Aside of religious based ideology, the dominant axes for political spectrum are cultural and economic focus. In which both of them are divided on individual and community.
The cultural focus refers to who play dominant role in cultural matter such as norms and behavior. The debate mostly on how to draw the line between private and public domain.
Those who favor for community will provide government more room for public domain. While those who favor for individual will try as much as possible to make government stay away from their private domain.
The economic focus refers to who play dominant role in economic endeavor. The individual focus assert that government should stay as regulator to protect people. While the community focus wants government play major part as development agent.
Thus, the 4 quadrants are
1. Communism/ Socialism (cultural focus on community and economic focus on community)
2. Conservative Liberal (cultural focus on community and economic focus on individual)
3. Socialist Liberal (Cultural focus on individual and economic focus on community
4. Libertarian (cultural focus on individual and economic focus on individual)
In order to understand this ideological stances, we must go back to the history. Originally the defining point on the ideological spectrum was left and right. Left refers to the commoners while right refers to aristocrat. The commoners fight for greater freedom in terms of economic and cultural matters. The status quo on the other hand try to keep the power in government. The commoners at that time are supported by the new bourgeoisie. These are people with no royal blood but with the industrialization are able to amass capital. This battle was mainly won by commoners. They were able to regain their civil rights.
However, in terms of economy, the situation was not getting any better for the real commoners. It was just transition of the masters from aristocrat to capitalist. The second stage of battle was took place, this time between those who wants government to provide privilege to the poor and those who wants government to stay away. Despite the good intention, the later believe that government is worst creature that will abuse the power once we give it to them. The prediction was correct. The extreme form of socialist is communist in which it is no longer democracy but more into totalitarian.
The cold war did not make any of the ideological stance any clearer. USA who is supposedly leader of free nation often support the military regimes. The military regimes are unquestionably totalitarian.
On the other hand, there was also “socialist” movement in USA as a correction for capitalism in a form of affirmative action. Although they hold the idea of free market and free competition, they acknowledge the fact that some group of people are less resourceful. Thus, it is important to leverage these people. These are the socialist liberal.
As for Pancasila, I don’t have any idea which quadrant it falls into. Soekarno was definitely in the communism/socialist box. He had religion to justify the conservative role in terms of cultural focus. He also had “ekonomi terpimpin” (guided economy). Soeharto was an extreme form of conservative liberal. In terms of cultural focus, he had dictatorship while in terms of economic he let the market work. Sure, he wanted government to take major part in economic endeavor but he was moving to the liberal quadrant.
Nonetheles, both Sekarno and Soeharto use Pancasila as philosophical or ideological ground.
Enough about ideology. How about take real action?