NEW: Limited edition signed prints of this image now available in our poster shop.
A concept-map exploring the Left vs Right political spectrum. A collaboration between David McCandless and information artist Stefanie Posavec, taken from my book The Visual Miscellaneum (out Nov 10th).
Of course, the political spectrum is not quite so polarised. Actually, it’s more of a diamond shape, apparently. But this is how it’s mostly presented via the media – left wing vs. right wing, liberal vs. conservative, Labour vs Tory. And perhaps in our minds too…
Well, certainly in my mind. Researching this showed me that, despite my inevitable journalistic lean to the ‘left’, I am actually a bit more ‘right’ than I suspected.
This kind of visual approach to mapping concepts really excites me. I like the way it coaxes me to entertain two apparently contradictory value systems at the same time. Or, in other words, I like the way it f**ks with my head.
I’ve got a few more of these coming from my book. They do a similar act of mind-flossing. Stay tuned.
Oh and if there’s enough demand, we’re going to do a signed, limited edition poster run of this image before Christmas. Email informationisbeautiful [at] gmail [dot] com if you’re interested
design notes
The original design concept was “something like a rosette”. But Stefanie did an amazing job taking it way further.
(I’ll be doing a ‘Great Visualizers’ piece on her in the future. But you can see some of her work here: itsbeenreal.co.uk. My particular favourite are her literary organisms. Truly beautiful and very informational. Yum.)
There are two versions with different colours: a US and a World version. This is because the US and Switzerland are the only countries in the world where red = right wing and blue = left wing. Grrr!
134 Comments
Very nice thinking and execution and well done… structured visual thinkers of the world unite!!!
John
wes, theknowmad, republicans
in the world outside the USA (!?!) the democrats AKA socialists AKA commies are characterised by the colour (or color for those in the “New World”) RED.
never wondered why commies were called “pinko-commies”?
try here.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinko
The republicans AKA the Conservatives AKA the far right shroud themselves in BLUE.
here’s one (to our eternal shame) we did earlier…. http://bit.ly/2vv1ax
Ho
Typical left-wing garbage. Shows that an attractive visual can be used to mislead and misinform. The idea that right-wingers want to simply preserve the status quo while the Left is ‘utopian’ shows how grossly you misinterpret yourselves and others. How can you say right-wingers want to simply preserver when it is right-wingers who applaud invention, growth and freedom while left-wingers applaud confining growth (ever hear of ‘sustainabilty), lack of school choice, higher taxes on people who work.
A beautiful chart that is completely full of BS. Nice job!
I agree that this is way too oversimplified. Personally, I thought the description of the Left looks at how the Right tends to describe the Left. A little bit insulting I thought.
As a liberal-minded democrat, the self-righteousness of this diagram makes me want to puke.
The most striking thing I see about this graphic is that when one uses the language of red and blue, the GOP is usually red, and on your chart you’ve got ‘em reversed. I also think you’ve reduced both sides, but especially the right, to jingoistic anachronisms and stereotypes. It is a really well-done graphic, though, and goes above and beyond normal, narrow-band analysis. Try to re-do it with more detail and more objectivity – and switch those colors!
