Scholars, teachers, parents, celebrities, movie stars teach children early on that you can choose only between left and right.
Not only is this a silly intention of the establishment (the super-rich groups who rule us, media, politicians, and lobbyists), but it is also very useful for the super-rich who also (what a surprise!) exert enormous influence over universities to maintain their wealth and power.
Since the left and right spectrum is truly detrimental to humankind, future robots, or AI, it is like choosing between Stalin and Hitler.
History of left and right spectrum
The concept of the political spectrum has its roots in the French Revolution of 1789. During the meetings of the National Assembly, supporters of the revolution and more radical change sat on the left side of the chamber, while supporters of the monarchy and traditional institutions sat on the right. This spatial arrangement gave rise to the terms “left-wing” and “right-wing,” which have since been used to describe political ideologies.
In the 19th century, the left-right divide became more pronounced with the rise of socialism and liberalism on the left, advocating for workers’ rights, social equality, and democratic reforms. On the right, conservatism emerged, defending established traditions, social hierarchies, and economic liberalism. This period saw the left-right spectrum solidify as a way to categorize political beliefs and parties.
The 20th century introduced further complexity to the political spectrum with the emergence of totalitarian ideologies such as communism and fascism, which were positioned at the extreme ends of the left-right axis. The authoritarian-libertarian dimension also gained prominence, differentiating between those who support strong central control (authoritarianism) and those who advocate for individual freedoms and minimal government intervention (libertarianism). This addition provided a more nuanced understanding of political ideologies.
In recent decades, the political spectrum has continued to evolve, reflecting changes in social attitudes and political priorities. Issues such as environmentalism, globalism, and identity politics have introduced new dimensions to the spectrum, challenging traditional left-right categorizations. Despite its evolving nature, the political spectrum remains a fundamental tool for understanding and analyzing political ideologies, movements, and party positions across different contexts and eras.
Current pseudoscientifc spectrum and how the mainstream sees it
The political spectrum is a conceptual framework used to classify and compare different political ideologies, parties, and movements based on their positions on a range of issues, particularly those related to government intervention, individual freedoms, economic policies, and social values. This spectrum helps in understanding the diversity of political beliefs and their relative positions, making it easier to analyze and discuss political ideas and policies.
Left and right by scholars
One of the most common dimensions of the political spectrum is the left-right dimension. The left-wing typically advocates for social equality, government intervention in the economy, and progressive social policies. Ideologies associated with the left include socialism, social democracy, and communism, all of which emphasize wealth redistribution, social justice, and welfare programs. Conversely, the right-wing emphasizes individual liberties, free-market policies, and conservative social values. Right-wing ideologies include conservatism, libertarianism, and sometimes fascism, focusing on limited government intervention, traditional values, and free enterprise.
Liberal or authoritian
Another important dimension of the political spectrum is the authoritarian-libertarian dimension. Authoritarian ideologies support strong central authority and control over individual freedoms, often justified by the need for order, security, or ideological purity. This can involve significant restrictions on speech, press, and assembly. On the other hand, libertarian ideologies advocate for minimal government interference in personal and economic matters, emphasizing individual freedoms and autonomy. Libertarians support civil liberties, free markets, and personal choice, often opposing government regulations and controls.
Economic and social issues
The economic dimension of the political spectrum further distinguishes between left-wing and right-wing economic policies. Left-wing economics focuses on wealth redistribution, regulation of markets, and public ownership of resources and services, aiming to reduce economic inequalities and provide social safety nets. Right-wing economics prioritizes free markets, privatization, deregulation, and reduced taxes, emphasizing economic growth, entrepreneurship, and individual responsibility.
Social issues also play a crucial role in the political spectrum. Progressive ideologies advocate for social reforms, equal rights, and anti-discrimination measures, seeking to address injustices and promote inclusivity. Conservative ideologies, in contrast, prefer traditional values, social stability, and resistance to rapid change, emphasizing the preservation of cultural and social norms.
