 2016 10:07 AM  

It looks like a collectivist-to-individualist axis. If that's the case, then the names work for me. Such an axis, though, would accommodate various "good guys" near Lenin and such -- for example respected popes.

A universalist-to-nationalist version of a Left-to-Right axis would not have Ayn Rand at number 10.

PA

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 10:08 AM  

How are you defining left and right here? I personally would not consider Rand a rightist. Extreme libertarian, sure, but also an extreme libertine who didn't give a rat's ass for community, which is considered a fundamental block of the right by most people.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian March 29, 2016 10:12 AM  

Without full comprehension (caveat) of the list, I tend to agree with @10 S1AL.

Anonymous unclesol March 29, 2016 10:12 AM  

I think the list is good, with the exception that I would replace Merkel with FDR, if you are going for an American audience. I'm not sure if too many folks over here are overly aware of where she stands outside of globalist issues.

Anonymous Cash March 29, 2016 10:12 AM  

I wouldn't think Rand is right. I always figured she was something of an other. Like Rothbard.

Blogger cavalier973 March 29, 2016 10:13 AM  

1. Dolores Umbridge
2. Lord Voldemort
3. Luscius Malfoy
4. Cornelius Fudge
5. Scrimgeour
6. Professor McGonnegal
7. Arthur Weasley
8. Professor Dumbledore
9. Severus Snape

Anonymous Cash March 29, 2016 10:16 AM  

I think 4,5,6 are perfect. Big names that people can understand.

As for 1 and 2. Very few people can differentiate those two.

Anonymous unclesol March 29, 2016 10:16 AM  

would not Mao or Pol Pot be to the Left of Lenin?

I don't know what Vox is going for here, but I would think this is well served by eschewing the radical left, if you are going to leave out the reactionary right. It's probably a good idea to do so as once you get into the radicals and reactionaries there are often other issues that make placing them on a linear scale more complicated. My two cents.

Anonymous DCM March 29, 2016 10:17 AM  

1. Vladimir Lenin
2. Karl Marx
3. Angela Merkel
4. Bill Clinton
5. John F. Kennedy
6. George W. Bush
7. Ronald Reagan
8. Thomas Jefferson/James Madison
9. Henry VIII of England

To the right of the principles of the American Revolution is the divine right of kings. Ayn Rand's philosophy is orthogonal to 1-8 in this spectrum.

Blogger Gaiseric March 29, 2016 10:17 AM  

I think an axis that ends at Pat Buchanan instead of Ayn Rand would be more what I expect from the Right. Libertarianism is kind of a different axis altogether, although it does tend to trend with right-wingers as well.

Not that Pat Buchanan is really the end-point, merely that since you are calling for sufficiently famous or well-known figures to populate the axis, and I can't think of one who's more Right than Pat Buchanan on the axis of conservatism and nationalism.

I suppose El Cid isn't a good example?

Blogger El Borak March 29, 2016 10:18 AM  

I suspect Franklin Roosevelt would be a more enlightening example than Clinton at #4, if only because he accomplished so much more and over a longer period, and implemented it purposely. Clinton has a reputation as a moderate, but that's not based on accomplishments so much as temperament.

Woodrow Wilson might be another worth finding a spot for, maybe #3. But I would drop another America to squeeze him in.

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 10:18 AM  

Seems to me your scale would be better served by an additional axis.

You're absolutely and utterly wrong. Seriously, what part of "I am not at all open to suggestions of multiple axes or anything more complicated than a single 9-point scale" is hard to understand?

I do not understand the idiotic urge to try to show how smart you are by demonstrating the complete opposite. I am, however, perfectly aware that one can more accurately identify gradations by expanding the scale, whether by adding axes or points.

Anonymous SDH March 29, 2016 10:20 AM  

FDR instead of Merkel and JFK was closer to Reagan than Bush.

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 10:22 AM  

The FDR suggestion is great. I agree that Lenin and Marx are perhaps too similar in most people's minds. I considered both Mao and Trotsky, but figured they were both too obscure, ideologically speaking.

Pat Buchanan in the place of Ayn Rand isn't bad. Will have to muse upon that one.

Anonymous DDT March 29, 2016 10:23 AM  

Left-right here is hinged largely on 'size and role of government' I'm guessing?

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 10:29 AM  

An initial revision:

1 Mao Tse-tung
2 Karl Marx
3 Franklin Delano Roosevelt
4 Barack Obama
5 John F. Kennedy
6 Ronald Reagan
7 Thomas Jefferson
8 Pat Buchanan
9 Ayn Rand

Jefferson kind of sticks out there. And Buchanan to Rand is a little odd, but Rand is definitely perceived as more out there than good old Pat. Maybe moving Reagan to #7 and putting William F. Buckley in at 6?

Anonymous paradox March 29, 2016 10:29 AM  

What's the going to be the metric for Left and Right? Marx is going going to agree with Rand on open borders.

Anonymous SugarPi March 29, 2016 10:30 AM  

Barry Goldwater instead of Ayn Rand?

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 10:30 AM  

Left-right here is hinged largely on 'size and role of government' I'm guessing?

Forget specifics. It's about proxy identifications, not details or accuracy. For example, Attila the Hun might work as #9, simply due to the popular expression.

I kind of like that, actually. Ayn Rand at 8, Attila the Hun at 9.

Blogger Student in Blue March 29, 2016 10:31 AM  

Vox, am I correct in guessing that having multiple names for one slot is also useful?

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 10:32 AM  

What's the going to be the metric for Left and Right?

There is no metric. This is a proxy for rapid identification. For example, if you say "are your politics Vox Day or John Scalzi", that says nothing about your precise view of NAFTA, but it gives you a pretty damn good idea about where you stand in general.

Blogger Jon M March 29, 2016 10:32 AM  

Not sure of your audience here, but you have a list of national leaders...and Ayn Rand. My guess is that #9 by definition is anti-state and thus unlikely to have actually led a state.

To keep it all pols, maybe swap Ron Paul for Ayn Rand?

Blogger B.J. March 29, 2016 10:32 AM  

Bush and Lenin were both statists. What about Locke or Montesquieu?

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 10:33 AM  

Vox, am I correct in guessing that having multiple names for one slot is also useful?

Possibly. That might be one way to make the point more clear. It's already clear that people are going to sperg on this no matter how irrelevant the details are.

Anonymous SDH March 29, 2016 10:33 AM  

Ayn Rand at 8, Attila the Hun at 9

That would be perfect.

OpenID denektenorsk March 29, 2016 10:34 AM  

I'm a reasonably well educated (at least compared to my peers which sadly is a pretty low bar so there is that) non-American in a technical field. As such, I didn't have a ton of exposure to the humanities in post-secondary education and my few electives were in European history and basic Economics.

As such, a lot of the nuance in US history is lost to me. I've done personal reading but it's largely shapeless and directionless. There are names being suggested that I don't recognize. If I don't recognize them I'd say a lot of our non-US peers will not recognize them either.

