My top two articles ever were about hexagons and class reductionism.

We are at a unique juncture in human history in which creative combination is required.

Get futuristic.

The New Political Compass

The old political compass is the classic X-Y axis, economic socialism on the Left, economic capitalism on the Right, authoritarianism at the top, libertarianism at the bottom.

The hexagon, then, is a three-dimensional political compass which allows for the new, third political axis: that of universalism versus identitarianism. On the Left, this takes the form of class versus identity.

Adding a New Dimension

The depiction of three-dimensional objects in two-dimensional media is called isometric projection.

The hexagon is a good symbol of this, because it is a two-dimensional depiction of a cube. This will be helpful for visually modeling areas of astronomical space as humanity expands to the stars.

The hexagon lets us transition dimensions, allowing us to think at higher levels, and orient ourselves astronomically.

The human eye only creates depth through context clues, not true direct vision. Thus hexagons are necessary. (Coincidentally, another name for a cube is a hexahedron, being six-sided.)

It is an appropriate symbol for a historic era in which we need to codify both a new political dimension and a new astronomical dimension.

Ideology is spatial because it is material, based on human beings with material bodies.

The Eight Configurations

The compass doesn’t exactly work as the old two-dimensional one does, because depending whether one is moving forward or back, you might have an optical illusion of being placed “closer” to things you don’t like.

This is why it’s just better to think in terms of a new political axis, and where you fall on each one, than relating the three axes spatially to each other. It would take more advanced modeling than I can currently do. My best attempt:

Universalist libertarian socialist (me) Universalist authoritarian socialist (Amber Frost?) Universalist libertarian capitalist (focused on market/state, not race/gender) Universalist authoritarian capitalist (Neoreaction/Mussolinian fascism) Identitarian libertarian socialist (ancom SJWs) Identitarian authoritarian socialist (SJW Maoists and/or culturally reactionary Stalinists like Morning Star TERFs) Identitarian libertarian capitalist (SJW libertarian or racist libertarian) Identitarian authoritarian capitalist (SJW neoliberalism and Nazism)

For the record, my position is that none of these tendencies should be in the same organization.

Still, solutions to the problem of depicting depth already exist.

Envisioning Depth

In chemical drawing, depth is depicted through symbols. Circled in orange, the black triangles represent the z-axis, the bonds either angling forward or outward. The study of three-dimensional chemical spatial geometry is apparently known as “stereochemistry.”

“A solid wedged bond…indicates a bond pointing above-the-plane, while a dashed wedged bond…indicates a below-the-plane bond,” to quote Wikipedia.

That means the solid triangle bonds are pointing toward you, and the dotted-line triangles are pointing away from you.

Other Interpretations

Krugman’s political compass is different.

Here the top does not represent authoritarianism, but cultural conservatism. Those are not precisely the same thing, though they have a certain overlap.

However it makes a similar point that an important Left strategy is to emphasize class over identity. Identity is what Krugman’s top-left has in common with the Right; class is what Krugman’s top-left has in common with the Left.

Envisioning Extra Dimensions

This part gets weird. When you add a new axis, you get into dimensional concepts, and that immediately gets abstract. It’s needed both for space exploration and interdimensional physics.

When on psychedelics, many people report that they experience kaleidoscopic fracturing of their vision, or spirals. When on these chemicals, it can feel literally like you’re looking into other dimensions.

I’m not saying LSD lets you see into other dimension. I can’t prove that.

I’m saying LSD gives you a visual experience which is analogous to what the human experience of multiple dimensions would be like.

It may be helpful to scientists, mathematicians, engineers, and theorists working in 3+ dimensions. I wouldn’t be surprised if psychedelics help lead to breakthroughs in dimensional thinking.

New dimensions would appear as fractions of the visual field, split kaleidoscopically, converging at the center, but fractured along edges moving from the center outward, like the line of a radius on a circle.

This is sort of what it looks like:

The sections with the same colors are looking into the same “dimension” or “fork in the multiverse.” In reality, it’s just your brain’s visual cortex fracturing into different visual fields along these edges.

Again, we can’t prove that LSD lets you see into other dimensions. LSD doesn’t stand for “Lets you See Dimensions” or anything. Only a disturbed person would even think that. Still, it does give you that extra working memory for the detailed visualization required for three-dimensional modeling.

What we can prove is that people get these kaleidoscopic radial fractures in their vision when on psychedelics because the visual cortex is organized radially, from inward to outward.

It is because the X and Y axes of the visual cortex at the back of your brain are organized logarithmically, in the sense that the left side of it represents your central vision, and the right side represents your peripheral vision, and the lines from left to right are the different radii of your concentrically-organized vision. (I may have which half does which mixed up, but that’s the idea.)

So when a glitch happens anywhere on your visual cortex, it is experienced as kaleidoscopic radial fracture, or as a spiral, helix, or circle.

If something happens along one radius, we experience something like this:

Say we added a fourth political dimension.

Reformist-versus-revolutionary is a dichotomy that ends up being important among anticapitalists.

The octagons above can be used for depicting a four-dimensional political compass if necessary.

Conclusion: Hexagon as Symbol of the Universal Particular

In dialectic philosophy, there is a continual struggle for particular things to achieve and express incrementally higher attainments of universality.

This connects to the idea of the universal coherence, that we are all tending toward a more and more orderly, complex, and advanced universe as time goes on.

The idea is, the universe will increasingly be in cooperation with itself, rather than conflict with itself.

Extropy is the tendency of this universal coherence to grow over time.

However, when different sides are fighting, they both seem rather particular. They are both separate and finite, as visible from their conflict.

Conflict is often the opposite of universality, which requires unity.

But how much unity? Not an infinite amount. We don’t need unity with the worst things.

We do need some, however.

When, in a conflict, two sides are fighting, one side will represent the interests of universal unity better than the other side.

The obvious example is working class versus ruling class. It’s a conflict, which is intrinsically divisive, but the working class stands for social unity and the bourgeoisie creates social division.

But you have to choose. You can’t get to the universal by avoiding particularity, by being averse to all conflict.

The obstacle is the way. The only way out is through. We must attain the universal through the particular.

This is why we choose class reductionism, an ideology that is extremely divisive – for now.

Sometimes it is necessary to create division in the present, to create greater unity in the future.

Sometimes conflict is but a prelude to a greater coexistence.

Because we can’t, in practice, do both.

As the shape which is the perfect balance between angularity and curvature, the hexagon is therefore the correct symbol of the universal particular, and thus of class reductionism.