Examples of this lying concept
Examples of political positions on the spectrum include far-left ideologies like communism and radical socialism, which advocate for complete state control of the economy and the abolition of private property. Center-left positions, such as social democracy, support mixed economies with both private and public sectors and extensive welfare programs. Centrism represents moderate policies that combine elements of both left and right ideologies. Center-right positions, like liberal conservatism, support free markets with some government regulation and moderate social policies. Far-right ideologies, such as fascism and ultra-conservatism, advocate for authoritarian control, nationalism, and often exclusionary social policies.
The political spectrum is often depicted as a linear or two-dimensional chart. A linear spectrum ranges from left (progressive) to right (conservative). A two-dimensional chart, such as the Nolan Chart, includes a vertical axis representing social freedom (libertarian vs. authoritarian) and a horizontal axis representing economic freedom (left vs. right). Understanding the political spectrum is essential for analyzing the complex nature of political ideologies and engaging in informed discussions about governance and policy.
Forget the mainstream and let’s immerse into (sadly) underground
What about the most ecstatic people or AI existences (with consciousness) that are completely carefree? Are you sure their concept proposes it?
What about an altruistic part (developing developing country)? Sensible eugenics (a few health issues, highly moral and super smart people)? What about completely novel philosophical morality?
200,000 people die from medical malpractice every year in the USA? Left or right?
What about tens of percent of GDP would be invested in science (basic research) which would turn society upside-down?
Doesn’t fit spectrum: not only who is born but if he or she is born at all
The average ejaculation contains around 100 million sperm cells. Women are born with approximately 1-2 million eggs, but only a fraction of these eggs will ever mature and be released during ovulation over the course of a woman’s reproductive years.
To calculate the number of potential genetic combinations, you would multiply the number of sperm by the number of eggs. For example, if there are 100 million sperm and 1 million eggs available for fertilization, the total number of potential genetic combinations would be 100 million multiplied by 1 million. It would result in 100 trillion possible combinations.
Since we know God doesn’t lead this process and it cannot be exactly just even by super-moral standards, the next question is if she or he is going to be born?
Counting people who died, not possibly born people
Yes, and this is a completely caveman-like mentality. A product of evolution.
Evolution programmed us to have children all the time, contraception means didn’t exist in the vast majority of human existence so there consequentially wasn’t any pressure when people didn’t have kids.
Car accidents, drownings, cancer, cardiovascular diseases, respiratory diseases, and infectious diseases, some of them are major causes of death in developed countries, and some of them are named just as a visible example.
But your possible brother, sister, aunt, uncle, cousin, or friend who has never been born? It doesn’t count and it is wrong.
100 million American shadows who were never born
In 2020, global GDP amounted to about 84.96 trillion U.S. dollars. The super-rich families and their banks own much more.
So it would have allowed to bring so many Americans alive without parents paying a dime. I made calculations previously with lower numbers, however, if we extend it to a higher number and more time, it would be entirely possible.
The altruistic axis of the spectrum
In 2020, global GDP amounted to about 84.96 trillion U.S. dollars. Out of this number, good causes such as cancer cure research ($6.9 billion), mental illness eradication ($2.21 billion), more people being born by extensive monetary support of natality, eradication of extreme poverty, health care for everyone on this planet, affordable housing, made basically laughing amount of money.
Insight into the political background? Left and right don’t care
How could have Joe Biden explained that he hadn’t allowed Ukrainians to attack inside Russia? Because it could have provoked a nuclear war because of the hidden constellations.
Lobbyists, crooks, movers-and-shakers serving the super-rich families make the political process paralyzed and ineffective.
The media should give us insight into the interior of politics, making sure we get rid of the clientelism. (Also, my other article about clientelism)
Populism vs. elitism
Populism, which emphasizes the power of the common people against a perceived elite, can be found on both the left and right, making it an issue that doesn’t fit neatly into the spectrum. Elitism, which supports rule by a select, often more educated or affluent class, also transcends economic ideology.
Foreign policy
What kind of policy the super-rich want is barely dictated by the right and left spectrum. Being a diplomat lies in handling thousands of clientelist groups and their influence.
There isn’t such a country in which foreign policy hasn’t been privatized.
Direct democracy vs. representative democracy
The debate over the best form of governance – whether decisions should be made directly by the people or by elected representatives – doesn’t fall along the typical left-right lines. Advocates for direct democracy may come from either side of the economic spectrum.
