Is the Political spectrum a globe?

I once heard a famous conservative radio host talk about how the liberal media was claiming the "far right" for some reprobate behavior (I have forgotten what), and the host claimed that there is no such thing as going too far right, politically. I do not understand what he meant exactly by this, but it made me wonder if one could, theoretically, loop around the spectrum and that the further you extended into one axis you would, in fact, fall out the other side. Is Fascism the result of far left and far right converging? Am I out of my mind?

Sounds like horseshoe theory. The farther one goes to the right or left, the more they mirror the extremes of the other.

Exactly! However, we know that there are more than one axis to deal with, so is the same true for the Y-axis?

That would surprise me if the more authoritarian a regime became, the more it resembled an anarchy. I think the sides (and "left" and "right" have never seemed consistent to me anyway) horseshoe because there are certain difficulties all states encounter, but there are differing opinions on their solutions.

Tell me, The Hanged Man, how do you interpret "left" and "right"? From the origin of the term, it seems all non-monarchists should be left-wing, yet "the left" seems to today favor a stronger centralization of state power.

Well, I'm certainly no expert, but from what I can tell, at some point in the 20th century there was a great exchanging of principle with movements in the West that represented either Left or Right politics. The modern left, seems to me, to be shifting to a strange mingling of authoritarian principles and pure democracy principles. That is to say, that though there is a sort of representative government, the government plays a crucial part in influencing the citizenry of what the authoritarian governments desires are, making it appear that they are desiring to follow the citizenry's wishes, and though extreme force and coercion if needs-be.

The Right, however, seems to have shifted more into a true democratic group while maintaining republican standards or representation. The issue is, that the Right has doubled down on a perceived conservative universalism. That is to say, that the Right is dogmatic in their political leanings to the point that far right values are being lauded as "Self evident" goods for humanity, and all that oppose are either extremely ignorant, evil, or otherwise obtuse.

Quote :

That is to say, that the Right is dogmatic in their political leanings to the point that far right values are being lauded as "Self evident" goods for humanity, and all that oppose are either extremely ignorant, evil, or otherwise obtuse.

What are your thoughts on natural law? Is there an objective morality in nature, and can it be discovered like physics can be? If so, whatever political leanings centered around those immutable truths must be the superior, even if their applications have fallen short.

I definitely believe in objective morality, but whether that is "discoverable" or not I suppose remains to be seen. I doubt earthly political systems could adequately center around natural law. I think humanity will always choose to oppose natural law given the choice.

Why wouldn't it be able to be discovered? How else would people know of it? Doesn't the Declaration of Independence say something about self-evident truths? I would think natural morality would be like any other facet of study of nature.

The right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are too vague to pinpoint for practical matters. They may be self-evident to the founders, but they spend no time in defining what they mean by those things.