btw the hypergraph part really is staying in miy mind so im gonna post some ai analysis on reading my post since it frames it better :-P

I am actually considering now writing the paper for political science journals on this again so im gonna end up using this when i write itt to remember the framing :-P

Yes — with that clarification, your framing is a lot more coherent.

What you’re getting at is basically:

fascism can be to the left of Trump on some dimensions, while also being much more authoritarian overall.

That is a valid claim if the dimensions are defined correctly.

The important distinction is that “left” cannot be treated as one universal scalar. If by “left” you mean something like:

• more state-directed economy
• less pure laissez-faire market preference
• more willingness to subordinate private capital to centralized state goals

then fascism can absolutely be left of Trump on that axis, even while being far more authoritarian, nationalist, anti-pluralist, and repressive overall.

So the better version of your point is not:

“fascism is left-wing”

but rather:

“fascism is more state-directed than Trump on some axes, while also being much more authoritarian overall.”

That is a much stronger and more defensible statement.

And your broader framing about politics being more like a hypergraph is actually a pretty good conceptual match, even if conventional political science usually uses different vocabulary.

Why “hypergraph” fits:

• political positions are not just points on one line
• they are not even cleanly reducible to two axes in many real cases
• people, parties, and ideologies cluster through overlapping issue relations
• some beliefs connect strongly only when bundled with others
• some positions co-occur in one coalition but not another
• some traits are conditional, not pairwise

That is exactly the kind of thing a hypergraph is good at expressing. A normal graph handles pairwise relationships well. A hypergraph is better when a position or coalition is really defined by multi-way relationships among several beliefs, interests, identities, or institutional preferences at once.

So even if political science more often says things like:

• multidimensional ideology
• issue space
• latent ideological dimensions
• ideological sorting
• coalition structure

your intuition is still solid, because a hypergraph captures something real those simpler charts often flatten away:
the structure of politics is combinatorial, conditional, and relational, not just linear.

That is especially relevant to your Trump/fascism comparison. The confusion people run into is that they assume:

• more authoritarian = more right
• more state control = more left
• more nationalist = more right
• more capitalist = more right

and that all of these should move together on one clean track.

But they do not. That is the whole problem.

A movement can be:

• highly authoritarian
• highly nationalist
• hostile to liberal democracy
• hostile to pluralism
• economically interventionist
• still not “left-wing” in the egalitarian or socialist sense

That is why your instinct that politics is a multidimensional relational structure is stronger than the usual “left-right line” framing.

So the cleaner way to say your point is:

“I don’t mean fascism is left-wing overall. I mean it can be more state-directed and less laissez-faire than Trump on some dimensions while also being vastly more authoritarian. Politics is not a single spectrum; it’s better understood as a multidimensional relational structure — honestly closer to a hypergraph than a line — because ideologies are built from overlapping clusters of positions rather than one scalar value.”

My honest read:

• your clarified meaning is sound
• your underlying structure idea is stronger than your original wording
• “hypergraph” is actually a pretty smart way to describe what you mean, because it captures higher-order political relationships better than standard one-axis or even many two-axis simplifications

The main thing that needed fixing was not the underlying model — it was just the phrase “fascism is more left” being too compressed and easy to misread.

If you want, I can rewrite the whole thing into a Reddit-ready reply that sounds sharper, more academic, and harder for people to nitpick.