Nationalism vs. globalism
The disgusting existence of national states that brought nothing but gas chambers should be ceased now. The dichotomy of us/them (tribalism) is highly deplorable.
Ethnocides, genocides, wars, and local conflicts all because of our primitive instincts.
Freedom of speech vs. regulation of speech
In my opinion, there is free speech or there is not. They say Europe, due to its history, cannot have freedom of speaking like the US has. But how can implement something new when you are unable to have a discussion about it?
Transhumanism
The idea of enhancing human capabilities through technology, such as genetic modification, artificial intelligence, and cybernetic enhancements, is a debate that doesn’t align with the left-right spectrum. Support or opposition can come from various ideological backgrounds, driven by ethical, religious, or philosophical considerations rather than economic views.
Improving people
With all the genetic knowledge, people could be highly moral, intelligent, disease-free, crime-less, and so on. But guess what, the ruling elites who control everything (including universities) sow the seed into the heads even of bright people because they wanted a feeble-minded population they can control.
Space exploration
The debate over space exploration, including government versus private sector involvement, the ethics of space colonization, and the allocation of resources to space programs, doesn’t align with the traditional political spectrum. Supporters may come from various ideological backgrounds, motivated by scientific curiosity, economic interests, or the quest for human survival.
Cognitive liberty
The concept of cognitive liberty, which involves the right to control one’s own mental processes and states, including issues like the use of psychedelics or neural implants, doesn’t fit neatly into the left-right spectrum. This issue intersects with debates on personal autonomy, public health, and state control.
Consumerism
An obscene amount of money goes to the church of consumerism. Putting money into other domestic development or developing foreign countries.
Or just give money to the poor when consumerism is restricted which our beloved spectrum doesn’t offer.
Develop the developing
If developed countries were to start funding developing nations extensively, the global landscape could change dramatically. Significant financial support could accelerate infrastructure development, providing better access to education, healthcare, and clean water. This influx of resources would enable developing countries to invest in critical sectors like renewable energy, technology, and agriculture, fostering sustainable growth and reducing poverty. With improved infrastructure and social services, these nations would likely experience enhanced quality of life, greater economic stability, and a stronger position in the global economy.
Furthermore, extensive funding could lead to a reduction in global inequalities. By bridging the gap between developed and developing countries, such investment would create more equitable opportunities for all. As these nations progress, they could become valuable trade partners and contributors to global innovation. Additionally, with increased focus on education and skill development, the workforce in developing countries would grow more competitive, driving economic diversification and reducing reliance on foreign aid. Ultimately, this shift could foster a more balanced, interconnected world, where prosperity is more evenly distributed and shared across borders.
Medical malpractice and supervision
200,000 (the numbers differ) people died from terrorism and the US declared war on every country in the world.
Medical malpractice is a serious issue that occurs when healthcare providers fail to meet the standard of care, leading to patient harm or death. In the United States, it’s estimated that medical errors are the third leading cause of death, with studies suggesting that they contribute to over 250,000 deaths annually. This alarming statistic highlights the critical need for vigilance, accountability, and continuous improvement in healthcare practices to prevent avoidable tragedies and ensure patient safety.
It is essential for ensuring the safe and effective management of health conditions in medical supervision. It involves the continuous monitoring of a patient’s progress by healthcare professionals to adjust treatments, manage side effects, and prevent complications. Without proper supervision, there is a risk of misdiagnosis, inappropriate medication use, or the worsening of symptoms. Medical supervision ensures that care is tailored to the individual’s needs, promoting better outcomes and overall well-being.
Legalizing drugs and the War on Drugs
It is widely believed the War on Drugs is a total failure. Consumption is the same, the same body count.
All because the big banks are laundering money for the drug cartels. Well, it is no surprise the super-rich don’t want this to be included in the left and right spectrum.
Morality improvement
Some people think this moral system is the only right one. There can be billions of combinations how what morality could look like.
And this moral system is animalistic to its core because we are animals.
Billions of decisions people on this whole planet make can be made differently. Thus, it would promote the hapiness and well-being of humanity.
