Open Forum: Spectrum or Dimensions?
Is there a Political Spectrum between ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ in Contemporary Politics?
Or, How do We Best Describe Current Political Phenomena?*

1.    Brief

	Given political differences how is the political spectrum shaped in contemporary Australia? Is there a left, a right, is there a center? How should we define/re-define what might be meant by conservative, liberal, socialist, green, etc., etc? (1)

2.    Intent

	To introduce this open forum let me outline a proposal whereby current political phenomena (in a democratically oriented setting) can be represented through the lenses of five dimensions or spectra whose collective integration may well re-instate a more complex way of understanding a so-called ‘left’ and a so-called ‘right’. (2)

3.    Preamble

	There seem to be many parallels between contemporary Australian political phenomena and American political phenomena (and a number of other countries like New Zealand, the European Community?)? In Australia we are seeing a concerted level of obstructionism in the Senate by the Coalition that appears to parallel that in the American Senate by the Republicans. Despite an apparent recent shift to the ‘Left’ a renewed shift to the ‘Right’ appears to have been re-instated? Similar issues seemed to have divided these political spectra. On the other hand, given a variety of issues, a number of other contending parties or political forces such as, e.g., Green parties, Liberal-Democrats in Britain, a Tea-Party in the USA, the possible re-invention of independents… we should ask how such mainstream/non-mainstream influences have deconstructed a more traditional sense of the Left versus Right frequently still used in attempts to describe current political complexity? (3)

	To resolve this type of complication I would like to propose five ad hoc spectra that might well capture representatively a number of the ideological forces at work in the formation of current political phenomena (e.g., in personal political outlooks; political parties; recent political decisions; political trends, etc.). I would also like to show how collectively these five spectra suggest that traditional labels of ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ can be reclaimed albeit with the degree of complexity we find ourselves needing to note. (4)

	Basically, I would like to test these ideas in the medium of this open forum. (5)

* Latest version of paper: www.homestead.com/noelshomepage/noelshomepage4.html 
4.    Five Possible Political Spectra

	In asking myself what might be meant by ‘Left’ and ‘Right’ and looking at the ongoing re-iteration of apparent ideological preoccupations in Australian and American political arenas I would like to note the following arguments (under five headings). (6)

i.	That perhaps a traditional Left-Right spectrum could initially be seen as an attitude towards the role of governance involving two contrasting styles in dealing with an assortment of political preoccupations, namely a collectivist approach (with an emphasis upon the state or society, etc., and its sanctioned interventionism) and a more individualistic approach (with an emphasis upon individuals being relatively unencumbered by a perceived excessiveness in state interventionism). On the extreme Left we have Communism, and, on the extreme Right, forms of Fascism that appear to leave the individual relatively alone? I would be the first to admit that I am not happy with this characterization but let us see if we can salvage it for less extreme political phenomena in relatively democratic settings? In America, e.g., Republicans are often found espousing a need for less government (even though it could well be argued that the ‘size’ of government has increased under both Republican and Democratic parties. There are a number of ways of measuring ‘size’ and would assume that all if not most of these measures indicate the same trend both in the USA and here in Australia, and elsewhere? Those ‘measures’ might include the number of people directly and indirectly working for the government, or, agencies paid by the government directly or indirectly, or, various proxies amounting to the same thing; the relative volume of money raised in taxes and/or spent, etc.). Let me title this spectrum as a contrast between Collectivism and Individualism. (7)

ii. 	In a similar ad hoc fashion we can note a certain range of political preoccupations whose concern is over a general perception as to whether ‘there is a perceived need for political innovation’ or ‘there is no perceived need for political innovation and/or removal of innovations’ beyond a mere call for ‘change’ and the implied imperative of a ‘change of government’?  In this spectrum we find a ‘liberal’ attitude in its more traditional sense versus a conservative approach; in effect, a contrast between liberalism and conservatism; prospectivity and retrospectivity; political innovation and a more laissez-faire approach, etc. Let me title this spectrum as a contrast between Liberalism and Conservatism. (8)

iii.	A third axis or spectrum could be proposed between a perceived need for a more centralist oriented position or a non-centralist position. Let me title this spectrum as a contrast between Centrism and Non-Centrism. (9)

iv.	A fourth axis or spectrum could be proposed between a perceived need for more government instituted regulation or for less of the same. Let me title this spectrum as a (time dependent) contrast between Regulationism and Non-Regulationism. (9)

v.	Lastly, let me propose a fifth axis or spectrum between a general attitude of cooperation versus a general obstructionism between political parties. I would like to title this spectrum as a contrast between Non-Oppositionalism and Opositionalism. (10)