If the idea is instant recognition and part of the audience is non-US citizens then go big or go home. Don't demonstrate how smart you are by throwing out potentially obscure suggestions. I.e. Mao, Pol Pot, Che, Stalin, Pinochet, Churchill, that guys whos last name rhymes with Nitler, etc. are all recognizable brands and if they are not, chances are the message will be lost on that particular individual.

As an example, I could throw out Joseph Howe but I doubt very many people on here know who he was. Do Google him, he was a bad ass in early Canadian politics. He's also a very bad example to be put on the scale.

Anonymous unclesol March 29, 2016 10:35 AM  

I think having Marx as number one and a famous socialist as number two, between Marx and FDR would be good. I'm having trouble coming up with anything good, though. I think John Steinbeck would be excellent, except I am not at all convinced that most people would recognize him for his politics.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 10:35 AM  

Ayn Rand at 8, Attila the Hun at 9.

Yep. That's it. Man, that was driving me crazy.

Anonymous #8601 Jean Valjean March 29, 2016 10:36 AM  

Agreed Attila the Hun is far right!

Anonymous Stephen J. March 29, 2016 10:36 AM  

Margaret Thatcher and Pope John Paul II should be on there at about the same rank (wherever he ends up) as Reagan; all three of them are usually named as the biggest leaders in the political currents that ultimately brought down the USSR.

At the lower end of the scale, if you are looking for influential philosophers, Noam Chomsky and Saul Alinsky might well be worth mentioning.

Anonymous paradox March 29, 2016 10:36 AM  

Pinochet, Franco.

Anonymous Anonymous March 29, 2016 10:37 AM  

Ross Perot in #5

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx March 29, 2016 10:38 AM  

VFM #6306 wrote:1. Lenin

2. Sanders

3. Obama

4. Hill Clinton

5. W.

6. Eisenhower

7. Reagan

8. Falwell

9. Rorshach...the comic. Hard right is hard to find.


Using living celebs and politicians might be more accessible for more people. Who's ever heard of Ayn Rand? Realizing this is about perception, not facts:

9. Trump

Blogger Unknown March 29, 2016 10:38 AM  

Ross Perot in #5

OpenID sigsawyer March 29, 2016 10:40 AM  

The Left-Right axis is simply the axis between antinomian and pronomian views. (simplistically, you can imagine it as a sliding scale between order and chaos). Rand is by no means a rightist; libertarians, ancaps, and similar are nothing but anarchists who are pronomian about property rights. (The assumption that a society can stand, in its entirety, on property rights as the only set of enforced social rules recalls "The train is fine...")

Collectivism and Individualism are terrible metrics for politics. Your scale breaks down if you add in the slightest historical perspective. Jefferson, to the Tories, was the most godless, recklessly idealistic collectivist the world had ever seen. "Democrat" used to have the same connotation that "commie" did in the 50's. Jefferson was a disciple of Locke; where on your scale is room for Hobbes? For Aquinas?

On the far right would be Confucius, Ramses II, and Charles I. "Classical Liberals" were on the left side of the Overton Window in 1800 and find themselves on the right side of it in 2000. Lenin is indeed to the left of Rand, but Rand is far, far to the left of Evola, who sneered at the petty, spiritually barren "bourgeois values" of objectivism and classical liberalism.

For the modern Overton window, your scale is serviceable, but in the larger historical context, Rand is a Leftist.

Blogger Sambuca Ford March 29, 2016 10:41 AM  

Mao Tse Tung
Eugene Debs
Jack London
Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Bill Clinton
F.A. Hayek
Alexander Hamilton
Edmund Burke
Ghengis Khan

A mixed bag. But I like Khan as you likely always knew where you stood with him.

Blogger Austin Ballast March 29, 2016 10:46 AM  

You don't want too many names at each point, but picking 2 or perhaps 3 in each category may help people categorize better when they don't know someone.

Part of it depends on how much intelligence and knowledge you expect of the users of the scale. It will be hard for them to categorize someone they know nothing about.

How many Millennials really know about FDR or Ayn Rand, in reality? I have no idea, but wouldn't be surprised if it is low given the poor state of most education today.

Anonymous Daedalus Mugged March 29, 2016 10:46 AM  

I understand you aren't ready for your big reveal of purpose/audience yet, but I don't much care where the Estates General sat in the late 18th century. I think 'left-right' is effectively meaningless as an axis. Statist to individualist is my primary/first axis, but it is inherently narrow for a single axis approach...is only about scope, not policies implemented at any given scope.

My only useful advice is that it is probably impossible for most average intelligences to compare political philosophers to American Presidents to current politicians to dictators. It might be more helpful to have multiple more closely related lists, one for 'founding fathers' one for former Presidents, one for current/recent major non-US political figures, one for political philosophers. Even if some lists didn't have certain extremes (I doubt any founding fathers could fit your low numbers) just the range that were applicable could help people calibrate to their own knowledge base.

And I think you should add another axis. J/K

Blogger El Borak March 29, 2016 10:47 AM  

Genghis Khan is a winner at #9.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 10:47 AM  

"The goal is to clarify, not obscure or start arguments, so leave Hitler and anyone else likely to spark debate out of it."

Nevertheless, someone needs to stand in place for where ideas further to the right are.

Otherwise, the list looks as if the entire tradition of the right has been glaringly amputated in this list, as if it is trying to erase, in a very Leftist way, any ideas that are not kosher.

That Rand, with her Judaic, atomized ideas, can even remotely be considered "right" is itself questionable at best.

At least include someone like Maistre or Spengler, for monarchial reaction, Nietzsche, for aristocratic reaction. Though you really should include Alfred Rosenberg to represent post-monarchial, non-democratic ethno-nationalism.

Blogger Michael O'Duibhir March 29, 2016 10:50 AM  

"One is extreme left, nine is extreme right. The goal is to clarify..."
#7 introduced neocon hegemony over our government
#8 was contemptuous of the Old and New Testament Divinity
#9 was an atheist, anarchist, Zionist Jew

A clarification of the terms "left" and "right" would help me.

Anonymous Sam the Man March 29, 2016 10:50 AM  

If you are speaking in terms of left-right split being a few variables with left being:

a) Extreme internationalist
b) Utopian social equality
c) State controlled economy

With Right being defined as:

a) Extreme nationalist
b) Individual meritocracy
b) Market based economy

Then perhaps the most left would be Pol-Pot or Mao. Of course in practical terms both Mao and pol Pot very actually very nationalistic, so perhaps Lenin is the best choice. I guess a lot of it comes down to what the person said vs. what they did. Perhaps putting in folks whose actions and writings matched would help clarify what the scale represents.

Saint Thomas More might be an example on the left as well, unless you include religion in at which point he does not fit within the scale.


On the right I would think Lincoln has a place, not at the far extreme but someplace in the middle right, say 6 to 7.

Last comment: I think who is chosen as a the exact middle will be as important as who you have on both extremes.

