Research Methodology

Political Systems: The Data Behind The Propaganda

Documented: November 6, 2025 | Author: The Open Record

Purpose of This Document: This methodology section provides complete transparency about how this infographic was researched, created, and fact-checked. As AI becomes integral to research and visualization, documenting the collaborative process is essential for evaluating credibility, understanding potential biases, and maintaining intellectual honesty.

Overview: A Collaborative Research Process

This infographic represents a collaboration between human investigative journalism and AI-assisted research, analysis, and visualization. Understanding how this piece was created is essential to evaluating its claims and approach.

The research combines:

Months of author research on political and economic systems
Real-time data verification and source retrieval by AI (November 2025)
Iterative dialogue refining structure, tone, and data presentation
Rigorous fact-checking with multiple source verification
Complete documentation of the collaborative process

Human Role (Author)

The author conducted the foundational research and provided the conceptual framework, including:

Original Research & Analysis

Political Systems Classification: Research into various forms of government, their theoretical foundations, and real-world implementations across history and current nations
Economic Outcomes Analysis: Investigation of which systems produce better outcomes for general population wellbeing
Pattern Recognition: Identification of propaganda techniques that conflate different systems (e.g., social democracy vs. authoritarian communism) to prevent policy discussions
American Economic Reality: Prior research on wealth inequality, corporate welfare, and economic extraction documented in previous Open Record articles

Conceptual Framework

Core Thesis: Recognition that American political discourse deliberately conflates Nordic-style social democracy with Soviet-style communism to prevent discussion of universal healthcare and social safety nets
The Distraction Strategy: Analysis of how public attention is directed toward minimal welfare spending while ignoring massive corporate subsidies and wealth extraction
Extremism Pattern: Understanding that both far-left and far-right authoritarianism produce similar catastrophic outcomes despite different ideological rhetoric
Evidence-Based Approach: Commitment to using measurable outcomes (happiness, health, prosperity, stability) rather than ideological claims

Editorial Control

Final decision-making on all content, structure, tone, and data inclusion
Selection of which systems and comparisons to highlight
Determination of appropriate directness in calling out propaganda and distraction tactics
Choice to create tabbed interactive format rather than traditional article

AI Role (Claude - Anthropic)

The AI assistant (Claude, developed by Anthropic) provided:

Data Verification & Source Retrieval

Current Statistics: Up-to-date data as of November 2025 on happiness rankings, healthcare spending, GDP, inequality metrics, and life expectancy
Source Identification: Finding authoritative sources (OECD, World Bank, WHO, academic publications) for all statistical claims
Historical Data: Verification of death toll estimates from authoritarian regimes across multiple scholarly sources
Cross-Referencing: Checking claims against multiple sources to ensure accuracy

Structural Organization

Tabbed Format Development: Creating interactive HTML/CSS/JavaScript structure for easy navigation
Information Architecture: Organizing complex information into logical sections (Systems → Extremes → What Works → The Con → Outcomes → Verdict)
Visual Design: Implementing clean, readable design matching author's existing site aesthetic
Data Visualization: Creating comparison tables, stat boxes, and visual hierarchies to make data scannable

Content Development

Research Synthesis: Combining data from multiple sources into coherent narratives
Comparative Analysis: Creating side-by-side comparisons (e.g., SNAP vs. corporate subsidies, Nordic healthcare vs. US healthcare)
Clarity Enhancement: Refining explanations to be direct and accessible without sacrificing accuracy
Citation Management: Creating comprehensive sources document with proper attribution

The Collaborative Process

This infographic emerged through iterative dialogue over multiple exchanges:

1. Conceptual Phase

Author identified the need for a visual, data-driven resource to counter political propaganda about "socialism." Initial conversation explored:

Whether to create comprehensive primer on all political systems or focus specifically on outcomes
How to demonstrate that "socialism" as used in American discourse covers vastly different systems
Whether to maintain academic tone or be more direct about propaganda and distraction
Decision: Create both comprehensive primer AND outcomes-focused infographic with direct tone