5.    The Collective Use of these Five Spectra

	Let me, for the sake of simplicity, model these spectra in parallel with seven spectral degrees of contrast, namely: extreme (left), moderate (left), weak (left), neutral, weak (right), moderate (right), extreme (right). (11)

	E.g., we might characterize a Communist or Communist inspired style of government on a Collectivist-Individualist Spectrum to be as follows:

	X	0	0	-	0 	0	0 (in a model using seven degrees of separation). (12)

	E.g., in contrast to the example in (12) we might consider a socialist or socialist-oriented government to be more along the following lines:

	0	X	0	-	0  	0	0 (13)

	Whereas, in contrast, we might like to perceive a traditional Labor (or Democratic Party) to be better represented by the following:

	0	0	X	-	0	0	0 (14)

	Similarly, the Coalition in Australia between the Liberal Party and the National Party to be along the following lines:

	0	0	0	-	X	0	0 (15)

	Now, generally, it is my belief that if we were to run these five nominated spectra in parallel we would find a lining up either to the ‘Left’ or the ‘Right’. There may well be some minor dimensions and degrees of alignment from time to time but, generally, a current sense of political identity almost seems to demand a degree of relative contrast (and a consequent polarization and de-centering of neutral. Furthermore, given a mobile sense of center we should also perceive a shifting of the relative center given such unequal polarizational shifting of an individual spectrum and/or collective spectra). (16)

7.    Utilization of these Five Parallel Spectra in the Light of Specific Issues

	In demonstrating this tool of these five parallel political spectra let me show how I would characterize the current Australian Labor government’s initial position on the implementation of an ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme), e.g.. I-V representing our five spectra as noted in their order of introduction. Let me contrast this with the Coalition as led by Malcolm Turnbull and the apparent (complex sense of an overall) position adopted under his leadership, contrasting, in turn, with the apparently new position of the same party under the current leadership of Tony Abbott. For a fourth comparison let me sketch my representation of the Democratic Party under the leadership of Barack Obama versus the Republicans (assuming an overall party solidarity in these instances).

1.	Labor (under Rudd)
I	0	0	X	-	0	0	0	Collectivist…
II	0	0	X	-	0	0	0	Liberalism…
III	0	0	X	-	0	0	0	Centralism…
IV	0	0	X	-	0	0	0	Regulationist…
V	0	0	X	-	0	0	0	Non-Opositionalism…

2.	Liberal (under Turnbull)
I	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
II	0	0	X	-	0	0	0
III	0	0	X	-	0	0	0
IV	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
V	0	0	0	-	X	0	0

3.	Liberal (under Abbott)
I	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
II	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
III	0	0	X	-	0	0	0	
IV	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
V	0	0	0	-	X	0	0

4.	Democrats (under Obama)
I	0	0	X	-	0	0	0
II	0	0	X	-	0	0	0
III	0	0	X	-	0	0	0
IV	0	0	X	-	0	0	0
V	0	0	X	-	0	0	0

5.	Republicans (mid 2010)
I	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
II	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
III	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
IV	0	0	0	-	X	0	0
V	0	0	0	-	0	X	0 (17)
	Admittedly, different people may well judge these degrees of separation differently! But, that granted, I would be hopeful, overall, that some degree of consensus would be formed that we could still hold this idea of a spectrum between ‘Left and Right’ albeit with a complexity as noted. E.g., we see, if I am correct, a further ‘movement’ to the Right with the Coalition under Tony Abbott? That both Labor and the Coalition (and under Howard as well), in common, effectively remain centrists in orientation? Interestingly, Labor seems to be in an overall alignment with the American Democrats whilst the Coalition is no mere copy of the Republicans? (18)

8.    Conclusions

	My conclusions could be tabulated under the following headings. Could some degree of consensus be also reached along these lines??