Science-based economy
If 20 percent of the U.S. GDP were allocated to basic, non-commercial scientific research, society would likely undergo transformative changes. Such a significant investment in science could lead to unprecedented advancements in various fields, including medicine, technology, and environmental sustainability. With more resources devoted to fundamental research, scientists would have the freedom to explore novel ideas without the pressure of immediate commercial applications. This could result in breakthroughs that redefine our understanding of the world, driving progress in ways we can’t yet imagine.
The emphasis on basic research would also foster a culture of innovation and curiosity. Education systems might shift to prioritize scientific literacy, critical thinking, and creativity, producing a new generation of thinkers and problem-solvers. As a result, the workforce would evolve, with more people engaged in research, technology development, and high-skill jobs. This could reduce economic inequality, as new industries and opportunities emerge from the fruits of this research, creating a more equitable society.
Moreover, dedicating such a large portion of GDP to scientific research could position the U.S. as a global leader in science and technology. The country might become a hub for international collaboration, attracting the best minds from around the world to work on groundbreaking projects. The ripple effects of this investment could extend beyond national borders, addressing global challenges like climate change, pandemics, and energy shortages. In the long term, this commitment to science could lead to a more sustainable, prosperous, and enlightened world.
Actually, we are obliged to take something from Stalin and Hitler
The piquant line attributed to Stalin—“a single death is a tragedy, a million deaths are a statistic”—was relevant to Iraq if the “single” was an American, but the million were not even a statistic. For in Iraq, as in Afghanistan, “we don’t do body counts,” was General Franks’s memorable phrase (Oxford Academic).
You may think you are not Stalin, but by the core of humanity, you are. Let’s imagine the number of deaths of 9/11 around 3,000 – a tragedy. “An estimated 3.6-3.8 million people have died indirectly in post-9/11 war zones, bringing the total death toll to at least 4.5-4.7 million and counting. Over 432,000 civilians have been killed as a result of the fighting. 38 million — the number of war refugees and displaced persons.” Costs of War – here
Since Americans are the highest in ranking of reader’s country of origin, you may say that they were not Americans.
But 100 million unborn Americans may provoke you to give a damn.
And since Hitler’s eugenical programs were criminally minded, we really cannot take their attributes, however, it doesn’t mean eugenics is bad.
So 100 million unborn Americans could have led joyful lives full of estatic moments meanwhile having been extremely moral.
Finally, my completely non-exhaustive proposal
More redistribution/Less redistribution
Liberal/Conservative
Anti-consumerism/Consumerism
Tens of percent of GDP investing in science/Little investment in science
Trillions of dollars for building whole countries/Little aid
Complex grasp of what surplus value is and how to change the constellation of the whole system/Unregulated savage capitalism
Pro-eugenics/Ill society
Clientelism-free politics/Patron-client political style
Massive support of natality/Few people being born
Animal-like stories news/Statistical-mathematical educational news
Lifetime education on how to change politics/Obscurantism
Anti-corruption fight/Corrupt politics
State atheism/Believing in superstitions
Forced collaboration of all political parties on common issues/Partisan politics
Cultural changes of ordinary people for better/Conservative cultures
Vegan, vegetarian society/Mass torture-prone concentration camps
Anti global warming/Denial
Paying the smartest people to be politicians/Feeble-minded prone to manipulation politicians
Eugenically healthy people – less money for a cure, more money for medical research/Ill society with trillions paid for a cure
Eugenically healthy people – less criminals, less prisons/Society full of crime
AI-friendly society/Anti AI
Global government/Eternal nationalistic wars
Global redistribution of wealth/National redistribution
Speaking one language/Babylon
Global educational system/Poor educational system around the world
People having access to a political background/Shallow hidden politics
Right to work, right to have decent housing, right to have adequate money/Savage capitalism
Morality improvement/Nihilistic-like morality
Legalizing drugs/War on Drugs
Education system renaissance/Rigid education system
Placing the brightest minds where they belong/Commercial misuse of the smartest
Banning lobbyists (governments would find out what is really needed to do)/Corrupt politics
Medical supervision/Estimated 200,000 people die from medical malpractice annually in the US
People not functioning in capitalism socially secured/The homeless army
Leave a Reply