Third World Ideologies Diagram

“We need constant thinking from our youth and not just any thinking but a serious and thorough reworking of the great circumstances in the present World Economy and World Politics [supported by] hard data and historical evidence. We cannot solve [any political questions] if we do not know exactly how it relates immediately to the political combinations in England, Russia, and America, and [elsewhere beyond the] knowledge of practical relations. [Any] advancement [in World Economy and World Politics] depends on our foreign diplomatic methods, as is the case in the fields of [Socialist Financial Technology] and [Economic Socialization].”

-Oswald Spengler, Political Duties to German Youth, ca. 1924
“Diversity in Conscience and Community, Unity in Discipline and Action.”

Okay, The Fourth Estate has the “Work-Standard Symbol” and the “Hamiltonian Federalist Socialist Symbol” derived from the Federalist Party Cockade. The next logical step is, naturally, the “Third World Ideologies” for those people who are neither Leftists, nor Rights, nor Centrists, nor Independents; those people belong the First and Second Worlds, the rest are in the Third World. There are all kinds of people, both historical and current, who have demonstrated themselves as being under my Third World Diagram.

The Third Way is a Third World Ideology that is neither Third Camp nor Third Position.

The Third Camp is a Third World Ideology that is neither Third Way nor Third Position.

The Third Position is a Third World Ideology that is neither Third Way nor Third Camp.

These three ideologies are, going by my own observations and studies as a political scientist, cannot always fit neatly into the Left-Right Political Spectrum.

Anyone who identifies with either the Third Way, the Third Camp, or the Third Position ought to know how to perform a Triangulation with people on the “Far-Left,” “Left-Wing,” “Center-Left,” “Centrist,” “Center-Right,” “Right-Wing,” and “Far-Right.”

For the purposes of the Third World Diagram:

  • Alexander Hamilton will be our designated Blonde Bestie.
  • Federalist Party is the Middle Ground.
  • Hamiltonian Federalist Socialism is the Triangulated Ideology.
  • Thomas Jefferson’s Primary Protégé James Madison is on the Far-Left (Democratic-Republican Party).
  • Thomas Jefferson’s Secondary Protégé James Monroe is on the Far-Right (Democratic-Republican Party).

The Explicit Intent is to demonstrate why Solidarity Preferences and Solidarity Traps are Implicit Intents, then determine who has the most to gain from The Work-Standard and who has the least to gain from The Work-Standard. In my previous Blog Post, I had cited two men from the Third Position, two men from the Third Camp, and two men from the Third Way.

For Third Way, Michael Lind and Newt Gingrich.
For Third Camp, Christian Parenti and Richard David Wolff.
For Third Position, Gore Vidal and Richard Alan Clarke.

I have already explained why Vidal and Clarke have written, spoken, and described concepts or ideas resonant with The Work-Standard.

How about Lind and Gingrich, Parenti and Wolff? Where are the Points of Agreement within the Metaphysics of those whatever ideas and concepts have been articulated and advocated by those four concerning The Work-Standard? Are there any potential Points of Contention where they may be become vehemently opposed to The Work-Standard, if there are any Points of Contention to speak of?

With The Work-Standard (1st Ed.) already completed, I am confident in my conclusions that there are possibilities where I could envisage Lind, Gingrich, Parenti, and Wolff being in the same Position as Vidal and Clarke. The real challenge is whether there is anything of interest within the recent historical record where those four had espoused anything that is favorable to The Work-Standard. Here’s the information that I have on them so far:

  1. Lind’s “Democratic Nationalism” is suitable for Council Democracy and he is opposed to a specific Liberal Capitalist Faction, particularly those of Classical Liberalism and Laissez-Faire Capitalism. This is promising in light of his so-called “Radical Centralism” because Ayn Rand had specifically argued in one of her works that Thomas Jefferson’s Cult of Personality [Read: “Separation of Church and State”] is integral to the OECD-Type Student Economy, the Market/Mixed Economy, the Fractional-Reserve Banking System, the Parliamentary Democracy, and the Empire of Liberty, the LIEO (Liberal International Economic Order).
  2. Gingrich is “Anti-Welfare Capitalism” “Balanced Budgets,” “Economic Nationalism” “Anti-LIEO and Anti-Jeffersonian,” “Pro-SSE,” “Pro-Autarky,” “Property Rights” and “Pro-MTEP” for the purposes of The Work-Standard. He is also an Ultramontane, which lends credence to his own Conservatism.
  3. Parenti, like his father, is also “Anti-Workfare Socialism,” “pro-MTEP,” “Pro-SSE,” “Democratic Socialism,” “Environmentalism,” “Anti-LIEO and Anti-Jeffersonian” for the purposes of The Work-Standard. He was extremely helpful in deciphering the Typus of Alexander Hamilton and Federalist Party.
  4. Wolff is “Anti-Workfare Socialism,” “Democratic Socialism,” “Environmentalism,” “Anti-LIEO and Anti-Jeffersonian” and his “Market Socialism” will literally become rendered obsolete by the “Tournaments of Hamiltonian Federalist Socialism” and the “Kibbutzim of Jewish Socialism.” Much like Bernie Sanders, Wolff is not particularly proud of his Authentic Dasein as a Jewish Socialist because, like Viktor Gruen, his family fled the German-speaking world when the Hitlerists came to power in the 1930s.

Sure, Lind, Gingrich, Parenti and Wolff may be in the Democratic-Republican Party at the moment, but I never said that they are incapable of seeing things differently. US History has demonstrated to me that the political-economic views of those men indicate a willingness to try genuine alternatives when The Work-Standard was properly conveyed to them and why all four should be in the Federalist Party.

With Heideggerian Reference and Relevance, I am presenting this Basic Reference Table as my Criteria for determining who belongs in the Democratic-Republican Party and who belongs in the Federalist Party.



Categories: Philosophy

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

1 reply

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: