Ideological Positions
The ideologies can be further distinguished by their position in three vital areas of societal life:
- The relative place of ideas and action in relation to change.
- How resources within society should be shared.
- Handling tensions between the individual and the group.
Ideas and Action
Change is about ideas put into action, and people in a society are differentiated primarily by the ideas they hold and what they do. As investigated in a previous topic, there are differences according to positioning along the diagonals. Here we use the quadrants to examine how ideologies incorporate those differences.
As might be expected, the simplest depiction paradigm () is action-based and the most complex () is ideas-based. There is an evident progression between these.
The diagram at right shows the previous analysis of action v ideas with the ideology names attached to the .
Right Wing Ideologies Prefer Action
In the UL Quadrant, action dominates thinking.
The with its Fascist ideology is preoccupied with power, and action is the ultimate source of power. As Mao said: "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun". In this ideology, society is undifferentiated which means thinking must be uniform. People must be indoctrinated and speculative exploration and open debate must be blocked. Ideas are used as powerful weapons: within as propaganda to ensure social control, and without as disinformation to sow confusion. Power and action are therefore primary.
The with its Conservative ideology holds that society is differentiated into two camps: typically business and labour, or the rich and the poor. These camps are action-oriented because the primary concern of the leaders and members of those camps is that events turn out to their advantage. This advantage is not necessarily related to what is most beneficial to society as a whole, even if that is claimed. When a dispute demands resolution, vigorous action guided by custom is preferred. Ideas and theories are viewed sceptically if they do not directly translate into actions producing factional benefit.
In the LR Quadrant, action demands thinking.
The with its Progressive ideology holds that society cannot be fully understood and members should not be tightly controlled. Because action is the source of all causation, it can be used to respond to political demands and improve matters in particular areas. The ideas and theories necessary to guide such action are viewed sceptically, so evidence and testing is required and pilots of ideas-in-action are desired.
Contrasts: The rational or scientific view that action demands thinking runs counter to the mentalities and ideologies of the and paradigms where action dominates thinking. The Fascist-totalitarianism of the paradigm does not permit more than one ideology. In other more democratic societies, there is likely to be an opposition between conservatism and progressivism, which satisfies the . Conservative parties have the advantage in opposing social change and upholding long-standing customs, however unfair and economically wasteful. The subordination of women is a currently typical example.
Keeping Action and Ideas Separate
The LL Quadrant contains paradigms that naturally view action and thinking as distinct.
The is the basis for Socialist ideology which holds that society possesses an orderly stratified social structure of classes that concretizes injustices by preserving inappropriate inequalities. Theory is viewed as important to understand why this structure persists, and wrong thinking or "false consciousness" is invoked to shift attitudes away from the ideas and values of the ruling class. Action is a separate matter which must be informed by knowledge and based on experience
The is the basis for Anarchist ideology and Libertarianism which hold that society consists of autonomous individuals, each of whom must be allowed to act as they choose, subject to not interfering with others. Different views about options and fundamentals are debated to reach conclusions that all can freely support. Action that is based on customs may be embraced by some and repudiated by others.
Looking outward, the international environment is anarchic at present. Each society is a single sovereign entity amidst other similar sovereign societies, each with their own structures, cultures, needs and concerns. There are norms that may be more or less rational and humane, but these can be ignored by powerful countries because there is no over-arching governance framework.
The Power of Thinking
The UR Quadrant contains paradigms that naturally expect thinking to dominate action.
The is the basis for Communist ideology that regards a society as the focus for collective efforts and capable of developing through individualistic self-governance. Class distinctions of socialism are no longer recognized because everyone has equal status. Society is viewed as a complex of many interacting sub-groups, each with their own interests and plans for development. Individuals within these organisation and bodies need to have a direct say in group decisions affecting their work and life, with all action being driven by shared values like economic needs, collective good, mutual aid, fairness, personal development. There is no need for private property.
The is the basis for Salvationist ideology and utopian theorizing. This holds that society is a system containing systems and is also a part of a larger environmental system. Such complexity requires speculative theory to be developed to embrace the society and its environment. Any action, even after investigation and reflection, is problematic because its ramifications and consequences are impossible to determine. In addition, ethical issues must be considered.
Sharing Resources
A major pre-occupation of all political ideologies is how the needs of members of society can and should be met, and how, or indeed whether, available resources should be shared. The TET quadrants again support different possibilities.
Competition-Regulation Quadrants
The UL Quadrant has a high orientation to control but a low focus on complexity. The simple assumption in thinking is that resources are inherently scarce, and the simplest and necessary solution to managing resources is to let individuals compete within markets. Fascist ideology expects the strongest and most capable to rise to the top and for losers to be crushed. Parties and governments may offer social programs however these are typically coercive, serve the state, and provide little comfort. Those at the top of the economic ladder are also expected to serve the state.
Conservative ideology also strongly supports free markets and sees market-based competition as the primary mechanism for allocating resources. Being , the persistence of winners and losers leading to division of society into rich and poor is regarded as natural. However, the wealthy winners are expected to support losers via their philanthropy. Charity is assumed to provide a balance to rapacity.