Anonymous Goodnight March 29, 2016 10:51 AM  

I agree with VFM #6306 - Eisenhower would make a better #6 than GWB. He was the gold standard for post-war center-right.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx March 29, 2016 10:51 AM  

Che. Che Guyverra (or whatever, I don't care) for 2. or 3. That soviet-style poster of him is promoted on campuses in the US. They even name buildings after him. He's got SJW brand recognition.

Blogger Krul March 29, 2016 10:51 AM  

VD wrote:orget specifics. It's about proxy identifications, not details or accuracy. For example, Attila the Hun might work as #9, simply due to the popular expression.

It's all about public perception? Then just put Jon Stewart and one extreme and Bill O'Reilly or Trump at the other, and fill the interior slots with fictional characters. That's what passes for a political spectrum in the MPAI brain.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 10:52 AM  

"1 Mao Tse-tung
2 Karl Marx
3 Franklin Delano Roosevelt
4 Barack Obama
5 John F. Kennedy
6 Ronald Reagan
7 Thomas Jefferson
8 Pat Buchanan
9 Ayn Rand"


Certainly if you're curbing the list so tightly, then Buchanan is a good placeholder for a position that the MSM might still consider "not out of bounds" but is at least legitimately Right.

But the idea that Rand is a Rightist (let alone to the Right of Pat Buchanan!) is not tenable, for the reason that S1AL identifies (#10). Rand would practically be at the opposite end of any list to Buchanan, in most respects.

Blogger Student in Blue March 29, 2016 10:52 AM  

...man it's hard coming up with these examples. I can see why you tasked it out, Vox.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 10:53 AM  


Hayek is a much better 9 than Ayn Rand I believe.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 10:54 AM  

and Eisenhower is a good example of the moderate right. Law and Order military conservative if ever there was one. Operation Wetback and the Interstate System.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 10:55 AM  

The problem with Hitler @33, is that he belongs at 3 or maybe 4 if you are generous...but nearly everybody would be baffled by that.

Would this one work for you?

1. Pol Pot
2. Mao Tse Tung
3. Karl Marx
4. Pierre Trudeau
5. Emperor Hirohito
6. Francisco Franco
7. Thomas Jefferson
8. Ayn Rand
9. Attila the Hun

Anonymous RatDog March 29, 2016 10:55 AM  

Left:
Salvador Allende, Juan & Eva Peron, Robert Mugabe, Mao Zedong, Nicolae Ceaucescu, Enver Hoxha, Pol Pot, FDR, Malcolm X, Louis Farrakhan, Mohammad Mossadegh

Right:
Augusto Pinochet, Francisco Franco, J. Edgar Hoover, Joseph McCarthy, Idi Amin, Tokugawa Shogunate, Douglas MacArthur, Curtis Lemay, Patton, Joe Arpaio, Ayatollah Khomenei, Winston Churchill, Charles James Napier (quote about burning widows in India), Lee Kwan Yew

Extreme Right:
Tom Kratman

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 10:55 AM  

Another excellent example for slot 8 would be Grover Cleveland. The man was a democrat but he vetoed more bills than all the other presidents before him combined.

Anonymous unclesol March 29, 2016 10:55 AM  

The Great Kahn was a benevolent dictator to those he let live and continued to remain on his good side, but he was ruthless to all who opposed him. His driving goal was the absorption of all of the land under the sun, as he believed it was appointed by the gods that he should do so. I'm not sure it's entirely useful to try to fit him onto a left-right scale of modern politics, unless far-right equals "piled the bodies into mountains, and let the blood run like rivers."

Anonymous roo_ster March 29, 2016 10:55 AM  

VD wrote:
"1 Mao Tse-tung"

Wade-Giles FTW!

Never give the commies a break.



Anonymous Instasetting March 29, 2016 10:55 AM  

Jemisin @ 1??; China Miellville @2??; Stephen King at @3; M-zed @4; John Ringo @5; Louis L'amour @6; Mack Bolan @ 7; William Johnstone @ 8; Tom Kratman @9

That's all authors. Since I have WJ and L'amour as Western, I'd like to include Zane Gray, but I haven't read him. So any guesses?

Blogger Student in Blue March 29, 2016 10:56 AM  

@Krul
It's all about public perception?

More like it's all about coming up with examples that are imminently recognizable to idiots, that are still otherwise correct on an intentionally restricted scale.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 10:57 AM  

Seriously, though, if you're including philosophers like Marx on one end, then there's no reason not to have Nietzsche or other true Rightist philosophers at the other end.

Otherwise it looks like a list that goes from the farthest left merely to the centre-right. That's not representative of anything.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 10:58 AM  

it is said that everything that was done in the 20th century to create a wellfare state was first vetoed by Grover Cleveland in the 19th.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 10:59 AM  

" Seriously, though, if you're including philosophers like Marx on one end, then there's no reason not to have Nietzsche or other true Rightist philosophers at the other end."

you really have no idea what spectrum this list is actually describing.

Blogger tz March 29, 2016 11:00 AM  

Merkel isn't really known except for immigration.
FDR or Wilson might be better. I'm not sure it also might not be useful to just include a lot more and where they are on the scale.

Also, the scale isn't left - right as such, but authoritan - libertarian. Progressive - individualist.

Everyone's seen the ideological test with two axes.

Confusing the axes will just confuse everything else.

Westborough baptist church is on the right. The salvation army is on the left.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 11:02 AM  

"you really have no idea what spectrum this list is actually describing."

Then enlighten me.

Said without snark.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:04 AM  

"Then enlighten me."

No. watching you people flail about is amusing in a dark sort of way.

Blogger Mastermind March 29, 2016 11:07 AM  

It's a terrible scale designed around libertarian obsession with freedom and not really useful as a result. To me all 9 people on that list are equally disagreeable.

OpenID anonymos-coward March 29, 2016 11:10 AM  

The Left-Right axis is simply the axis between antinomian and pronomian views. (simplistically, you can imagine it as a sliding scale between order and chaos).

Finally, a worthwhile answer in this thread.

Anonymous Pierce O. March 29, 2016 11:10 AM  

VD wrote:Jefferson kind of sticks out there.

If this list is for rapid identification, us fans of America 1.0 would like an option or two. Any way to fit a Federalist and an Anti-federalist on there; say, Hamilton and Federal Farmer? ;D The latter would run into the public perception problem for sure though.

If the list can accommodate multiple names of varying degrees of recognition, JRR Tolkien would be a fun one to stick in the 8-9 range.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 11:11 AM  

"You people." You sound like Popehat. And that you consider someone like me someone you oppose puts you squarely with the cuckservatives -- at best -- who likewise snark about ethnonats.

I see a list that goes from far left to center right and point this out. Without any further information as to what the measure here is, that's all that there is to offer.

But I look forward to hearing what the metric is that puts Pat Buchanan just one step away from Ayn Rand, whenever Vox decides the time is right for him to share it.

Blogger SciVo March 29, 2016 11:12 AM  

I think two for each, a writer and a leader.

