Political Factions

Conservatives

‘Center’ Right:

Neocons/Rightwing Pluralists

In theory, fiscally libertarian leaning and socially moderate.
Increasingly corrupt in practice.

Rightwing Moderates

Fiscally and socially moderate.
Slightly to the right of leftwing moderates.

Rightwing:

Paleocons

Fiscally libertarian leaning and socially conservative.

Rightwing Populists

Fiscally moderate and socially conservative.

Libertarians

Far Right:

Fascists, Nazis and Authoritarian Conservatives

Fiscally corporatist/class collaboration and socially very conservative.

Liberals

‘Center’ Left:

Neoliberals/Leftwing Pluralists

In theory, fiscally moderate and socially progressive.
Increasingly corrupt in practice.

Leftwing Moderates

Fiscally and socially moderate.
Slightly to the left of rightwing moderates

Leftwing:

Progressives

Fiscally social democrats (and social corporatists) and socially progressive.

Leftwing Populists

Fiscally social democrats (and social corporatists) and socially moderate.

Far Left:

Anarchists

Marxists

In theory, state socialists/class warfare, state capitalists in practice and socially very progressive.

I tend to view society and politics somewhat cyclically.

When times are relatively good, people tend to support the center-left (leftwing moderates and neolibs) and the center-right (rightwing moderates, neocons and libertarians), when times are so-so, people tend to support the leftwing (leftwing populists and progressives) and the rightwing (rightwing populists and paleocons) and when times are relatively bad, people tend to support the far left (Marxists and anarchists) and the far right (fascists).

That being said, individuals, regions and nations tend to subtly or unsubtly gravitate towards one faction over the others.

Factions tend to start out good but become increasingly corrupt and incompetent overtime before being replaced by new factions.

During times of growth and relative prosperity, people gravitate towards the center-left or center-right, during times of stagnation or decline and relative poverty, people gravitate towards the far left or far right.

Civilizations tend to go through long periods of growth and relative prosperity followed by long periods of stagnation or decline (sometimes to the point of collapse) and relative poverty, followed by long periods of regrowth and so on.

Within these long periods are short periods of greater and lesser growth and relative prosperity and short periods of greater and lesser stagnation or decline and relative poverty.

The left started out in favor of reverse classicism and anti-racism/sexism, will the left end up in favor of anti-classicism and reverse racism/sexism?

Or reverse classicism and racism/sexism?

Or anti-classicism and racism/sexism?

At the turn of the 21st century, the right were socially conservative but not so nationalistic, will they become nationalistic but not so socially conservative?

Or socially conservative and nationalistic?

Or not so socially conservative or nationalistic?


Scientism and religionism are another matter.
In my view, egalitarianism isn’t inherently more scientific than elitism, so while historically the left has gravitated towards scientism and the right towards religionism, there isn’t much if any reason why the left couldn’t gravitate towards religionism and the right towards scientism in the future, whether it’s a leftwing interpretation of Christianity, Paganism or Unitarian Universalism.


As far as I can tell, in the 19th and early 20th century, American and British sociopolitics were aligned fundamentally differently than they were from the mid 20th to the early 21st century.
It was less about left versus right, progressive versus conservative and more about libertarian versus progressive conservative.
Big government progressives allied with big government conservatives against small government libertarians.

In America, democrats were the libertarians while federalists, Whigs and republicans were the progressive conservatives.
Libertarians tended to do better with the working class, southerners and ruralites while progressive conservatives tended to do better with the upperclass, northerners and urbanites.
Curiously libertarians were proslavery, progressive conservatives abolitionists.

The 19th century south sort of reminds me of the Roman republic and classical Athens, for all 3 were preindustrial, predominantly agrarian republics where citizens had a great deal of freedom, yet owned slaves.

Every several generations politics get realigned.
We seem to be at the onset of another realignment now.
No one can be certain how politics will realign if they do.
We could go back to the old realignment of libertarian populism versus progressive conservatism.
Another reversal would be if fiscal progressives allied with social conservatives and fiscal conservatives with social progressives.


We’ve had increasingly corrupt leftwing ‘moderates’ and liberals versus increasingly corrupt rightwing ‘moderates’ and neocons.

Here’s a couple ways politics could realign:

Leftwing Populists versus Rightwing Populists

Progressives versus Paleocons

We’ve had increasingly corrupt progressive populists versus increasingly corrupt libertarian conservatives.

Here’s another couple ways politics could realign:

Progressive Conservatism versus Libertarian Populism

Libertarian Progressivism versus Conservative Populism