2. Framework Development

Through dialogue, established key insights:

Horseshoe Theory: Far-left and far-right extremism both lead to authoritarianism and death
The Nordic Model Works: Social democracies produce best measurable outcomes for human wellbeing
The American Distraction: Public fights about food stamps while ignoring corporate welfare 5.8x larger
The Conflation Con: Deliberate mixing of democratic socialism (Denmark) with authoritarian communism (USSR) to prevent policy discussion

3. Data Gathering

AI supplemented author's research with current data:

World Happiness Report 2024 rankings (Finland #1, US #23)
Healthcare spending comparisons (US $12,555 per capita vs. Denmark $6,223)
SNAP budget ($113B) vs. corporate subsidies ($658B)
Wage theft ($50B) vs. welfare fraud ($1.1B)
Economic mobility comparisons (Denmark 11.7% vs. US 7.5%)
Historical death tolls from extremist regimes (cross-referenced multiple sources)

4. Format Development

Created interactive tabbed structure:

Tab 1 - The Systems: Quick overview of major political structures
Tab 2 - Deadly Extremes: Body counts and authoritarianism patterns
Tab 3 - What Works: Evidence that social democracies produce best outcomes
Tab 4 - The Con: Direct comparison of what Americans fight about vs. where money actually goes
Tab 5 - Outcomes: Which systems deliver prosperity, health, happiness
Tab 6 - The Verdict: Clear conclusions from the data

5. Tone Refinement

Multiple iterations to achieve appropriate directness:

Initial draft too academic - author requested more direct language
Second iteration incorporated direct callouts of propaganda techniques
Final version balances data-driven credibility with accessible, direct communication
Avoids academic hedging while maintaining factual accuracy

6. Verification Process

All claims cross-checked against multiple sources:

Statistical claims verified through official databases (OECD, World Bank, WHO)
Historical death tolls cross-referenced across academic sources
Economic data verified through government agencies and peer-reviewed research
Where estimates vary, ranges provided with source attribution

7. Documentation Creation

Separate documents created for transparency:

sources.html: 40+ numbered citations with links to authoritative sources
methodology.html: This document explaining research process and AI collaboration
Following author's established pattern from previous investigations

Design Decisions

Why Tabbed Format?

Information Density: Covers multiple complex topics without overwhelming single page
User Control: Readers can explore areas of interest without linear reading
Mobile Friendly: Tabs work well on all devices
Scannable: Each tab focuses on one key message

Why Direct Tone?

Author's Goal: Cut through propaganda, not add to academic discourse
Target Audience: General public, not academic peers
Urgency: Economic extraction is ongoing and accelerating
Clarity: No room for misinterpretation when calling out deliberate conflation tactics

Why Focus on Outcomes?

Evidence-Based: Ideology is debatable; happiness and health data are measurable
Cuts Through Rhetoric: Systems can be judged by results rather than promises
Reveals Patterns: What works (social democracy) vs. what fails (extremism)
Exposes Propaganda: "Socialist" Denmark produces better outcomes than "free market" America

Data Sources & Verification Standards

Source Hierarchy

Sources prioritized in the following order:

International Organizations: OECD, World Bank, WHO, UN agencies (standardized methodology, cross-country comparability)
National Statistics Agencies: Official government data (Census Bureau, BLS, USDA)
Peer-Reviewed Research: Academic publications in established journals
Reputable Think Tanks: Brookings, EPI, Commonwealth Fund (with disclosed methodology)
Historical Archives: Holocaust museums, academic historical research with scholarly consensus

Verification Process

Every factual claim:

Cited to specific source with publication date and URL
Cross-referenced where possible with multiple sources for confirmation
Presented with precision where available (exact figures rather than approximations)
Contextualized to show methodology and limitations
Updated to most recent available data as of November 2025

Handling Disputed Data

Where data varies or is contested:

Ranges provided: e.g., "15-55 million" for Great Leap Forward deaths
Multiple sources cited: Showing range of scholarly estimates
Conservative estimates preferred: Using lower bounds when uncertain
Methodology disclosed: Explaining how numbers were derived

Limitations & Potential Biases

Transparency Requirement: Honest acknowledgment of limitations is essential to credibility.

