A Multi-Dimensional View of Politics

Many people view politics as a one-dimensional model. Like the image above, a person or politician would fall somewhere on the line between hardcore conservatism or hardcore liberalism. Although this model would include moderates--who would fall somewhere near the middle of the scale--it completely ignores those with libertarian views. These people are generally fiscally conservative and socially liberal. The two-dimensional graphic below would be far more accurate.

Both of the models above fail to acknowledge some of the most influential political forces. The image below is a representation of how I view the US political model. The two dimensional model at the equator of the sphere is where the strict ideologues would be found. Forces such as corruption, a desire to maintain elect-ability, deeply-held biases, etc., pull politicians away from that equator. They exist somewhere in the sphere where their political loyalties and core beliefs are compromised by these other factors.

When we look at the one or two dimensional models, we simply judge politicians on how liberal, conservative, libertarian or moderate they are or claim to be. But if those ideals are severely compromised by corruptive influences, it really doesn't matter how liberal, conservative, libertarian or moderate the person is. The politician will pursue an agenda that is inconsistent with the political ideals of the group they ascribe themselves to.

It is far more important to evaluate a politician based on the forces that drive their behavior than it is to evaluate them based on their party affiliation.

For instance, Republicans claim to promote economic growth by being "business friendly" and making opportunities for oil companies and other large corporations to expand and create more jobs. But is this their policy because they honestly believe that this is the best remedy for the country's economic crisis? Or is it because most Republican politicians are heavily invested in oil companies and other large corporations? Is it because oil companies and other corporations will contribute generously to their next election campaign if they can promise and deliver policies that will make those corporations more wealthy?

Democrats claim to support the middle class worker but they seem to provide a lot more support to people on Wall Street. Is that due to their personal financial investments in Wall Street banks? Is it for the campaign contributions they receive from Wall Street? Does anyone recall that while Countrywide was swindling home buyers and writing bad mortgages, the politicians in Congress that should have been regulating their business were not doing so? They were, however receiving great deals for their home mortgages from Countrywide. Isn't that a conflict of interest that we should never allow to take place? Do Democratic politicians "support" workers for the campaign contributions from unions? Do they do it for the votes that the unions deliver on Election Day?

One-dimensional thinking affects our understanding of political events as well. One example of a one-dimensional view is the statement that "terrorists hate us for our freedom". That may be true but it is not why they are attacking us. There are many geopolitical reasons for the attacks and it can't be so easily explained away. Until we understand them, terrorist attacks are likely to be a forthcoming.

Another one-dimensional view is the idea that business people would make the best politicians. Being able to balance a budget is an important skill for government workers to have but look at other aspects of the job. Are business people generally aware of the protocols of holding an elected office? Do business people generally empathize well with others? Business people generally succeed when they gain an advantage in a deal whereas a good politician needs to find equitable solutions that work for the benefit of all parties. Also consider that wages--like any other commodity--are subject to the laws of supply and demand. Business people profit when jobs are scarce and demand for them is high because that allows business people to freeze or lower wages. If a business person's cronies are other business people, will they be likely to work hard to create more opportunities for employment to better the country or will they keep unemployment high so that their cronies (and perhaps they, themselves) can benefit from suppressed wages?

For this country to move forward, we need to break out of the box. Republicans will give you a game plan to move the country forward and the Democrats will give you an alternative plan. But we don't have to choose one or the other. We can demand other options. And, if we think multi-dimensionally, we can identify solutions that will actually work for the country as a whole, instead of just for the politicians and their cronies.

~R. Charan Pagan
information systems technologist, musician, writer, filmmaker
Los Angeles, CA 90017
http://www.reclaimingourbirthright.blogspot.com/