Atlas / Comparisons / Global Greens vs US Democratic Party
Global Greens and US Democratic Party
Measured distance across six axes
The same broad family. They agree within three points on EC, ID, CH. No axis separates them by eight points or more.
Axis by axis
| Axis | Global Greens | US Democratic Party | Gap | Reading | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EC · Economic organisation | −05 | −03 | 2 | Agrees | Effectively the same position. Not what an argument between them is about. |
| CU · Social and cultural order | −09 | −05 | 4 | Differs | Real difference, but not the dividing line. |
| AU · Organisation of power | −06 | −02 | 4 | Differs | Real difference, but not the dividing line. |
| SC · Scale of decision | 00 | +04 | 4 | Differs | Real difference, but not the dividing line. |
| ID · Rule of membership | −08 | −06 | 2 | Agrees | Effectively the same position. Not what an argument between them is about. |
| CH · Method and tempo | −04 | −06 | 2 | Agrees | Effectively the same position. Not what an argument between them is about. |
Each axis runs from −10 to +10; the distance is the straight-line separation across all six at once, out of a maximum of 49.0. How the scoring works →
The evidence behind the widest gaps
A distance figure is worth nothing unless the scores behind it can be checked. These are the artefacts supporting the axes that separate these two most.
Global Greens · CU −09
Coded −9: respect for diversity is one of the six founding principles.
- Programme textThe Charter commits to gender equity, indigenous rights and cultural diversity as core rather than adjacent.
US Democratic Party · CU −05
Coded −5: the party has moved substantially toward the liberal pole on family and identity questions since 2004.
- Programme textPlatform support for same-sex marriage moved from opposition to endorsement between 2004 and 2012.
- Comparative datasetCHES-equivalent placements put the party well toward the GAL pole relative to European mainstream parties.
What this comparison does not establish
Proximity means similarity of stated position. It carries no claim about competence, circumstance, scale of operation, or what either organisation actually did to the people under it. Two organisations can sit close together and produce entirely different histories, because those things are not on any axis and could not be.
Global Greens
2001– · Worldwide
Ecological wisdom, social justice, participatory democracy, non-violence, sustainability, respect for diversity.
US Democratic Party
1828– · United States
Regulated capitalism, expanded health coverage, civil rights, climate action, and defence of existing institutional procedure.
Distance is not the whole answer. Two organisations can sit the same distance apart for entirely different reasons, and the reason is the content of any claim about them. Open the comparison in the atlas to weight the axes yourself.
Open in the atlas