Politics in Four Dimensions

For quite some time on the main site I had a logo which was labeled “liberty, equality, nature.” Meanwhile, the “books” were either red for equality, green for nature, or blue for morality. I had a mismatch. Morality belonged in the logo, and maybe I needed to add some pure liberty books — though my original plan was to relate all other values to liberty.

One obvious new color for liberty is gold vs. the light blue I had in the old logo. Gold is the color used for the Libertarian Party, and I hadn’t used it yet. The question remained how to add a fourth dimension to the logo. One option was to use grow/shrink as the fourth dimension, taking a cue from Flatland.

That didn’t look right. So I had a go with a physics option. Rotations can give us three more dimensions to play with, so:

 

Possible, but doesn’t quite connote rotation. Trying again:

Hmmm, now we have a rotation in the Equality/Liberty plane, sort of. Another possibility was:

Much more physics like: the rotation is definitely about an axis. But the wrong axis IMO. The wife definitely didn’t like. She wanted morality to point up. But getting a curved arrow to behave propertly in Power Point eventually taxed my patience and I stumbed on this:

Instead of a rotation, how about a halo? Works for morality, and angels as beings that can move in another dimension fits some of the historical descriptions. (It is not the only option, however. Our three dimensions are mostly empty space. Matter which acts through different forces could pass through us without our knowing it. Neutrinos are known to do this.)

Next, I needed some liberty books. Greed vs. Freedom is a critique of Ayn Rand’s approach to liberty as much as it is a morality series, so it could be gold instead of blue. And I have started a new manual of libertarian strategy to have another gold series. For those who have followed my other projects over the years, some of he material will seem familiar. I have written on libertarian strategy at Quiz2d.com and on the Libertarian Reform Caucus site. This go around I am being less party-centric and attempting to be more accomodating to those who won’t follow my approaches. Comments to come will determine my success in this matter.

As for the font choices for the chapters on liberty, I wanted to have headings that resembled those in either the U.S. Constitution or the Declaration of Independence. The closest I could find is an Old English font. Not a perfect match, and these documents are mainly cursive, with just some Old English like highlights. What think ye?

3 Responses to Politics in Four Dimensions

  1. Michael Bindner says:

    On the Quiz, I still think that you should retitle Left-Leaning Freedom Lover as Social Libertarian, making Right-Leaning Freedom Lovers Economic Libertarians. Additionally, you can divide authoritarians into Economic Authoritarians and Social Authoritiarians, with the EAs on the Left and the SAs on the right. It makes a nice synergy to the table and shows where some folks cooperate. For example, economic authoritarians are likely to cooperate with economic liberals, while social libertarians are more likely to cooperate with social liberals (creating the upper left). Economic libertarians cooperating with economic conservatives is also not news, nor is the cooperation between social conservatives and social authoritarians. Of course, this then raises the question as to why use the terms conservative and liberal at all, except for the fact that this is how people think of themselves, i.e. as less extreme (or more extreme, in terms of adherence to liberty).

  2. Michael Bindner says:

    Relating what I just said to the original question, one could say that nature and equality are opposite polls, with moral authority and liberty at opposite polls – of course, that flies in the face of what we both believe. I suspect that morality is the lens by which we see things and nature is the context, with the dimensions being liberty and equality.

    In the public policy sciences, we had four dimensions (at least at the AU School of Government). If memory serves, they were Efficiency, Effectiveness, Equality/Equity and Responsiveness/Representation/Participation.

  3. Carl says:

    Regarding the quiz: I went with freedom lovers after numerous insults by guardians of libertarian purity. I wanted to point out the hypocrisy of using the Nolan Chart quiz with its broad libertarian area with the LP’s oath based definition.

    The passage of time has lessened my ire and I have put the word libertarian in the text for these two areas, though mentioning the controversy over terminology.

Leave a reply