[ianremsen]

How on earth are these metrics defined even somewhat objectively? How is it justified that countries such as China, India, and Russia occupy only one point despite being stunningly diverse polities? Why are all 'traditional' values rolled into one category? Why are 'survival' and 'self-expression' considered opposite extremes?

[_delirium]

In this case it's entirely factor analysis of responses to a particular survey, the World Values Survey [1], which gets periodically administered across a number of countries. The survey data and factor analysis can be done in a fairly "objective" way, in the sense that you do have answers that vary between countries, and you can analyze trends there. Whether the factors pulled out of these particular sets of questions can accurately be labeled with fairly strong terms like "traditionalism" is maybe more controversial. You also have the general issues around self-response data.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Values_Survey

[ianbooker]

These are well tested social science concepts. Its just hard to communicate in a two word label..

[prewett]

When you and your family and your neighbors, village, tribe are worried about where your next meal is coming from, you don’t have much energy for self-expression. See also Maslow’s hierarchy.

China and Russia have similar politics in that they both have long authoritarian histories, as well as Communist histories. I don’t know much about India, but I’d guess that the average Indian and the average Chinese person have similar concerns: how to get enough money to move their family up from poverty or near poverty and into the middle class.