1.	The traditional Left-Right political spectrum is to some extent breaking down given its complexity.
2.	However, some form of overall consensus could be reached through the use of parallel spectra as briefly explored in this working paper?
3.	That, generally, a traditional Left-Right spectrum appears to still apply when treated in a broad collective fashion?
4.	That, perhaps, political complexity is increased with an increase in independents, other parties like the Greens, etc, but, that the same considerations can now be applied to individuals and parties when approached through these same spectra?
5.	Even though extreme ideological positions are sometimes claimed such positions are not always put into effect (and, instead, take on more of a rhetorical aspiration or complexion?)? (19)

Lastly, let us ask what other observations might be apposite when considering political phenomena through this type of complex collective spectral lens? In the process a number of other questions could be asked, namely, to what extent positions and shifts in attitudes can be measured and represented, can a broad working consensus be reached in this type of pursuit, and, what effects extremist attitudes might have on a democratically-oriented context…? (20)

9.    Postscript

	Elsewhere I have argued that overall democratization is assisted through more effective democratic representationalism, increased degrees of transparency in process, appropriate regulation and their proper supervision. Does this formula cast any light on recent political proposals (say in education, e.g.)? To what extent could policies, in a balanced spirit of moderation, move the political center towards a sense of the political center (be that relative or absolute in demarcation)? Or, is the political process better facilitated, over time, through moderate swings between ‘Left’ and ‘Right’? (21)
							         Noël Tointon, Sydney, 24.4.10.
10.    A Later Postscript under a Number of Propositional Headings

	After conducting this open forum (9.5.10) I would like to add a number of additional ideas, comments and qualifications coming from that discussion. (22)

1.	Developing and maintaining a true ‘center party’ is difficult for a number of reasons, namely, e.g., polarizational de-centering by non-central parties even if done by Center-Left or Center-Right parties; a permanent absolute center cannot be arrived at given a relative center and the movement of the same; a need for contrasting identity in political formation, etc. (23)
2.	Style of government reflects a natural tendency to relatively privilege either a holistic sense of unity versus a sequentially focused sense of localized detail (in a parallel to the nature of this Left-Right opposition) in a type of idealist/realist style of approach (that can be found in other spheres such as philosophy, economics, etc.). (24)
3.	The tentative observation of greater obstructionist tendencies on the right demand some theoretical reason/s for this differential style and I tentatively suggest that the same tendency for individualism on the right might well contribute to this greater desire for expressions of oppositionalism (whereas a collectivist bias would be more inclined to cooperate [hence their greater overall opposition in this regard from the right?]?)? (25)
4.	By ‘regulation’ is meant more an ‘overall regulatory environment above and beyond mere regulatory acts’ where the formation of many minor regulations will have a life and death of their own without direct regard to that overall meta-environment. (26)
5.	Similarly, ‘supervision’ is more concerned with ‘over-arching regulation’ in a supervisional environment (although it could be argued that all forms of regulation should be supervized)! (27)
6.	Change can be tentatively quantified with reference to the acceleration/de-acceleration of novel memetic density, furthermore, inter-cultural contestation of the same amplifies this experience of social flux. (28)
7.	Very recent changes in political attitude observed in and/or imputed to Kevin Rudd (w.r.t. the ETS, e.g.) may well represent an intuitively demanded movement to the right as already in evidence in the Coalition (and reflecting a current shift back to the right in a relative sense of an overall political center in contemporary Australia?)? (29)
8.	That politicians, to be practical and pragmatic, need to re-capture this sense of a relative political center, and, then, return that relatively neutral position, of a migratory relative center, to a less de-centered sense of an absolute center intuitively determined through the adequate application of an ongoing overall transcendental suspension. (30)
9.	That political oscillations from time to time will eventually return the body politic to a state of temporary absolute centering, however, political health (through existential orchestration and augmentation quantitatively and qualitatively demands that that general sense of an agenda be sought, whether overly or covertly, since a de-centered political ecconomy is less representative, less democratic, less efficient, less productive, etc., in terms of subsequent welfaring be our concerned interest local, national or global in orientation)! (31)
										       N., 9.5.10.