Democracy in America

'Mr Sumner's illuminating diagram would make more sense to me if...'

In fact the diagram could easily be seen as a viewpoint on a cube, which almost does this! Whether that helps may be another matter...

As simplifications go, I'm not sure what this contributes to the broader discussion, other than to elevate Libertarianism to a position of importance it doesn't currently hold. It ignores that there are at least three major, conflicting strains of liberal thought: Communism, Religious Idealism and Safety-Net Capitalism off the top of my head. There are similarly at least three major, conflicting strains of conservative thought: Objectivism, Moral Theocracy and Masculine/Racial Identity politics come to mind. All three of the strains of conservatism have a larger influence on American politics than all the forms of Libertarianism put together.

Beth, I agree. And shouldn't it be heart-shaped for valentine's day?

"While conservatism and progressivism both have 'idealistic' and 'corrupt' variants, libertarianism is only 'dogmatic' and 'pragmatic'."

actually, I would suggest that any self-described libertarian who works for Fox - such as John Stossel, say - fits the bill for corrupt libertarian.

What about adding a "corrupt" point for libertarians? Not in electoral terms (at least not yet), but in the sense that some libertarians compromise their principles in order to gain financial support for their think tanks? There is surely a libertarian case to be made for, say, a carbon tax (polluters must pay for their negative externalities), but you don't hear that message coming out of the Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org/special/climatechange

"progressive values through practical, empirically-tested means"

An impossibility.

Seriously though, I'm assuming this chart only applies to economic issues. It would fall apart when trying to apply it to other issues. E.g., there is no libertarian position on abortion and pragmatic libertarian foreign policy would be compatible with realpolitik. On economic issues, anybody who isn't a libertarian just isn't arriving at their positions through practical empirically-tested means. They're corrupt.

Having said that, I have a problem with the chart. On economic issues aren't dogmatic libertarians idealistic conservatives? Can you think of a difference? And pragmatic libertarians are closer to idealistic conservatives AKA Reaganites than they are to idealistic progressives AKA socialists. The chart should really be 5-sided with 19th century nostalgia removed.

Wouldn't libertarian be completely removed from the grid and off on it's own, floating untethered from any other ideology?

"Exceptional America" and now this political taxonomy.

WW, it's time you move out of IOWA.

Whose original intent ? Hamilton's or Madison's/Jefferson's ? Or Washington's ?

I agree with Beth, this elevates libertarianism to something it really isn't.

I kinda doubt that it's possible to accurately make a diagram for current political stances, too much of current politics is narrowly contingent and will fall apart with the next major policy development.

I prefer a more standard three axis model, with something like:
X: laissez faire to interventionist
Y: Authoritarian to democratic
Z: individualist to corporatist

That can capture most polities that have existed, though I'm sure there's some that won't fit. And a few that a couple of additional axes would be required to describe (ancient China vs. its neighbors comes immediately to mind, but the variance isn't important today).

Somebody call Henry Kissinger and tell him that Realpolitik is actually anti-intellectualism.

A number of readers have suggested that there's something wrong with giving libertarianism such a large role. Mr Sumner addressed does address this in his post:

"Is it self-indulgent to devote two of six categories to libertarians, given that they receive less then one percent of the vote in presidential elections? I suppose, but recall that the Libertarian Party is strictly a dogmatic libertarian organization. Pragmatic libertarians probably constitute at least 1/6th of the intellectual elite in public policy."

And the most handsome 1/6th at that!

Eh, many business elites are libertarian. WW, did you mean the 1/6 of public policy elites that make policy or write about it in DC think tanks?

The standard Nolan chart does a better job of describing the major political ideologies in the America; this chart adds ideological consistency/ coherence of principal as a variable, which is helpful insofar as it's my main criticism of the two major parties.

Tzi, I like your model, but where would you put constitutionalist on the Y axis?

19th Century Nostalgia is a curious space to be in. Is that for real?

Nostalgia for a non-specific past that never quite existed seems more accurate.

Doug,

I'd put them in the exact same spot on the Y access as I would the US as a whole, barring other particular views of individuals, and only locate Constitutionalist on X and Z.

As a fan of Sumner's work generally, I think this rethinking of the Nolan chart is an interesting idea. However, I'm not a fan of the "corrupt" terms, mostly because it strikes me as needlessly inflammatory, especially when compared with the "pragmatic" label given to conservatives. I personally prefer this diagram's labeling: http://www.themoneyillusion.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/wheel.jpg, since its a bit more fair to the other ideologies, though realistically you could call all non-pure ideologies corrupt, and go with, say, "dogmatic prog/con/lib" and "corrupt prog/con/lib," which would be the same thing (and in my view is the "first-best" way of looking at it).

Overall, I think an even more interesting way of going about this would be to take the nolan chart and add a 3rd dimension, which may try to tie up some loose ends that the nolan chart does a poor job on, since too much of the economic scale confuses the redistributive and regulatory aspects of economics, and misses a few other points. The nice thing on this attempt, however, is that it has a bit of good Dem/Rep divide to it, since the dogmatic libs tend to be R's, while the pragmatic libs, as per W.W. (and other's) liberal/libertarian project, make much more send on the party of "progress", which is one of the (potentially unintended) insights of this exercies.

Tzi, I actually don't understand what you mean by that.

Look, secret Lizard People sympathizers probably consist of at least 1/6 of of the intellectual elite in public policy, but you don't see them going around making revised Nolan charts.

Admittedly this is most likely due to the fact that the Lizard People would drag them off and eat them, but you still have to admire their humility.