It's not postulating, it's what is. Authoritarian and socially conservative is theocracy. Again, everybody using the line segment model is using it from a different perspective. Some see it as freedom on the left and authoritarian on the right, some see it opposite. Some see it for a fiscal perspective. It's a pathetically inadequate model.
The square model makes it clear. You need to realize when you say "the left", you are speaking of authoritarian philosophy, but when " liberals" say "the right", they also are speaking of authoritarianism via religion. The extremes of both sides of that line IS authoritarian if you combine the perspectives.
Dude you need to get the hell out of here with your misinformation. You are attempting to cause some damage. Same as those idiot party switch narrative ppl.
Socially conservative is not authoritarian. You are conflating the religious push of the 80s and 90s from Republicans as socially conservative. It wasn't. It was authoritarian and wrong and of the left and it failed.
Please stop conflating Democrat and Republican with the base definition of left and right. Left is total control. Right is total freedom.
Wrong again. Even in a square, theocracy is to the left.
Squares have left and right sides. Total control is to the left. Total freedom is to the right.
And the square, I would posit, actually doesn't make sense. It merges two different topics and tries to put them on the same graph. When in reality 2 separated but parallel lines would make more sense. Add a line for every new subject.
Far right would be theocracy. The square model makes more sense than the line. The line can only take into account either social or fiscal, not both.
How do you even begin to postulate that a theocracy would be a right side ideology?
It's not postulating, it's what is. Authoritarian and socially conservative is theocracy. Again, everybody using the line segment model is using it from a different perspective. Some see it as freedom on the left and authoritarian on the right, some see it opposite. Some see it for a fiscal perspective. It's a pathetically inadequate model.
The square model makes it clear. You need to realize when you say "the left", you are speaking of authoritarian philosophy, but when " liberals" say "the right", they also are speaking of authoritarianism via religion. The extremes of both sides of that line IS authoritarian if you combine the perspectives.
Drop the line, get the square.
Dude you need to get the hell out of here with your misinformation. You are attempting to cause some damage. Same as those idiot party switch narrative ppl.
Socially conservative is not authoritarian. You are conflating the religious push of the 80s and 90s from Republicans as socially conservative. It wasn't. It was authoritarian and wrong and of the left and it failed.
Please stop conflating Democrat and Republican with the base definition of left and right. Left is total control. Right is total freedom.
So, you’re just a shill trying to further erode American political ideology. Got it.
Solid argument mate. You really got him.
Wrong again. Even in a square, theocracy is to the left.
Squares have left and right sides. Total control is to the left. Total freedom is to the right.
And the square, I would posit, actually doesn't make sense. It merges two different topics and tries to put them on the same graph. When in reality 2 separated but parallel lines would make more sense. Add a line for every new subject.