Thanks to u/MemeToDeath2021 for the inspiration provided by his repost of the circular model of the political spectrum (https://greatawakening.win/p/19AKTcPukw/reminder-fascism-and-communism-a/c/)

The political spectrum is a circle (not a line) ....

Not to be overly pedantic (well, to me it's relevant, anyway), but I think it's valuable to recognize that what you've presented here, OP, is a model. In other words, it's a framework that can be used to illustrate and illuminate certain aspects of the reality, i.e. "political reality".

I don't think it's accurate or correct to say "The political spectrum is....[X]" because what you're referring to here is a model that seeks to illustrate the spectrum, but which is not the spectrum itself. Why is this important?

Consider what a spectrum is

One definition: A spectrum is a condition that is not limited to a specific set of values but can vary, without gaps, across a continuum

A spectrum is not limited to any set of specific defined values. As far as a political spectrum goes, there may well be values that are not represented in the model provided above. Reality varies, and as far as politics goes, the human elements is subjective, so it's not simply an objective reality, but one that fuses both the objective and the subjective.

The objective is covered by the actions, behavior and results of political elements (people, groups) but the subjective includes motivation, philosophy, objectives and interpretation.

What the model above (and others) do is to take the objective and attempt to place it within a form of structure that maps and/or gives insight into the subjective, the ideology, philosophy and objectives, etc, that people or groups have.

Accuracy - How models of reality work

A model of reality - political or otherwise - are maps that we use to chart the invisible or subjective reality. For example, our models of physics have been developed in ways that attempt to increasingly reflect the underlying reality, the invisible laws that rule the material universe.

Recognizing that the MAP (the model) is not the TERRITORY (The reality) is a fundamental intellectual position that is critical to flexibility and progress. We can use maps to navigate the territory in which we find ourselves, but as soon as we confuse the map as being the actual territory itself, we become one step removed from the reality, and our ability to readjust, to learn, to improve on the model or map becomes downgraded.

The more stuck to a particular model someone is (because they think it IS the reality itself), the less ability they have to see OUTSIDE of the model, to recognize its limitations and to improve on that model.

Ideally, what we want to do is to move from less effective models to more effective models. The assumption is, generally, that the more accurate a model is, meaning the more it reflects actual reality, the more effective it is in the long term.

Let me illustrate this point using two examples.

First Example - Marxism

Marxist-Leninism was a model purportedly describing the 'reality' of the universe, human society and life. It was very powerful. In a formal sense, it conquered almost two thirds of the world (at the height of the cold war), cause the destruction of centuries of culture, and resulted in the murder of hundreds of millions of people and the devastation of the lives of many more.

However, this form of 'classical Marxism' collapsed when the Soviet Union imploded. Worldwide, it was generally recognized as a bankrupt ideology. Even China began moving towards a form of 'communistic capitalism', where the control gained by the communists was solidified by allowing a certain level of perceived 'freedom' economically, even though in reality, it has become a society with the illusion of freedom, but where in fact every single person and entity is locked under control by the CCP State.

Point is, that despite Soviet Marxism starting out as an extremely powerful system of thought, it collapsed after 70 years. Why? Because it does not accurately reflect reality. Actually, the power of Marxist communism was rooted in lies. Very powerful lies that fooled and deceived millions, but a lie, nonetheless. In terms of this discussion, we can say Classical Marxism was a model that, although extremely powerful in the short term, eventually lost all power because the model is not in any sense an accurate description of reality. It was lies. Completely and utterly inaccurate.

How the core lies of Marxism, which in its root is Satanic thought, evolved and grew and morphed (globalism, corporate oligarchy, 'woke' neo-Marxism, etc) in attempts to continue to exist is another discussion. Point is:

The less 'accurately' a model represents reality, the less staying power it has over time (even if it is powerful in the start).

I think we'd agree on that. You've illustrated it well in the example of 'paradigm smashing' that you provide below.

Second example - Personal

I've been Christian all my life since 18 years of age, at in that sense, I'd always recognized that the world was essentially controlled by Satan, but I understood that in primarily in a spiritual sense. However, when I was led to go down certain rabbit holes in 2015, I experienced an powerful shift in thought. I began to learn about the concrete and tangible mechanisms of influence and control that Satan used via the material world satanic forces (i.e. the corrupt satanic families and cliques) used to maintain spiritual domination. Aka content that has now become mainstreamed via the effects of the Great Awakening.

Up until that point, I'd understood the political spectrum in the Left -Right paradigm, and had always been what you would say is 'Conservative'. I supported the 'Right' side of politics, and saw the Left side as representing the fundamental satanic force (with Communism at its core).