It's jarring for me when you jump around between Mao and Marx, Reagan and Buckley. They aren't comparable in my mind, so that would make it less useful for someone like me; but you seem to want both types in there.

Anonymous Gen. Kong March 29, 2016 11:15 AM  

If what your describing is a scale of left to right in terms of equalitarians, the nine posted is a good example. Note there are no monarchs or even dictators like Francisco Franco on the list. All nine are what would be described as liberals - as the word was traditionally defined. My only recommendation would be to put Mao at the top and reverse Kennedy and Imam Al-Duhbya, the great Islamic theologian (sorry, couldn't resist the potshot at Jorge W. Shruberon). Obama would do just as well a Merkel.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 11:16 AM  

@61 Zane Gray would be about 7. The main leftward thing was his private position on open marriage. Otherwise, he was to the right of the literary critics - further so than L'Amour. His books are masculine blood and thunder and very much on the side of order over self-expression. His outlaws, for example, are not always criminals, but even when not, they don't kill innocent people and accept the punishment of the law as justice, even when they really haven't done anything wrong. (For example, an outlaw might be on the run for a case of self-defense that is deemed murder, but he accepts that the Marshals are not just doing their job, but upholding justice, and sometimes justice rightly lassos people on technicalities)

L'Amour has those sorts of characters - they are more "American individualist" in outlook, which is why I agree with his place on your literary spectrum.

Blogger SciVo March 29, 2016 11:16 AM  

I mean it would less useful for me if it's a mixed bag, so more useful if each has both a theoretician and a practitioner.

Anonymous Sensei March 29, 2016 11:17 AM  

If this is a scale of famous people from "rightiness" to "leftiness" (a la "truthiness"), then something like this:

Vladimir Lenin
Karl Marx
FDR
Bill Clinton
George W. Bush
Ronald Reagan
Thomas Jefferson
Otto von Bismark
Genghis Khan

The middle three serve to illustrate an important point...

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:18 AM  

9 should be Murray Rothbard, Mises, Ron Paul, Ayn Rand

Blogger Sevron March 29, 2016 11:18 AM  

Soliciting general advice on a list of unknown purpose and then claiming to be amused by people not getting said unknown purpose is stupid.

I like the idea of having several names per number, perhaps grouped like political figures, philosophers, and pop culture. The Harry Potter list is gold and probably has the best chance of resonating in the general public.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:18 AM  

In what universe are Bismarck and Genghis Khan on the political right?

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 11:19 AM  

"If what your describing is a scale of left to right in terms of equalitarians, the nine posted is a good example. Note there are no monarchs or even dictators like Francisco Franco on the list. All nine are what would be described as liberals - as the word was traditionally defined."

Okay. That, finally, makes sense of the list. Basically, "If you're anti-true-Right (or, in Buchanan's case, simply not quite a true Rightist), then where are your politics?"

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:19 AM  

"If this is a scale of famous people from "rightiness" to "leftiness" (a la "truthiness"), then something like this:"

See?

Look at this idiot. He literally has no idea what is being discussed here... and has a completely retarded idea of what right and left are.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 11:20 AM  

"In what universe are Bismarck and Genghis Khan on the political right?"

The non-Judeo-cucked universe.

Bismarck was the staunchest of monarchists.

Anonymous Spartacus xxxxx March 29, 2016 11:21 AM  

SciVo wrote:I mean it would less useful for me if it's a mixed bag, so more useful if each has both a theoretician and a practitioner.

Agreed. One action figure (Lenin, FDR) and one cheerleader (Marx, Ayn Rand) for each level.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 11:21 AM  

It's already clear that people are going to sperg on this no matter how irrelevant the details are

Its funny that this is what you'd ask your readers not to get caught up in details because many of them do that for FUN. Accuracy matters more to many here than perception.

But... in terms of perception, I'd put Obama between Marx and FDR.

And I've got nothing for that but Obama *feels* more like Marx than FDR. FDR sings with red-headed orphans and bald billionaires alike. Obama and Marx eats em alive.

Anonymous paradox March 29, 2016 11:21 AM  

Mao
Marx
Che
Lincoln
FDR
Regan
Buchanan
Washington
Pinochet

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:22 AM  

"In what universe are Bismarck and Genghis Khan on the political right?"

I'd like to know by what definition Mao and Ghengis Khan cannot be considered in the exact same tier. How one can claim Lenin is left and Khan is right is beyond my kin.

perhaps left means "people we don't like" and right means "people we do like" to these types.

Blogger rho March 29, 2016 11:22 AM  

Worst Buzzfeed quiz ever.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:22 AM  

Look...if this scale isn't completely bloody obvious...you're a full potato retard...and you should stop polluting the comments with your retardery

Anonymous Roundtine March 29, 2016 11:22 AM  

You are lacking a right-wing authoritarian. JFK requires too much context, if you tell me that's your politics, I don't know if you're a tax cutting neo-con or a welfare state liberal. Eisenhower I think is the best for the middle, a real pragmatic moderate.

I think this list is a better mirror:

1 Mao Tse-tung
2 Karl Marx
3 Woodrow Wilson
4 Franklin Delano Roosevelt
5 Dwight Eisenhower
6 Ronald Reagan
7 Andrew Jackson
8 Friedrich Hayek
9 Augusto Pinochet

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:22 AM  

"Bismarck was the staunchest of monarchists."

/facepalm

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:23 AM  

Bismarck was the staunchest of monarchists.

He also invented the welfare state

Blogger tz March 29, 2016 11:23 AM  

I see I'm not the only one who can't figure it out.

What do you mean by left and right?
Donald Trump is what?

If it is authoritarian - libertarian it will be different than secular humanist - activist christian. And there'd be no place to put people who are at the extremes in one on the other.

Complex things can't be reduced tomreal simplicity either in ideology or numbers.
Imagine how much easier it would be if -1 has a real square root.

Blogger pyrrhus March 29, 2016 11:23 AM  

10.Edmund Burke

BTW, George W. Bush was much less conservative than Kennedy, and Grover Cleveland was far more conservative than anyone on the list, a true limited government Libertarian.

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:24 AM  

Nate, no two people agree on right and left. But yeah, that's kinda idiotic.

Anonymous Difster March 29, 2016 11:24 AM  

Given that Ayn Rand was not a politician and the rest are, wouldn't it be more appropriate to replace her with Ron Paul. Rand is theoretical whereas Paul actually put it in to practice.

But if you're trying to get close to anarchy and the politician aspect isn't imporant, Rothbard, though more obscure to most would be a better fit than Rand.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:25 AM  

Donald Trump is what?

3-4

Blogger pyrrhus March 29, 2016 11:26 AM  

Mao was a radical, but a strong Nationalist. In his latter days, he regarded himself as another Emperor in the traditional sense. Shows you the problems of classifying ideology vs. nationalism....

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:27 AM  

You are lacking a right-wing authoritarian.