I argee this is overly simplified. The left-wing accused Bush for viewing the world in too black-and-white colours and loved Obama for what they perceived as readiness to recognize it wasn’s so simple – well, this diagram implies it is. And the right-wing is clearly portrayed too negatively: exclusive, nationalistic, they support aggression; they vote for aggression and militancy, they believe in survival of the fittest. Come on, do they really love aggression and war, have you made sure you understand them correctly? The world is fine as it is – no one says that; the right wing simply believes that reforms also can create more problems than they solve; and so one has to be careful. Also, many positive descriptions of the left-wingers which imply the rightists are not like this: nurturing parents; relationship with the kids built on respect and trust as opposed to respect and fear, lerning to ask questions – and rightists aren’t? Openness, empathy? – only on the left? Stiving to be self-fulfilled as opposed to self-reliant – why are these two mutually exclusive and why the former only the Left and the latter only the Right? All in all, too simplified and unfair to the right, though to the left at times too. I also like to analyze the differences between different political wings in many countries, but this is not the way it should be done. The main lesson I personally have learned from these observations is that each side in any political spectrum wants good and sincerely believed its ideas and endeavors represent the good while the opposing side is driven by evil, intentionally or mistakenly, that they threaten the good and therefore have to be resisted. Each resists what it perceives to be a threat by the other, and then each takes the other’s resistance and further threat and aggression. Most of it is tragic misunderstanding by well-meaning people who needlessly demonize each other instead of REALLY trying to inderstand each other, not just talking about their readiness to do so; and in a way each one is happy to feel he is on the good side and the other side is bad, because then he feels he is fighting for good and is better than others. That’s the sad reality of this imperfect world, and this, I’m afraid, cannot be improved any time soon – so shows the experience…
This chart is as beautiful as those diagrams of the Aristotelian/Dantean view of the universe, with Heaven on top, Purgatory under it, Earth in the middle and Hell below, each non-terrestrial realm divided into its appropriate circles.
Unfortunately, it is also just as accurate.
NAILED IT!!!
Brilliant depiction of the essence of the liberal vs. conservative debate.
This is not objective. It was obviously created by a liberal. Not very useful for an objective look at the issues, but it might make a liberal feel good to hang it on the wall.
How can religion be scientific? Is this another attempt to appropriate science’s cloak of respectability for religious ends?
Neither side seems to be happy, so you’ve done something right. Good work.
Amazingly clear presentation of messy ideas that also happens to be both fair and visually appealing. I’m going to give this to my students who don’t understand the difference between left and right.
On Economics it should have read
Left: Tax, then spend
Right: don’t tax, spend anyway. (goes for the last 20 years of repub presidents….
look it up, the rightwing always increased the deficit, fiscal responsilble, my ass.
It seems to me that right wing more often interferes with social lives, where as left wing more often interferes with society. Right wing often includes strict controls (based on traditional morals) about what people can do in private. Left wing has more rules (based on political correctness) about what society can do.
Though of course this isn’t 100% the case, as with things like smacking.
@WES
Red V Blue is a massivly important thing in the UK as well, it just happens to be opposite colours. America isn’t the only country in the world you know
“This is because the US and Switzerland are the only countries in the world where red = right wing and blue = left wing.”
Actually, that’s a recent development. From the dawn of color TV until the 2000 election, each media outlet used its own color scheme, or even switched the parties’ colors in each presidential election. In 2000, though, electoral maps were on TV for five weeks, and during that time they got standardized on the current color scheme.
Unfortunately, political color-coding terminology contrary to the rest of the world is the least of the problems that began with the 2000 election.
It’s visually compelling, but disappointingly inaccurate.
While there are pacifist liberals, I don’t think the Democratic party is pacifist. Certainly, the Democrats would be far more likely to use the military to enforce human rights. Certainly, if you’re going to brand liberals as pacifists, then you must brand conservatives as isolationists. In reality, both parties are more complex.
The chart also does a terrible job showing how the Right seeks to interfere with personal lives (as opposed to “social lives”) by legislating moral issues like marriage, abortion, and religion.
This is too simplified, and not objective in protraying Conservatives.
The one thing I found missing is that Liberals in the US like to TALK about making things better, but Conservatives prefer to roll up their sleeves and do the work.
Considering that super-powerful private wealth thinktanks such as the pro-socialist/communist Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and it’s Europe-based mother organization, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, have memberships equally populated by both Democrats and Republicans, means that the international central bankers who own or control most of the infrastructure of the planet are quietly funding both liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans.
Some 95% of the 2008 US presidential candidates are members of the CFR (including Obama and his wife, Hillary and McCain), which means these candidates were financially backed by private wealth interests with CFR affiliations, and that these candidates philosophically support a fascist world government controlled by the United Nations. In fact, you cannot be a member of the CFR unless you are aligned with these philosophies.