The Progressivism of the LR Quadrant also supports competition in free markets as the rational means to allocate resources and ensure pricing relates to demand and supply. However, the orientation generates an awareness of potentials for market failure and the need for effective regulations, especially to deal with fraud, monopolies, and cartels. Society also needs some regulation to minimize deprivation and consequent social turmoil. So there is provision of safety-nets to ensure basic needs like health, shelter, and education are met for all.
The Entitlement Quadrant
The LL Quadrant has a low orientation to both control and complexity. The assumption here appears to be that fairness can be expected, even demanded, of the group.
The Anarchist-Libertarian assumption based on the paradigm assumes each is entitled to autonomy, privacy and freedom. The independent and enterprising action of each and all will somehow (by an "invisible hand") lead to collective needs being met. Any requirement for leadership, instruction or regulation will be freely recognized as useful and necessary (if indeed it is). Such things will naturally be fair or they will not be supported.
Socialist ideology draws on assumptions and that means resource development and distribution can be organized and ordered. Many inequalities are judged as unfair and require removal by laws and regulations. Basic needs should be met by organising welfare for all who require it. Societal basics like the provision of public education, health care for all, housing and employment security can and should be met out of the public purse.
The Abundance Quadrant
The UR Quadrant has a high orientation to both control and complexity. This makes it possible to regard resources as potentially abundant and hence available through creative endeavours. The group should therefore be able to find ways and means that ensure all are provided for.
Communist ideology emerging from the paradigm proposes arrangements based on a maxim that assumes abundance: "from each according to ability and to each according to needs". It is noticeable that this principle is used by healthy families, and the idea is to extend this concern to wider society. Abundance removes life-and-death struggles over resources. Wealth and power can be distributed equitably among all members of society so profit-driven exploitation is eliminated. Through collective effort, challenges can be addressed and overcome.
Utopian ideologies that use the paradigm are even more confident that a realistic perception of how systems and the environment interact will lead to creative solutions that resolve any resource issue and provide spectacular abundance. All share the environment, and benefits from intelligent management will naturally flow through to all.
Individual–Group Tensions
All societies are forced to address how to balance the impact and role of the individual and the impact and role of society as a whole. So all ideologies regard the individual v collective/group/society relationship as critical, most especially in terms of the relation between personal freedom and economic freedom.
This has been mentioned above in relation to action/ideas and sharing resources, and previously in relation to identity management. Now the conclusions can be brought together.
Terms like freedom, individualism, groupism, and collectivism can be confusing if their reference is not specified (e.g. freedom for what? individualism for what?). As a result, it is not contradictory for an ideology to simultaneously promote individualism and groupism.
This analysis uses the natural order of entities from simple to complex.
Position of the individual in terms of personal freedom
minimum at the bottom (—Fascist) progressing to maximum at the top (—Utopian).
Position of the individual in terms of economic well-being
minimum-competitive at the bottom (—Fascist) progressing to maximum-collective at the top (—Utopian).
These two issues also affect personal identity (as previously analysed), where
the group is primary at the bottom (—Fascist) while the balance alters and progresses until the self is primary at the top (—Utopian).
This Matrix Table is laid out below to show the progression when using the natural depiction order from the most simple to the most complex, and comparing the linked ideologies on these 3 dimensions of social life.
| Ideology (Paradigm) | Personal Freedom | Economic Well-Being | Position on Identity |
|---|---|---|---|
| Salvationist |
Maximum autonomy and individualism. | Assumes abundant resources. Individuals assume the society can and will provide for all. |
Self is identified with the group. |
| Libertarianism |
Freedom of thought, feeling and action without regard to the collective or its needs. | Society assumes that free individuals will meet their own and collective needs without explicit leadership or controls. | Self is primary with the group being a vehicle for self-expression. |
| Communism |
Freedom of thought and feeling if actions support the collective's needs. | Society assumes equality and respects individual contributions with rules binding on all to support the collective and needs of each. | Identity is based on impact on the group identity. |
| Socialism |
Views and feelings can be expressed if they support collective efforts and identity. | Society creates a welfare state to minimize suffering due to competition or majority preferences. | Identity is determined by contribution to the group. |
| Progressivism |
Personal initiative with acceptance of the collective view. | Society provides market regulations and ensures a safety-net for losers and the weakest. | Identity is based on recognition by the group. |
| Conservatism |
Convention-based self-reliance with adherence to customs and traditions. | Society is highly competitive and support for losers is provided by charitable activities. | Identity is based on membership of the group. |
| Fascist |
Obedience to authorized beliefs with no independent communication media. | Assumes scarcity of resources. State directs all economic activity and mandates cooperation. |
Self is confused with the collective. Identity is determined by the group. |
So far, the analysis of ideologies has been theoretical. After all, parties are sectional groups that only aspire to power. Once in power, there is an expectation of concern for all, and focus shifts to the «governing/ruling regime».
Let us see how regimes have applied these ideas, and briefly compare the governance mechanisms that result.
- Review the various regimes.
Originally posted: 30-Jun-2024. Amended 10-Jul-2024.