Political Spectra: Somewhere Over a Rainbow?

David Cameron, the newish head of the Conservative Party in the UK, has a new slogan for the forthcoming local elections: "Vote blue, Go green". This is a bit more catchy than "Vote blue, Go right." The colour of the UK Labour Party is red, and the colour of the third party, the Liberal Democrats, is orange-yellow. Plotted against the visible colour spectrum (ROYGBiv), from left to right, those colours would nominally seem to fit.¹

In recent years in the USA, the colour associated with the Democrats, nominally on the left, is blue, and the colour of the Republicans is red. It's unclear how this reversal of colours came about.² Until the US Presidential election in 2000, the Republicans did not have a colour that represented the party; now it uses both red and white. Whether it's left-to-right or red-to-violet, such simplistic, one-dimensional classifications of political parties and views do not work very well. If it were one dimension, which dimension³ should it be? Nurture (left) v. Nature (right)? Secular (left) v. Religious (right)? Internationalism (left) v. Nationalism (right)? Collectivism (left) v. Individualism (right)?

When I was at university, I considered myself to be an pacifist-anarchist. (Anarchism appealed to me primarily because of my resistance to the monopoly on state-legitimised violence.) As far as I could tell my views were despised as much by the Marxist-Leninist 'pukes' in the SDS as they were by free-market capitalist 'pigs' at the Engineering School. During the student strike in 1968, those of us in the draft counselling office created the PABPCMC, the Pacifist Anarchist Bisexual Psychedelic Conspiracy Motorcycle Club. To 'align' with the group, you only needed to 'be' one of the words. (Well, it was the Sixties.) There is even doubt that ideological classifications have any relevance at all in contemporary politics.

In a recent programme of BBC Radio 4's Analysis titled "Politics for Plumbers?"⁴, discusses the current state of political ideology. To rephrase David Willetts' comment, comparing political parties today is like the 'Pepsi challenge'. British politics⁵ has become much like American politics⁶, and that may not be such a bad thing. It requires more negotiation and consensus and avoids extremes. Certainly this can take a lot more time and may result in small minorities exercising more power than their proportion in the population would merit. All the above is really just to show how inadequate and insufficient one- or even two-dimensional classifications are.

Of course, what would work better is an n-dimensional, faceted classification.⁷ The first problem is which facets should we choose? Cheating a bit, we could start with some of those facets mentioned in the Wikipedia article on the political spectrum. Here are a few.

• one's view of the future: Dynamists, who want to let the future happen v. stasists, who want to control the future. The Future and Its Enemies: The Growing Conflict Over Creativity, Enterprise, and Progress,
• ways of responding to conflict: Conversation (left), negotiation (centre), or force (right). Charles Blattberg, "Political Philosophies and Political Ideologies" in Public Affairs Quarterly 15, N° 3 (July 2001): 193-217
• urban v. rural: In the UK, this was symbolised in the "fox-hunting debate".
• political violence: Pacifism (political views should not be imposed by violent force; "doves") v. militancy (violence is a legitimate or necessary means of political expression; "hawks").
• foreign trade: Globalization/free trade (world economic markets should become integrated and interdependent) v. autarky/protectionism (the nation or polity should strive for economic independence).
• freedom: Positive liberty (having rights which impose an obligation on others) v. negative liberty (freedom from interference by others).
• change: Radicals (rapid change) v. progressives (measured, incremental change) v. conservatives (minimal or cautious change), and sometimes v. reactionaries (changing things to the way they were).
• international action: Multilateralism (states should cooperate and compromise) v. unilateralism (states have a strong, even unconditional, right to make their own decisions).

1. It's interesting that the Tory slogan (blue to green) is a move from right to left in colour terms. This is what some accuse David Cameron of doing politically.

2. See the discussion in the bulleted item in the section on Exceptions in the article on "Political colour" in Wikipedia.

3. Multiplicity of interpretation of the left-right axis in the article on the "Political spectrum" in Wikipedia.

4. Transcript of "Politics for Plumbers?".

5. Almanac of British Politics by Robert J. Waller and Byron Criddle. But before you go out and buy the current edition, you may wish to wait a few months for the next one.

6. Robert was inspired by the The Almanac of American Politics by Michael Barone and Richard E. Cohen.

7. William Denton. "How to Make a Faceted Classification and Put It On the Web".