That said, there is no difference between the right and left, anymore. The media simply portrays that there is a difference. Independent political parties still exist, and the most prominent are the Libertarian and Constitutional parties.
To be accurate, your data analysis should focus on the pro-fascist party of the joined Republicans/Democrats, and contrast that party with the remaining independent parties.
Please do not ignore the financial backing from private wealth interests and where the political backing, media, and financial support come from for a political party. If you do the proper research you will see without a doubt that most prominent US candidates today are members of the same pro-fascist organizations. In fact, most of these individuals would likely not be in allowed in their current positions of political power unless they were supportive of the agendas of the international central bankers and powerful industrialists who have created their own pro-fascist world economic order behind what the media portrays to the world.
@Tom; You just whooshed so hard my friend…
The diagram, though attractive, is far too simplistic and inaccurate. Perhaps it would be better used to portray the media’s representation of left vs right (the publication of this diagram in your book will further those stereotypes, and so contribute to the problem). If the spectrum really is more of a diamond shape, why not put *that* in your book?
The left interferes with social lives far less than the right does. “Evolve” implies improvement (perhaps “change” would be a more neutral word). The gendered images jumped out at me. Fulfilled and self-reliant are not mutually exclusive (in fact they fit together quite nicely). The relationship based on fear part is a bit insulting to those on the right. Why is scientific listed under religion? It is easy for a person on either the left or the right to think that criminals can choose to be criminals and be a victim of society at the same time. The diagram has other opposed things where the average person could comfortably agree with both. A left person can support employers (though perhaps not giant corporations). Right people prefer to help those who cannot help themselves through charities rather than through the government.
What country/region do the percentages come from? Or are they global? The diagram seems to be an American or British view of politics, although even those countries do not fit properly into the diagram (Right American Republicans spent a lot during this decade, Left British Labour went to war in Iraq)
I am very impressed with this. I would say the left tries interfere with people lives less than the right tho, especially concerning gay rights and religion.
This is a nice visual and it’s an appealing concept to present political belief systems visually but honestly, it is utter bullshit. It’s a lefty trying to misrepresent the right in stereotypical ways.
Where is for left the notion of devaluing individual liberty for the community, which is one of the fundamental values of the left?
I think there is useful information in this well-made diagram, and I don’t agree with others that it’s overly simplistic.
That being said, I think it’s terrible that you decided to use women to represent “family” and men to represent “work.” What were you thinking?
Pretty image, riddled with inaccuracies on the right, but agreed on thats how its presented.
It’s not about “helping those who help themselves”, for example, it’s about helping individuals privately so they aren’t dependent on the government to help.
If a society / collection of people are dependent on a government to supply them with the ‘fixes’ to their problems, then that population of people have a strong incentive to protect/uphold that particular government — right or wrong actions.
It’s not about leaving people behind who can’t help themselves, it’s about making sure all of us aren’t dependent on the government in case the government goes awry.
Theoretically, of course ;)
I like the idea and design, and appreciate all the work that must have gone into it, but agree with others that it seems both oversimplified and biased.
i think the left side is happier but not completely happy because theyre will always be a right side giving their children mental disorders by being so strict, its like they teach their children to be in the military,i’m a communist and i am happy with it and i think it was right on spot, i do work in the media and i would nuture my child with love because my kid wouldn’t be mean to other kids and grow up to be something boring.
And who picked the ‘right’ and ‘left’ thing, its messed up but i’ve lived in a small city my whole life its no urban area so i don’t get how you put all this down i would be more like a tiger if you bite i bite back maybe stupid democrats are pacifists but I’m definitely not but i am against war i think everybody should be because its ruining the world.
Am I the only one to notice that they used the outline of the Capitol Building, which is correctly divided by the House of Representatives on one end and the Senate on the other? To align political parties to each side of the building makes no sense.
Actually it’s the lefts who don’t interfere with social lives.
Look for example at abortion. By forbidding that, you’re interfering with social lives.
I’m not saying whether forbidding abortion is good or bad, but it does interfere with social lives.