I'll take what is an oxymoron for 500 , Alex

Blogger doo-wop March 29, 2016 11:27 AM  

Err, forgive my ignorance, but how exactly is Thomas Jefferson right-wing? His vision of America was a nation of farmers, and he was a member of the proto-Democratic party.

Doesn't the spectrum of left-right denote economic policies? A nation of disjointed working-class peoples sounds pretty left-wing to me.

Seems more like you're looking at a scale of authority -- liberty.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:27 AM  

'Nate, no two people agree on right and left. But yeah, that's kinda idiotic.'

yes. lots of people agree on right and left.

on the right... is anarchy. on the left... is totalitarianism.

that is the only spectrum that matters.

That is why Ghengis Khan, Mao, and Bismark are ALL on the left... and that is why Ayn Rand, Hayek, Mises, Thomas Jefferson, and so on are on the Right.

That is why Bill Clinton, Dubya, and JFK are near the middle.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 11:27 AM  

International fame-based, perception-based:

1. Gandhi
2. Buddha
3. Muhammad Ali
4. Lincoln
5. Princess Diana
6. Adolf Hitler
7. Eminem
8. Arnold Schwarzenegger
9. Chuck Norris

Anonymous smedley butler March 29, 2016 11:28 AM  

1. Vladimir Lenin
2. Karl Marx
3. Rousseau
4. Ayn Rand
5. Thomas Jefferson (Locke)
6. Alexis D'Tocqueville
7. Frederic Neitzsche
8. JRR Tolkien
9. Alasdair Macintyre

Until you have addressed Macintyre's critique of "l"iberalism, you haven't begun to touch politics.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:29 AM  

"Seems more like you're looking at a scale of authority -- liberty."


DING DING DING

Give the boy a cookie.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:30 AM  

Err, forgive my ignorance, but how exactly is Thomas Jefferson right-wing? His vision of America was a nation of farmers, and he was a member of the proto-Democratic party.

You are far too short for this ride.

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:30 AM  

"On the right... is anarchy. on the left... is totalitarianism."

Oh bull. I know staunch right-wingers who are freaking Praetorians. Anarchism gas traditionally been considered a tool of the left.

And if you were correct, Thomas "go bar em" Jefferson would be around a 4.

Anonymous Roundtine March 29, 2016 11:31 AM  

From 1 to 9, the size of government shrinks and the power of the individual rises, but at the extreme right and left, violence and a powerful leader are used to achieve the goal.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:31 AM  

Hey can all you people that got you concept of Right and Left from Moldbug just go ahead and go back there?

this really isn't traditionally the place for (((midwits)))

Blogger Anthony March 29, 2016 11:32 AM  

There's no political scale on which Merkel is close to the communists and Ayn Rand is on the opposite end. On an economic or social policy scale, Merkel is much more centrist, while on a nationalist/globalist scale, Rand isn't on the opposite end from Lenin, she's near the middle.

I like Roundtine's list if you're not trying to do a nationalist/globalist scale, but I'd replace Hayek with an actual ruler, since all the rest are. Maybe Jefferson or Calvin Coolidge.

Blogger Elocutioner March 29, 2016 11:32 AM  

Teddy Roosevelt, Putin, LBJ.

Vlad Tepes, Alexander the Great, Caesars, Nero, Hannibal, Napoleon - but you'll have little more than name recognition that far back.

Anonymous Roundtine March 29, 2016 11:32 AM  

I'll take what is an oxymoron for 500

In America, but not if the audience is global. Anglo-American politics is unique.

OpenID denektenorsk March 29, 2016 11:32 AM  

Bismarck was the staunchest of monarchists.

He also introduced state socialism to Germany. Some would say somewhat cynically as the average life expectancy of people was below his retirement age... until modern sanitation and medicine kicked in.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 11:33 AM  

#69

"To me all 9 people on that list are equally disagreeable.

That's pretty much my feeling about the original list. Whatever the list's specifics, the simple fact is that practically none of my politics are represented by anyone on it, so as a shorthand way of describing one's political affiliation, it simply doesn't represent me. (And, as it turns out, a big chunk of the Alt Right.)

Unless it's not meant to, in which case -- moot point.

The addition of Buchanan, which VD says he is considering, at least gives me one name to whom I could attach myself.

Use whatever metric you wish, but if you want a shorthand measure of some aspect of people's politics, then give them some name that represents them.

Blogger tz March 29, 2016 11:33 AM  

9 Dick Cheney
...
2 Penn Jillette


Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:35 AM  

"Oh bull. I know staunch right-wingers who are freaking Praetorians. Anarchism gas traditionally been considered a tool of the left."

mate... we don't use those words like you, or they, use those words. I don't care if a red cat calls itself blue. Its red.

This is how you end up with idiots claiming that the political spectrum is a circle. it isn't. It is a simple straight line from totalitarian to anarchist.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:36 AM  

" it simply doesn't represent me."

You think Vox cares?

Blogger Steve Moss March 29, 2016 11:38 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:38 AM  

Okay...to help the retards understand the scale...

What is the likelihood of a person on killing you, assuming you are not a criminal?

Doesn't matter if the method is gas chambers, ovens, guillotine, famine, firing squads, helicopter rides...whatever

1 = the highest probability
9 = the lowest probability

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:38 AM  

Then explain Jefferson's placement in the list given the political climate during his life, including official state religions, the embargo, and slavery.

Anonymous BGKB March 29, 2016 11:38 AM  

Where would Pim Fortuyn be on the scale?

variables with left being:a) Extreme internationalist b) Utopian social equality c) State controlled economy

I can see the variables for the right but the left has all 3 interrelated.

Genghis Khan on the political right?

Khan had small government, barely above anarchy.

There's no political scale on which Merkel is close to the communists

Merkel was a communist party member before the wall fell. Now she is doing the (((communist))) work.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 11:39 AM  

Saint Thomas More might be an example on the left as well, unless you include religion in at which point he does not fit within the scale.

I swear, people who read Utopia only got through half the book. More is a rightist on your scale.

I was wondering if Bible figures could go in here with Christ in the middle with Moses and Paul on the left and maybe the more useless judges on the right.

Blogger Noah B March 29, 2016 11:39 AM  

I would put JFK to Reagan's right.

Anonymous karsten March 29, 2016 11:40 AM  

"You think Vox cares?"

Look, Rick Wilson, I already put this in my post:

"Unless it's not meant to, in which case -- moot point."

Here's an insult generator. You can use this and spare yourself the trouble of writing original posts:

http://ergofabulous.org/luther/

Blogger Steve Moss March 29, 2016 11:41 AM  

Correction.

I think it is helpful to begin and end with "philosophers" (the ideal) and fill the middle with known presidents, for greater public recognition.

Just my two cents.

