A unidimensional (left-right) division of political views is inadequate

From dKosopedia

A modestly more complex view--two left/right spectrums, one economic, the other social (authoritarian/libertarian)--is favored by many. The Political Compass http://www.politicalcompass.org/ presents this view, with a short test to locate you on their two-dimensional grid.

However, there are other ways to view this complexity. Robert Altemeyer, originator of the Rightwing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale argues that leftwing authoritarians are "as rare as hens teeth." He is relying on a sociological definition of leftwing and rightwing--relative to the dominant power structure in a society, regardless of its official ideology. Indeed, hardline Soviet Communists in the 1980s did indeed score high on the RWA scale.

Altmeyer is not arguing for a uni-dimensional political spectrum. Rather, his findings suggest a more nuanced approach--that political positions come embedded in social systems, and cannot simply be equated with one another devoid of their social context.

This leads toward the even more nuanced position that political distinctions can be 1-, 2-, 3- or more-dimensional, depending on the situation being evaluated and the purposes of the analysis. From such a point of view, a simple left-right spectrum might well be sufficient for many purposes, while for other purposes, it could be quite difficult to discern the number of dimensions needed--or even what some of them might be. For example, how does one distinguish between schools of feminism--such as cultural feminism vs. radical feminism vs. lesbian feminism--based on a multi-dimensional spectrum model?

Such a situational approach to employing spectrums represents a pragmatist outlook, rather than a positivist one.