After numerous rabbit holes, then the 2016 US political campaigns, then the election of Trump, I came across a similar representation of the political spectrum to the one you've posted here. That particular model was the 'diamond' model, pretty much like this: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Nolan_chart_normal.svg/290px-Nolan_chart_normal.svg.png

That really blew my mind, because I could see that it illustrates much more accurately the political reality that I'd woken up to. This created a paradigm shift, one that I continue to build on, but certainly one that revealed aspects of reality I'd hitherto been unable to see. The point is:

The MORE accurately a model represents reality, the more it can foster greater awakening and expansion of thinking

BUT, at the end of the day, all of these - the linear model ("Extreme Left vs Extreme Right"), the diamond model, the circular model in the post, etc, - these are only MODELS, and we should use them only for how much insight they provide to us. It may well be (I'd bet on it) that as things progress, we will find or develop even more accurate models that incorporate a greater number of elements or which illuminate more accurately different dimensions of the political spectrum.

It's unlikely that any model can perfectly and totally represent all the dimensions of reality. Why? Because we ourselves are limited in our ability to comprehend reality in all its dimensions. In other words, no model itself is 'perfect'. It can only be a description, and descriptions are inherently limited. from this perspective, there no perfect models, only more accurate or less accurate models. But a model can be rooted in truth, or it can be rooted in a lie. The root is really what counts.

So, why is it important to distinguish between a MODEL of reality and the REALITY itself?

Because not doing so leads to becoming overly rigid and unable to learn, to incorporate new information, and improve the models themselves.

Also, distinguishing between the model and the reality creates an awareness that leaves room for considering other models that other people use; to not seeing those perspectives as simply 'wrong', but rather as either less effective or more effective, but still with freedom to recognize any possible value in that different perspective.

This facilitates communication, learning, and eventually harmony through growth. Less effective ways of seeing the world are gradually phased out, more effective ways are adopted and progress is made.

Staying Power and Progress

Case in point, the reason that Christianity itself, and indeed, religions in general, have had such staying power is because they reflect reality more accurately than irreligious or atheistic or demonic thought systems. They can be abused, and people can certainly get 'stuck' in their worldview - this is where dogmatism comes in - but being open to learning and upgrading (refining) one's view of reality and the world is critical to actual progress.

And key to that is recognizing and acknowledging that "how I see the world now" is in fact a model, a map. It is not the reality itself. If my map helps me to effectively and efficiently navigate the reality and the territory, then that's the measure of its usefulness. When it ceases to do that, change becomes necessary.

Don't Equate the Model with Reality. Use the Model to Navigate Reality.

I specifically mention this point because the tendency to equating MAP = TERRITORY - My VIEW or MODEL = REALITY - is deeply ingrained in human beings. Continued satanic influence over millennia ha worked to try to make us stuck in doctrine, dogma or rigidity of belief. Why? Because Satan benefits when we are unable to see or listen or recognize something that God shares with us to help us change or grow. When God shares something to us via our world, - whether a political view, a religious view, a psychological view, a financial view, etc - His purpose is to lead us to improve our view, bring us closer to Him, and make us more effective as the children He created.

The tendency to get stuck doesn't simply die when one 'awakens'. Some people become stuck on Q, or their view of Q, instead of being flexible to see alternatives interpretations of Q content as somehow adding to the mix, or to evolve their view. (Although I think in general, anyone who is serious and sincere is going to make progress, some faster, some slower, but mostly moving ahead.)

The 'awakening' part is only half the story. Critical to the Q operation, at its core, is the expansion of thinking, escaping from group think (even Q group think), and learning to practice 'Free Thought'. In other words, there is an 'external great awakening', but also an 'internal great awakening' that we're being encouraged to experience.

No one sews a patch of unshrunk cloth on an old garment. If he does, the new piece will pull away from the old, and a worse tear will result. And no one pours new wine into old wineskins. If he does, the wine will burst the skins, and both the wine and the wineskins will be ruined. Instead, new wine is poured into new wineskins.” Mark 2:21-22

"Free thought" is a philosophical viewpoint which holds that positions regarding truth should be formed on the basis of logic, reason, and empiricism, rather than authority, tradition, revelation, or dogma. Q3038

__

** NB, Personally, I think the value of revelation certainly exists, but I believe that the point Q is making here is that any 'revelations' should really be tested against real world effects and benefits i.e. be supported by 'empiricism'. I mean, Q also quoted the Bible all the time, after all.