Template talk:Political spectrum

one dimensional spectrum

politics isn't about just left and right. there are other ideologies too. fix this please69.248.225.198 (talk) 03:04, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

I think libertarian and authoritarian should be somewhere on the top part. what do others think?--69.248.225.198 (talk) 03:10, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Other models

I've expanded the template to include an "Other models" line, which includes Horseshoe theory, Nolan Chart, Political compass, and Pournelle chart. This fixes WP:BIDIRECTIONAL, as those articles already use this template, and that seems like a reasonable way to consolidate alternative approaches. I considered including Inglehart–Welzel cultural map of the world, but that seemed over-broad. Grayfell (talk) 00:33, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Ideologies listed

I think the ideologies listed should in some way reflect the spectrum, i.e. they should at least be identifiable on the spectrum, and preferably be ordered according to their position on it. The previous ideologies listed seemed just a random medley of ideologies without a clear relation to the political spectrum. I think the current list of ideologies, which is symmetrically ordered from far-left (revolutionary) to far-right (reactionary) is far more relevant and sensible. Other ideologies can be listed in other templates; the political spectrum is eurocentric (originating from the French revolution) and many ideologies come from other traditions. Keepcalmandchill (talk) 06:33, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Keepcalmandchill, I did not see or noticed you started this discussion when I did this, sorry. In relation to this and previous edits, I understand where you are coming from but it looks really awkward and we may simply put Populism and Nationalism in the centre, or better yet, avoid the whole issue and list them alphabetically. Now it is also looking way too full and this was fine.--Davide King (talk) 08:18, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Davide King What about now? Removed some of the things I added earlier, but kept left and right-wing nationalism and populism without the main articles, though they could be added at the top or the bottom tiers. Keepcalmandchill (talk) 08:24, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Davide King I'm happy with what's there now. Keepcalmandchill (talk) 08:28, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Keepcalmandchill, we should probably remove the links to left and right variants of populism and nationalism. For one, Right-wing nationalism is a redirect to Right-wing populism; Left-wing nationalism is related to socialism and is basically a non-fascist nationalist form of socialism; and I would want us to avoid going into two paragraphs. Nationalism is certainly an ideology; for Populism it is a bit more complicated but I do not see why not add it. Populism clearly has some coherent positions ("the people" vs. "the elite") but it has two different results depending on how "the people" and "the elite" are identified, resulting in left-wing and right-wing variants, which pretty much all ideologies have. I would certainly describe it first and more as a political tactic or rhetoric rather than a political position.--Davide King (talk) 08:40, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Davide King Perhaps Populism should be on the top tier, since it is clearly related to an attitude towards The Establishment? And I would rather suggest Nationalism go under See Also, since it does not have a clear relation to the spectrum, since that is where Libertarianism is, which also has left and right variants.Keepcalmandchill (talk) 08:50, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Looks good now.Keepcalmandchill (talk) 08:58, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Pejoratives

Out of 13 only 1 is right-wing, really...? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.18.33.42 (talk) 01:25, 28 January 2021 (UTC)