1. Karl Marx
2. Barack Obama
3. Franklin D. Roosevelt
4. Bill Clinton
5. John F. Kennedy
6. Dwight Eisenhower
7. Ronald Reagan
8. Theodore Roosevelt
9. Ayn Rand

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:43 AM  

How? How can you possibly have Teddy Roosevelt at 8? I greatly admire the man and many of the changes he made, but the national parks system and reforming freaking football right next to Ayn Rand? Come on now.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:44 AM  

Theodore Roosevelt is on the same space as Wilson and FDR

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:45 AM  

I would place karsten on 1 or 2

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 11:47 AM  

By Bands:

1. The Beatles
2. One Direction
3. U2
4. The Who
5. Kansas
6. Johnny Cash
7. Rush
8. AC/DC
9. Sex Pistols

Anonymous Sensei March 29, 2016 11:48 AM  


VD:

What's the going to be the metric for Left and Right?

There is no metric. This is a proxy for rapid identification. For example, if you say "are your politics Vox Day or John Scalzi", that says nothing about your precise view of NAFTA, but it gives you a pretty damn good idea about where you stand in general.




Josh:

Okay...to help the retards understand the scale...

What is the likelihood of a person on killing you, assuming you are not a criminal?

1 = the highest probability
9 = the lowest probability


Hmm, so by the metric that we're idiots for not using after being told there's no metric, Scalzi is on the Far Right and our fearsome Dark Lord is on the Far Left. Amusing, but not indicative of anything.

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:50 AM  

"Theodore Roosevelt is on the same space as Wilson and FDR"

Not even close. Roosevelt had very specific issues that he thought the government ought to handle, but he wasn't the sort of wannabe totalitarian those two were.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:51 AM  

Hmm, so by the metric that we're idiots for not using after being told there's no metric, Scalzi is on the Far Right and our fearsome Dark Lord is on the Far Left. Amusing, but not indicative of anything.

I thought "in a position of political power" was implied.

Blogger doo-wop March 29, 2016 11:51 AM  

@Nathan and Josh

How exactly am I stupid? I'm just telling you what I've been taught. Personally, to me, it seems like none of you guys know what "right" or "left" means. Why are you conflating two completely different concepts?

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:52 AM  

Not even close. Roosevelt had very specific issues that he thought the government ought to handle, but he wasn't the sort of wannabe totalitarian those two were.

He founded the progressive party.

Your argument is invalid.

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 11:53 AM  

Soliciting general advice on a list of unknown purpose and then claiming to be amused by people not getting said unknown purpose is stupid.

I'm not amused. I'm irritated by people who can't follow freaking directions. I know they don't understand my purpose. That's why I provided the directions in the first place.

This may come as a shock to some, but sometimes there are competing issues that need to be balanced. The point is not to allow people to identify precisely, but to have a general idea. Most of us understand that Thatcher-Reagan is different than, say, Clinton-Obama.

Blogger doo-wop March 29, 2016 11:54 AM  

@133 And let me guess, you think Hitler was a socialist too, right? "National Socialist!" It's right there in the name guys, c'mon! And Communism's all about the community, too.

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:54 AM  

"He founded the progressive party.

Your argument is invalid."

This is just as historically ignorant and obtuse as mister "proto-Democrat" further up.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 11:55 AM  

What is the likelihood of a person on killing you, assuming you are not a criminal?

1) Jezebel
2) Bloody Mary
3) Catherine the Great
4) Isabella
5) Hilary *
6) Elizabeth I
7) Anne
8) Victoria
9) Maria Theresa

Need some asian empresses in there...

*assuming her election

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:56 AM  

This is just as historically ignorant and obtuse as mister "proto-Democrat" further up.

Read his 1912 campaign platform

OpenID sigsawyer March 29, 2016 11:56 AM  

The Statism/Individualism dichotomy is a fallacy, especially when the greatest threat to your freedom, statistically speaking, is private actors and not state actors.

Some 'individualist' states have been quite orderly as a result of the nation's character and history; the American "Old Republic" springs to mind. Some "Statist" states have been extremely chaotic; see Stalinism. Stalin's USSR had to be brutal and chaotic, however, because it was weak and its hold on power was tenuous. Bismark never needed gulags. As history has proved, the US Old Republic was a transitory state that was dismantled by the same Leftist entropy that created it.

The British ruled India, a country of 250,000,000 people, with 1,000 civil servants. It had arbitrary powers that would make Ron Paul shit himself in terror and yet was such a small, efficient, noninvasive government that Paul could not help but cream himself in delight.

Libertarian principles only work in a country that is at peace, internally stable, and under the rule of Law. Confucius called it "wu wei". It is utterly incapable of restoring a socially atomized, crime-filled, mistrustful, anarchic society to its former glory.

Blogger doo-wop March 29, 2016 11:56 AM  

@136
You guys seem to take a lot of invalid assumptions based on innocuous historical facts mentioned by other people. Like I am somehow implying something I am not.

Blogger Nate March 29, 2016 11:56 AM  

"Soliciting general advice on a list of unknown purpose and then claiming to be amused by people not getting said unknown purpose is stupid."

The issue here is you're not bright enough to spot the profoundly obvious pattern displayed in the list and its order.

Anonymous Arnold Sigmanegger March 29, 2016 11:56 AM  

I am not at all open to suggestions of multiple axes or anything more complicated than a single 9-point scale.

Multiple Axes? I recommend two. One for each hand. Til VALHALLA!

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 11:57 AM  

I'm not amused. I'm irritated by people who can't follow freaking directions. I know they don't understand my purpose. That's why I provided the directions in the first place.

If someone can't follow directions, does that make them a 1 or a 9?

/ducks

Blogger Doom March 29, 2016 11:57 AM  

I'd put Kennedy where Bush is, moving Bush over even to replace Clinton (given Clinton's second term and both of Bush's terms).

My problem is left and right isn't linear. It has at least two other dimensions. More, I actually don't even have Christians on the left-right system. Both the left and right are forms of socialism, and I don't count that socialists can be Christians.

As for a list of socialists, I think you do fairly well. Regardless of what Ayn suggested, without faith, there is only various forms of human secularism which always turn to socialism, which in turn always head (unchecked) to communism. I'm not really familiar with Jefferson, the rest seems fine.

Anonymous Jim Mortensen March 29, 2016 11:58 AM  

Is it just me or does this scale make you want to rank people from Lawful Good to Chaotic Evil rather than left/right : )

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 11:58 AM  

How about this?

1 Karl Marx, Mao Tse-tung
2 Fidel Castro, Bernie Sanders
3 Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Gloria Steinhem
4 Barack Obama, Camille Paglia
5 George Bush, Bill Clinton
6 Mitt Romney, William F. Buckley
7 Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher
8 Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan
9 Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 11:59 AM  

"This may come as a shock to some, but sometimes there are competing issues that need to be balanced."

Maybe I'm just missing something obvious, but that original list looks to me like it progresses from globalist to localist. However, that seems like it should put Kennedy further right than Bush, and Ayn Rand shouldn't even be on the list.

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian March 29, 2016 12:00 PM  

@145

Looks good.