(This only serves as an example, you can apply it to anything else.)
Also it’s already been several 100 years ago where you could divide politics into “Left” and “Right”. Modern politics require at least two different axes.
politicalcompass.org is a really good place to start. It’s not perfect, but it’s serves really good as start.
Judging by theses comments you can really see the reflection that the L+R”s policy
and thought patterns effect all people in some way or other
I do not care for any political party So I guess I”m a little of both
I agree that this must be a pretty good representation, or else you wouldn’t have so many offended commentators. I would add that most people who keep talking about how giving to charity privately is better than reliance on the “government” to accomplish the task of aiding the poor seem to forget that the government is indeed an embodiment OF the people. No-one ever wants to remember that WE ARE the composition of the government (uh, Gettysburg Address anyone?).
Excellent example of structured visual thinking and well done. As evidenced by the comment at the site this is a great illustration of how the craft of thoughtful visual and structured thinking can create the fierce and critical debates for the 21st Century…well done and brave the onslaughts of those struggling to rethink meaning…
Where by “exploring” we mean “taking an already over-simplified one-dimensional representation of multidimensional opinion, and dumbing it down further into a binary pair of clip art/sound bite collages”.
from an independent standpoint, the people who agree with this chart are likely to be liberal. those who disagree most certainly are conservative. I dont side with either ideology, however, this chart seems to hit the nail on the head. conservatives need to check themselves and realize the asinine culture they have created amongst themselves. Until conservatives get their shit on track, my vote goes to the liberals (until they screw up too). jumping the band wagon in sports is a sin, but it’s what we should do in politics. vote for whats best today, not what was best yesterday, and dont try to predict what will be best tomorrow.
This is a wonderful idea. What a terrible pity you didn’t ask someone who is a conservative to fill out the right-hand side. I’m sure many would have been delighted to do so. Then you would have a very interesting graphic, with each side presenting its argument in its own words. (And it would have been very illuminating about the fact that most of the argument is actually over which loaded words to use to describe the very same concrete thing.)
As it is, you have produced something which is sadly flawed, in that one side is a caricature drawn by the other. What a wasted opportunity.
That’s a great idea, getting someone conservative to fill out the right-hand side. Please feel free to adjust the copy as you see fit, anyone.
Either by email or in the comments field here.
Thanks!
david
It’s a very nice graphic you’ve made there (I really like the way you’ve laid out all that information, it’s clever, easy to read, and visually pleasing), but where do us libertarians fit in? Considering that many of us have ideas/beliefs/stances that are often not consistent with left and right, if they are not in fact entirely outside left and right thought, there’s no way at all to fit us in that two-option graphic you’ve got there. It’s pretty and all, but you’ve forgotten an important political movement. Just because we are outside of the standard left and right doesn’t mean you should just ignore us. Of course, I admit that it’d probably be a real bear to add in a third branching and keep the thing from looking like a horrible mess.
i do agree with the 2nd: typical left-wing grbg.
What about libertarians? Where are ron paul, peter schiff, … austrian school of economists in the chart? do they support wars too? are they conservative too?
What about the contradiction between progressists and a progressive economy (lower taxes one) –> see ireland vs nordic countries in the last ten years.
What about the german, cuban and russian samples? (all of them socialist-driven)
… and yes. German´s situation was reached bk of an over-developed socialism.
The thing is that the doctor, the policeman, the writer, … do not need to know about politics and about economic policy. It is the politicians who should! I would like to see the moment when certain financial decisions are out of the political stream: we have already surpassed that (keynes was wrong, and most of the keynessians -democrats- know it).
The thing is that they also know what a bunch of votes are behind that mind-scope.
I’d be happy to fill out the conservative side. Send it on over.
