There is a conflation out on the periphery on the ends of the linear, so-called “political spectrum.” (The astute reader will have noted that I implied that there may be a problem similar on the other side of the so-called spectrum.)
Recently, I had a MeWe-group comments-exchange on the subject of Europe’s all-too-readiness to place “far” as prefix to “right” with respect to whomever occupies that “end of the spectrum.” I place those last four words within quotes as the subject turned to–by my intent–the questionable employment of the line (straight) to represent one’s political identification: That one’s political identity is, by way of metaphor, placed and located on a line extending out, straight, left and right from the center. Also, note I’ve left generalized those occupying that end, The Right, by using, “whomever occupies,” also, with intent for the following.
My belief, currently, is that there are many problems generated by using the straight line to designate the range of political types. Let’s look at the word, “spectrum.” Here are the distinct types where a word appears before “spectrum:”
Absorption, Chemical, Chromatic, Continuous, Diffraction, Gaseous, Normal, Ocular, Prismatic, Solar, Thermal. (There is one entry in the list where a word appears after “spectrum:” “Spectrum analysis,” which is a type of chemical analysis.)
The source doesn’t include what we, in America, use without hesitation or forethought: “political spectrum.” Where do you fall on the political specrtrum?
What the bleep does that look like?
Probably, like the Uterus.
That’s my guess.