Blogger flyingtiger March 29, 2016 12:02 PM  

Where is Joe Stalin on this list? a -1? It is hard to define what the politics of Thomas Jefferson is in modern terms. Is he left or right?

Blogger Conan the Cimmerian March 29, 2016 12:03 PM  

I think the original list is fine as well (if just a sort of economic one thru 9).

But @145 does open up the breadth and depth a bit more. (Again, caveat, don't know that I fully grasp all the list might suggest).

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 12:04 PM  

It is hard to define what the politics of Thomas Jefferson is in modern terms. Is he left or right?

No it's not. He's on the right

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 12:04 PM  

@Josh

"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day."

Yeah, that definitely sounds super authoritarian.

Blogger Doom March 29, 2016 12:05 PM  

Vox,

*thumbs down* =>(modern equiv of thumbs up)
I can live with that. Before God I was... Hmm... 9ish. If you are going to dictate, then damned well do it bold. Thankfully you didn't put Vlad in. He doesn't fit this list.

Anonymous LurkingPuppy March 29, 2016 12:07 PM  

VD wrote:Gloria Steinhem

It's “Steinem”.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab March 29, 2016 12:07 PM  

1. Jeffery Dahmer
2. Ted Bundy
3. Ted Kaczynski
4. Matthew Broderick
5. Ted Kennedy
6. James Dean
7. John Wayne
8. Bob Hope
9. Mother Theresa

Those are the people I deem most likely to kill me to least likely to kill me.

Blogger Mastermind March 29, 2016 12:08 PM  

@VD that list looks much better.

Blogger Noah B March 29, 2016 12:08 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Brick Hardslab March 29, 2016 12:09 PM  

VD wrote:How about this?

1 Karl Marx, Mao Tse-tung

2 Fidel Castro, Bernie Sanders

3 Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Gloria Steinhem

4 Barack Obama, Camille Paglia

5 George Bush, Bill Clinton

6 Mitt Romney, William F. Buckley

7 Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher

8 Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan

9 Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan


Perfect.

Blogger Mastermind March 29, 2016 12:09 PM  

the one in post 145 that is

Anonymous Sensei March 29, 2016 12:09 PM  

What about Rush Limbaugh instead of Romney?

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 12:09 PM  

"To destroy this invisible Government, to dissolve the unholy alliance between corrupt business and corrupt politics is the first task of the statesmanship of the day."

Yeah, that definitely sounds super authoritarian.


It also sounds like Bernie Sanders.

In the social sphere the platform called for

A National Health Service to include all existing government medical agencies
Social insurance, to provide for the elderly, the unemployed, and the disabled.
Limited injunctions in strikes.
A minimum wage law for women.
An eight hour workday.
A federal securities commission.
Farm relief.
Workers' compensation for work-related injuries.
An inheritance tax.
A Constitutional amendment to allow a Federal income tax.
The political reforms proposed included

Women's suffrage.
Direct election of Senators.
Primary elections for state and federal nominations.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 12:09 PM  

Jefferson is Right-wing in any era, under nearly any definition of "political spectrum". Lincoln is Left. This is not controversial, but it is clear that most people might be generally confused by their inclusion as such.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 12:09 PM  

I personally liked JFK in center position. He's more universally accepted as centrist by both right and left.

Regardless of politics, GW and Clinton are still seen as further right and left than dead center.

OpenID paworldandtimes March 29, 2016 12:11 PM  

5 George Bush, Bill Clinton

Recommend including a middle initial(s) for Bush.

Blogger Noah B March 29, 2016 12:13 PM  

1 Karl Marx, Mao Tse-tung
2 Fidel Castro, Bernie Sanders
3 Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Gloria Steinhem
4 Barack Obama, Camille Paglia
5 George Bush, Bill Clinton
6 Mitt Romney, William F. Buckley
7 Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher
8 Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan
9 Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan


How about:
6. Dwight Eisenhower, William F. Buckley

The problem with JFK being in the list is that the current perception is that he was far left when in reality he was farther right than most of those in the GOP today.

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 12:16 PM  

@Josh - Congratulations on cherry-picking. Feel like including the parts about government reform that are fundamental to the modern libertarian agenda?

Roosevelt sits right around a 6 on the original scale, probably. Wilson and FDR are 3-4.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 12:17 PM  

The problem with JFK being in the list is that the current perception is that he was far left when in reality he was farther right than most of those in the GOP today.

Huh. Interesting. Either I have been reading here too much or I need to spend more time with liberals. I always had the impression he was The Perfect Moderate.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 12:18 PM  

Roosevelt sits right around a 6 on the original scale, probably. Wilson and FDR are 3-4.

Based on what, your feelings?

Blogger Noah B March 29, 2016 12:18 PM  

1. Deray
2. David Brooks
3. Anita Sarkeesian
4. Popehat
5. Ben Shapiro
6. Adam Baldwin
7. Milo
8. Nate
9. Azzmador

Blogger Doom March 29, 2016 12:20 PM  

If I had to switch something, it would probably be 7 and 8. But that is probably the difference between our political views... which is actually not as much as it can seem. As to why Reagan is there, I don't think we have had a Christian president at least in my lifetime. So... that's that.

Really, though, I can live with the list as is.

Blogger dc.sunsets March 29, 2016 12:20 PM  

Rand was NOT a libertarian. She explicitly rejected anarco-capitalism in favor of some ill-defined minarchism.

Blogger Doom March 29, 2016 12:21 PM  

Uhrm, 167 is for Vox's last list.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 12:22 PM  

1 Karl Marx, Mao Tse-tung
2 Fidel Castro, Bernie Sanders
3 Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Gloria Steinhem
4 Barack Obama, Camille Paglia ---***is Cornel West as well known as Paglia? I might move him to Stienem at (3) and then Steinem to (4)
5 George Bush, Bill Clinton --- YES.
6 Mitt Romney, William F. Buckley --- *Romney isn't specific enough in my mind. Maybe McCain or Palin? Might just be me. 5 and 6 are hard to distinguish from one another.
7 Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher --- Yes, but a bit redundant. Pope John Paul II might work in place of Thatcher.
8 Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan
9 Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan

That's shaping up very nicely.

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 12:23 PM  

1 karsten
2 tad
3 dh
4 sigbouncer
5 Tom Kratman
6 John C Wright
7 Nate
8 Vox
9 Josh

Blogger Sevron March 29, 2016 12:23 PM  

Soliciting general advice on a list of unknown purpose and then claiming to be amused by people not getting said unknown purpose is stupid."

The issue here is you're not bright enough to spot the profoundly obvious pattern displayed in the list and its order.


Focus, Natykins, focus. I know exactly what the list is for and the algorithm it's going to serve. Your fee-fees got hurt enough by me calling your empty posturing "stupid" that you forgot to call me sugar tits and put in your customary "..." all over the place.