It appears that many people who self-identify as “left” don’t like how they are described, and the same goes for many who self-identify as “right”. Someone could say this probably means the chart is largely correct or fair. Then again, it could also mean the chart is just flat out wrong. Nice idea though, and nice design too, even if virtually nothing on it jives with my personal experience. I’m a skateboarder/artist/graphic designer/entrepreneur who was raised by right-wing, religious parents, one a school teacher and one a scientist, who built a relationship of trust and respect with me by being both nurturing and strict, and who taught me the world can be improved, that war is a horrible thing but is sometimes necessary, that freedom is the chance to achieve or fail as well as freedom from power, abuse, and institutional inequality, and to look to the past for lessons on how to look to and shape the future so that mistakes aren’t repeated. I believe in helping both those who can and cannot help themselves, that most criminals do choose to become such, but that there are also societal and economic incentives that influence that choice.
Anyway, maybe this kind of chart helps in reinforcing stereotypes that are somewhat accurate when applied to a group, but when you start looking at individuals stereotypes tend to fall apart.
i’ll sacrifice looking like i know what i’m talking about because i think it is necessary… people commenting are dumb.
To the person who wrote: “right-wingers who applaud invention, growth and freedom while left-wingers applaud confining growth (ever hear of ’sustainabilty), lack of school choice, higher taxes on people who work.”
Don’t know where you’re from but I got a tax cut on my middle-class income from the Obama administration. It’s a laugh to say that right-wingers applaud freedom when Bush and his gang wire-tapped phones without a court order. And as for invention, right-wingers are the clowns who thwart stem-cell research and don’t even believe in evolution, the cornerstone of biology. Add 4500 dead GIs based on lies, an economy left in tatters, the worst job creation for a two-term president since the 1930s, and adding 5 trillion to the national debt and it’s no surprise that American voters threw the Republicans out.
Idiotically simplistic.
Note all the productive vocations are on the political left — exactly the opposite of reality.
Are conservatives really not loving and nurturing parents? I think they are.
Reality is much more nuanced than this graphic would have us believe.
Obviously created by a whiny lefty.
Let me tell you what I think is the “essence of political debate” — the basis behind the ideological divide. It relates to recognizing intrinsic differences. You could say it goes all the way back to Genesis — where G-d divides: night from day, man from woman, mankind from animals, etc.
You have one camp (the right), which recognizes inherent differences: evil is distinct from good; men and women are different; adults and children are treated differently; humans are distinct from animals; there are proper and improper behaviors; etc.
And you have the other camp (the left), which always wants to blur those distinctions: people can choose their (traditionally gender-bound) sexual behaviors; animals have rights similar to humans’; children can behave as adults; all behaviors that don’t directly harm others are ok; etc.
I think that is the simplest summation of the ideological divide. Comments welcome.
I love how many people this piece pissed off despite it being perfectly fair and well-organized. Good job!
94% of conservatives support war, but only 12% support same-sex marriage. Maybe they will start a war with gay people who love each other and kill two birds with one stone?
I was ready to buy the book until I saw this chart in “Fast Company.” From this, I can only assume that the rest of the charts in the book are equally biased and inaccurate. ..so what good are pretty charts with biased information? Honestly, attractive biased charts would better be labeled as propaganda.
Maybe you should get a lefty to fill out the wingnut side and a righty to fill out the moonbat side.
Fun use of Visualization to start a discussion (or series of rants if its on web).
More truth than lies, everything I have ever heard about right vs left is an oversimplification, of course, but my experience with corporate VP’s for example is that half are liberal, half are conservative roughly, but extreme fundamentalists tend to be what you would call RIGHT wing (Taliban, Fundamentalist Christians and Jews) while moderate theists and moderate humanists or atheists can agree on most ideas. Dictatorships of course DISTORT their root claims (Stalin, Hitler, Hirohito, Mao) and could be called RIGHT by everyone, even though communism as a theory of governing is called LEFT by everyone. Current socialism-capitalism mix is skewed to RIGHT in US, to the LEFT in EU perhaps but both very moderate compared to dictatorships of the past. Animal Farm vs 1984 vs Brave New World vs Utopia was a paper I had to write in high school in 1950′s and seems to sum up the current debates if all sides were forced to read them and predict which best predicts the 22nd century.
18 Trackbacks