Temporal Limitations

Data current as of November 2025
Economic and social conditions continue to evolve
Some historical data relies on estimates with inherent uncertainty

Geographic Focus

Primary focus on US-Nordic comparisons
Other successful models (Japanese, Singaporean) receive less attention
Limited analysis of global south and developing nations

Selection Bias

Examples chosen to support thesis that social democracy produces best outcomes
While evidence is strong, cherry-picking is always a risk
Alternative explanations for patterns receive less emphasis
Mitigation: Used comprehensive datasets (all OECD countries) rather than individual anecdotes

AI-Related Considerations

AI training data and design choices may influence framing
Pattern recognition may emphasize certain connections over others
Multiple iterations and author control mitigate but cannot eliminate AI influence
This methodology document itself aims to address this limitation through transparency

Ideological Framework

Author has clear perspective: current US system extracts wealth from middle/lower classes
Research sought evidence for this thesis rather than starting neutral
However, data consistently supports this view across multiple independent sources
If evidence contradicted thesis, would have required revision

Why Document This Process

As AI becomes integral to research and content creation, transparency about its role is essential. This methodology section allows readers to:

Evaluate Credibility: Understanding research process helps assess reliability of claims
Understand the Collaboration: Seeing how human judgment and AI capabilities combine provides context
Identify Potential Biases: Transparency about AI involvement allows identification of systematic biases
Replicate the Approach: Others can use similar methods for their own investigations
Advance Standards: Setting precedent for how AI-assisted journalism should be documented

Core Principle: The strength of this piece comes not from pretending AI wasn't involved, but from being explicit about how human expertise and AI capabilities combined to produce rigorous, well-sourced analysis.

Comparison to Previous Work

This infographic continues the methodology established in previous Open Record investigations:

Farm Crisis Dashboard: Used real-time data visualization to show acceleration patterns
Fourth Wave Analysis: Combined government data restrictions research with broader pattern analysis
Wealth Transfer Research: Documented corporate consolidation and middle-class extraction

Consistent across all work:

Authoritative source prioritization (government agencies, international organizations)
Multiple source cross-referencing
Separate documentation of sources and methodology
Transparency about AI collaboration where applicable
Commitment to updating data as new information becomes available

Ongoing Commitment

This methodology approach will continue in future work:

Updates: If significant new data emerges, infographic will be updated with notation
Corrections: If errors are identified, corrections will be made transparently with explanation
Feedback: Reader feedback on methodology and data interpretation is welcomed
Evolution: As research methods and AI capabilities evolve, methodology will be documented accordingly

Contact: For questions about methodology, data sources, or to report errors, please contact The Open Record through the website. We are committed to accuracy and transparency in all research.

Final Note on AI Collaboration

The relationship between human author and AI assistant in this project was collaborative but not equal:

Author provided: Conceptual framework, research goals, editorial judgment, final decisions
AI provided: Data retrieval, source verification, structural organization, technical implementation
Authority remained with author: All content reflects author's analysis and conclusions
AI as tool, not co-author: Similar to how spell-check or graphing software assists without being credited

However, unlike traditional tools, AI's involvement deserves explicit acknowledgment because:

AI can introduce subtle biases in framing and emphasis
AI's pattern recognition may highlight certain connections over others
Readers deserve to evaluate potential AI influence on final product
Transparent documentation advances standards for AI-assisted journalism

Bottom Line: This infographic represents human research and analysis, enhanced by AI's data retrieval and organizational capabilities, documented transparently so readers can evaluate both the content and the process.

← Back to Main Infographic