Blogger 2Bfree March 29, 2016 12:24 PM  

Based on actual action in office I’d switch Clinton and Bush. Clinton’s welfare reform is arguably more to the right than Bush’s No Child Left Behind, etc. Re-reading your parameters and your familiarity trumps accuracy negates my argument. Although Clinton could possibly be replaced with good ol’ Abe whose actions were certainly more statist than Kennedy etc., but again familiarity trumps accuracy negates my argument. Not knowing the precise use of the scale, but being able to guess form your selections, if it’s for an American audience you might want to consider Jimmy Carter replacing Merkel.

Blogger Noah B March 29, 2016 12:25 PM  

Expert trolling, Josh.

Blogger S1AL March 29, 2016 12:25 PM  

"Based on what, your feelings?"

The difference between totalitarianism and moderate government social assistance. The difference between globalism and nationalism. The difference between registering lobbyists and registering the citizenry. The difference between the national park system and the TVA.

If you can't comprehend those differences, that's not my fault.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 12:25 PM  

Oh, just saw the Ike suggestion for 6. by @162.

I like that one better.

Blogger Student in Blue March 29, 2016 12:26 PM  

9 Josh

(in monotone) Look out, everyone, Josh is coming to kill us all.

Anonymous Monkey Boy March 29, 2016 12:26 PM  

The problem with Marx is that he wasn't a sexual or social leftist in the way that the modern left is, it's unlikely that would have cared about gays or trans individuals, in fact he probably would have thought they were mentally unstable. He's unquestionably the end game of Economic and Statist Leftism though. I can't think of anyone who combines extreme social leftism with extreme economic leftism though.


Buckley was more conservative than Romney. Remember that Romney was for universal healthcare and at one point was also pro-abortion and supported assault rifle bans.


Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan should be 10. Maybe Joseph de Maistre and Julius Evola at 9.

Personally feel that 10 should be Pagans.

Blogger VD March 29, 2016 12:26 PM  

5 George Bush, Bill Clinton

Bush is too inflammatory. I think I'll change this to John F. Kennedy, Bill Clinton. That's about as neutral as one can reasonably be perceived to be in this day and age.

Anonymous unclesol March 29, 2016 12:27 PM  

I don't know about #9. Attila and Genghis don't scream "right wing" to me, like a proper #9 should. Perhaps I am in the minority, though.

Blogger dc.sunsets March 29, 2016 12:28 PM  

This is senseless to me, made incoherent by today's utter confusion about Leftism and its opposite.

Leftism today is an utterly collectivist cult devoted to a bizarre notion of equality.

Show me who on any list of notable people is individualist and openly favors hierarchy.

Anonymous Monkey Boy March 29, 2016 12:31 PM  

"Dwight Eisenhower, William F. Buckley"

I like this one. Maybe some slight differences on military issues but it's a better fit than Romney.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 12:31 PM  

I'm going to retract the Pope suggestion. Like a good Catholic, he's got too much baggage. Thatcher/Reagan's fine.

Blogger Thomas Davidsmeier March 29, 2016 12:31 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

OpenID sigsawyer March 29, 2016 12:31 PM  

Nonsense. Jefferson was a Leftist in his time. He rejected traditional structures of authority, rejected aristocracy, was a believer in the Lockean tabula rasa, which is the ideological seed of all the SJW bullshit today, etc.

Imagine if today, SJW's took over Hawaii and made it into a radical feminist 'utopia'. That's how the West saw America in 1776. Jefferson was the SJW of his day. 'self-evident natural rights of man' is the same equality-whining we have to hear from the modern Left. Once you tear down the nomian structure of imperial monarchy, then you tear down the nomian structure of property rights, (which the socialists of the 1800's did) then you tear down the nomian structures of family, marriage, and community, which the leftists of the 1900's did.

It doesn't matter that Jefferson stopped at property rights and couldn't have imagined the rest of the social structures being pulled away, just like it doesn't matter that Wilson couldn't fathom that his politics would be used to justify mass immigration. The SJW's trace their lineage directly back to Jefferson. They're finishing the work that he started, it's just a matter of degree.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 12:34 PM  

Based on what, your feelings?

Perception IS largely *feelings*.

It is not usually tied to details that help make realistic and accurate views of the world.

Teddy wasn't libertarian but he wasn't authoritarian, either, and the perception is he is further right than FDR.

Anonymous GregMan March 29, 2016 12:35 PM  

1. H. Beam Piper's Thalassans
2. Forbin's Colossus
3. Captain Picard
4. Captain Kirk
5. Overlord Karellan
6. The Connatic of Lusz
7. Khodos the Executioner
8. H. Beam Piper's Hetairans
9. Any Robert Heinlein hero

Spergs, GO!

Blogger Josh March 29, 2016 12:35 PM  

Teddy wasn't libertarian but he wasn't authoritarian, either, and the perception is he is further right than FDR.

Only slightly, though. The man loved government power.

Blogger Thomas Davidsmeier March 29, 2016 12:36 PM  

Oops, didn't see Vox's revision @145

Ann Coulter in place of Ron Paul.

Romney is terrible because nobody knows anything about him. He doesn't bring an image to anybody's mind that I know. But, I can't come up with anybody when I try to think about it.

Is that where Rush Limbaugh might belong? Or Glenn Beck?

Anonymous Roundtine March 29, 2016 12:40 PM  

1 Gawker
2 Salon
3 Slate
4 New Republic
5 The Atlantic
6 The Economist
7 Washington Times
8 Breitbart
9 /pol/

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 12:42 PM  

"Jefferson was a Leftist in his time."

Oh. Right. Thwarting state religion, banning the expansion of slavery in the territories, weakening the Vice Presidency, equal and exact justice, self-defensive wars, and national tarriffs.

You've got a regular Mao there.

OpenID sigsawyer March 29, 2016 12:43 PM  

@181 "Bizarre cult of equality" is exactly how the US would have been described in 1790, you know.

Left-Right is a measure of social and legal obligations. It has nothing to do with 'collectivism', a term which serves as rhetorical squid-ink by objectivists in an attempt to disguise the fact that, like the socialists they despise, they are materialists whose political philosophy is grounded in nihilism.

Blogger Giraffe March 29, 2016 12:43 PM  

9 Attila the Hun, Genghis Khan

I can't wrap my brain around a couple of emperors being on the political right.

Anonymous VFM #6306 March 29, 2016 12:44 PM  

Beck and Limbaugh belong in positions 6 and 9, interchangeably, depending on the preference of the GOPe insider providing that night's entertainment.

Blogger CM March 29, 2016 12:45 PM  

The SJW's trace their lineage directly back to Jefferson. They're finishing the work that he started, it's just a matter of degree.

Jefferson was a founding father-ergo, right.

And the SJWs are carrying Jefferson's philosophy to absurdity. There is nothing sjw about demanding equal treatment before the law. Elitists are not above the law. Monarchs, nobles, governors, generals all are to be judged under the same laws as peasants, cobblers, and bakers.

Judging J by what SJWs do with "all are created equal" is like judging Jesus by how much of a pansy SJWs have made him.

1 – 200 of 280 Newer› Newest»

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts