That's actually prove for the joke fish hook theory, because those people are centrists. In social sciences people don't adhere to the US specific pol. spectrum unless the research is made by Americans in America and about America.
Let's Put an End to 'Horseshoe Thoery' Once & For All
- Thread starter Caz
- Start date
There are plenty of secularists who are good and these few have crazy positions and hate filled ideas unlike all the other secularists who are sane folks . These few are just the ones who spew the same extremist ideas on the people and society as right wing does
House of Lightning is completely correct though, we have like a century of evidence that fascism is not incompatible with movements that claim to be "left wing", in the sense of "seizing power from the bourgeoisies and empowering the worker". You can argue that those didn't result in "true left wing politics" weather that's socialism, or communism, and I'll agree with you that they failed at meaningfully being those things, but this does seem to keep happening. Fascism keeps rearing its head everywhere
They are not centrists lol. Centrists are within the major political parties already. The GOP/Dems in the US, SPD/CSU in Germany, for example.
Once you get past the furthest point either side can be from each other on that horseshoe, everything past it should just be labeled "crazy." Different kinds of crazy for different reasons, but still kinda crazy.
Not too big on that theory overall though. Reminds me of
Not too big on that theory overall though. Reminds me of
I think it's because authoritarianism and force are somehow more attractive to people, like they're fighting for a cause of something. It's a great rush to demonize the other, unfortunately.
IDK man, I think the European spectrum is pretty generalizable to the rest of the world. Where social liberals and the Christian/religious parties are around the center, the conservative liberals and the populist right as the rightwing and the left starts with the social democrats, greens, democratic socialists and so on.
Looking at for example Morocco, Tunesia or Turkey, Japan the same kind of structure seems to be in place. You could argue that social democrats are centrists and I would personally call them center-left. In the end though, like others said, the many aspects such as progressive/conservative/reactionary or centralized vs decentralized give much more dimension than just a 1D left right spectrum.
Powerful knowledge in the hands of the ignorant doesn't degrade that power or invalidate that knowledge, it just highlights how dangerous it can really be.
I would say, more accurately, that the more anti-authoritarian a population generally is (and the US isn't great, but it is more than, say, China) the more the clamor of voices results in a centrist "everyone fighting with everyone else to get anything done". Allowing dissent is absolutely a double edged sword, and one that we have to genuinely reckon with our own ethics
(I mean, I'm pretty firmly in the "allowing dissent is critically ethically important" but I recognize that it also leads to slow change that can be harmful)
The mistake of horseshoe theory is the underlying assumption that political ideologies exist on a 2D spectrum. The reality is that political ideologies exist on a mult-dimensional object in such a way that ideologies can be the complete opposite on one spectrum but very similar on another.
Socially Conservative is going to be authoritarian because it's all about actively imposing your values on others.
Horse shoe theory is just another word for “both sides” centrism and the people who are using it to demonize the left are the ones who MLK was referring to in the letters from Birmingham Jail. And plenty of these people will be quick to say they’re against far right ideology, but won’t do jack shit to support black lives matter, #metoo, fightfor15, unions, campus protests against fascists and colonialism, the prison abolition movement, or anti-war movements.
And plenty of these people here and elsewhere say they’re all for equality and shit, but will either never show up to support the causes or always have choice words about the methods in which these causes are strived towards. These people probably call themselves liberals or progressives, but are nothing more than diet conservatives who tell themselves that they care about women, the poor, black and brown lives, victims of imperialism and capitalism, but somehow they always prefer the status quo.
And plenty of these people here and elsewhere say they’re all for equality and shit, but will either never show up to support the causes or always have choice words about the methods in which these causes are strived towards. These people probably call themselves liberals or progressives, but are nothing more than diet conservatives who tell themselves that they care about women, the poor, black and brown lives, victims of imperialism and capitalism, but somehow they always prefer the status quo.
Perhaps we can develop a new theory, similar to the old theory but the ends turn into a black hole of hot garbage memes and lies attacking your allies because their too centrist or cucks or something
Yes, because no one on the left dismisses "identity politics," no sir; no one on the left is willing to elect a pro-lifer and minimize women's issues as long as he supports "economic justice," uh-uh. It's just those insidious neoliberal radical centrist shills trying to denigrate those noble citizens who desire true progress.
Not really sure I agree with horseshoe theory.
My issue is with nonintersectional economic leftists. The people who see socialism as a revenge fantasy rather than a means of maximizing people's utility. The people who claim feminism is man-hating cancer. The people who claim minority issues are at best a distraction and class should be the real focus. The people express support for a podcast that LOVES shitting on rape victims, the mentally ill, and the disabled. The kind of people who constantly plays both sides when republicans do something shitty.
My issue is with nonintersectional economic leftists. The people who see socialism as a revenge fantasy rather than a means of maximizing people's utility. The people who claim feminism is man-hating cancer. The people who claim minority issues are at best a distraction and class should be the real focus. The people express support for a podcast that LOVES shitting on rape victims, the mentally ill, and the disabled. The kind of people who constantly plays both sides when republicans do something shitty.
Just say "heterosexual white men who want everything to be about them because everything has always been about them and advocate 'economic justice' because a sole focus on economic issues benefits them the most."
Theres no question that the far right is pretty fucking loony, but I'm not going to let that give the far left a free pass. They're not nearly as dangerous nor as loony, but they certainly have their moments.
The horseshoe may not be symmetrical, but I definitely think its a good analogy.
The horseshoe may not be symmetrical, but I definitely think its a good analogy.
Good way to put it.
This is really the only thing horseshoe theory is trying to explain and it definitely holds up.
100%
But then again, you know my opinion of the patriarchal, condescending and performative "Left".
As I stated in my other post here, there isn't a difference between the "Far Right" and the "Far Left" in anything other than who their political constituent is. Calling one "Left" and the other "Right" is misnomer.