Well, for one, I feel like that chart is an inaccurate model of politics.
It's more like a menorah with certain groupings to the right and left of each other but a continuum from left to right. When we say left-wing on that model we are talking more about the authoritarian-libertarian spectrum than the liberal-conservative spectrum. This also helps explain why the right keeps calling traditional conservatives "far right" when they are actually closer to the center. The farther left in this model, the more people wish for a government that rules every aspect of their lives, while farther right you go, the more people want to be left alone. This doesn't automatically make farthest right some virtuous ideal, having no government at all means you have to basically protect your freedom with a gun. Also, the further right you get, the more the menorah unifies. Where a stable state is, then, is closest to the center. I will include Islam here because they usually swing authoritarian with theocratic values far more than Christianity, but there are also very anarchic pockets.
Farthest left: Secular dictatorship/Theocratic absolute monarchy (the menorah goes left/right like that, with the right side having what would be called conservative vakues like religion and an upward-facing hierarchy (favors the rich/powerful over the poor)).
Very far left: Communist dictatorship/Foaming-at-the-mouth Islamic caliphate OR Fascist dictatorship (turns out we have two lovely options on the right here)
Far left: Secular socialism/Theocratic authoritarianism
Left: Current liberal-socialists (think AOC right now)/Current Muslims
Near left: Liberal-socialists 50 to 100 years ago/Bible-bashers (classic theocrats)
Middle: Classic democracy/centrism/"Far right" conservatives
Near right: Goat-herding anarchic Muslims (there are quite a few pockets in the world of Muslims that are remote enough to be more at the anarchic-reactionary end of this spectrum)/Reactionary Christian conservatives
Right: Libertarian (the real kind, not the "libertarians" who typically think they can legitimately be a party people can vote for)/Minarchists (there is a government, but it's bare bones, more like a town hall or bounty hunters)
Far right: Anarcho-capitalist (remember I said the further right you get, the more it unifies? Well, anarcho-communism isn't a thing, in order to have a communism they have to set up a state, the leftt/right difference here is whether you're a follower of Ayn Rand or some religious anarchism)
Farthest right: Might-makes-right anarchy
And that is why I say farthest right does not equal utopia? This is what I mean. Further, there is a bounceback effect, because a might-makes-right can very quickly turn into the farthest left if someone takes over everything. And why do I make this left to right? Because the classic far left sociakist thinks that the more government they have in their lives, the more people will take care of them. Actually, they will more lukely "take care of them" another way.
I'm a minarchist.
