Or a shitty spiral that leads us astray.

I like it, and would even go further to say that they are so similar on purpose, and that left and right is actually a false Hegelian dialectic used to manufacture consent in the population. And if not consent, to Atleast keep us too busy to fight back

Horseshoe theory isnt political science it's an oversimplification that's comforting for people who can't be bothered to open a book and try to understand the real, substantial differences between the "ends".

Relevant

Divide and conquer, we are not supposed to see how similar we actually are

Just ignore the sliding comments like his

Now that's what i call edgy

If the far left end is political anarchy/anarchism, then either they get consumed by a stronger ideology and disappear/hide (zapatistas) or, to attempt to prevent this from happening, they employ "consensus-based" eugenics programs, gulags or genocides in an attempt to eradicate undesirable human traits. So they either collapse or end up rembling a super-authoritarian form of governemnt.

In short, anarchism must employ authoritarian concepts or it will disappear everytime.

This may be a dumb question, but if anarchy begins to employ authoritarian concepts, is it still anarchy? Is there a such thing as authoritarian anarchy?

Nah, which is why anarchy will always just be snuffed out either from outside or from within. There is no mechanism by which anarchy can survive people existing outside their consensus

I'm with you. It's lazy and explains nothing.

Lol, there are pretty fundamental differences between the far left (anti-authority) and far right (authoritative). I call bullshit.

Bernie and democrats are nothing like the far left.

What? That doesn't really mean anything. There are pretty fundamental differences between the far right (anti-authority) and far left (authoritative).

In an interesting turn of events, each side thinks they are the true anti-authoritarians!

Did you miss the point? Authoritarianism can come from both sides of the political spectrum. I wasn't saying either is more or less so.

No I got it, I was just emphasizing that no matter where the authoritarianism come from, both sides point the finger to the other.

Why is it good to be anti-authoritarian?

far left

.

anti-authority

Wat. They are the biggest promoters of obedience to authority. The fuck?

I just gave an example. Marxists are leftist-authoritarians and anarchists are leftist anti-authoritarians.

Seems like every time I bring up Horseshoe theory I get downvoted to shit. Apparently, there are a couple groups of toxic humans that do not appreciate the comparison.

Great post and question though. And appreciate the attempt to find some common ground among these factions at a time when all the forces in the universe are trying to make us want to tear each other apart.

The whole concept of a political spectrum is fake. Each issue must be analyzed independently. Holding one view on abortion doesn't mean you must hold a certain view on taxes or foreign policy.

Anything else is just letting someone think for you. "Oh, I agree with this ideology on 2 or 3 issues, so I'll just accept everything else they say."

Focus on learning how to explain why you believe what you believe, with facts and evidence, on every discrete issue.

Often the reason why parties agree on slates of issues is that their reasoning for support of each policy is based in principles which can be extrapolated to numerous individual policies. For example, libertarians' belief in self-ownership and the non aggression principle is enough to take a position on almost any imaginable policy.

I'm not a libertarian, but there are reasons why people tend to organize in political parties with coherent views

I understand the reasoning behind it. But I would encourage you to read some of the warnings from America's founders on the dangers of political parties. This is not an innocuous thing, it's far more dangerous than people realize.

I feel it is very applicable to our politics as they are widely accepted from a mainstream perspective. The left and the right vary little once we step outside of social/morality issues (gay marriage, abortion, etc). While I am pro choice and a supporter of same sex marriages I identify more closely with republicans when it comes to traditional republican views on spending and taxation. I use the word traditional because there really is no difference between the two now when it comes to fiscal responsibility. Sure one spends more on guns and the other more on welfare, but neither address real issues anymore. They both have sold the people out for the corporations.

Essentially, during the last four terms (Trump, Obama, Bush 2.0) the difference between the two sides are primarily based on "issues" in our society that affect very few individuals but consume the majority of everyone's thoughts, political conversations, and of course sound bytes. I'm not saying these issues aren't important but they should not be our focus. Yet they are. As a straight man with a vasectomy I shouldn't really care about gay marriage or abortion but I do. Politicians have done an excellent job of getting us all to care about issues that should not be our focus considering there are issues far more pressing.

TL;DR: the "horseshoe" is essentially a circle IMP.

I think I've seen this "horseshoe theory" instead saying the political spectrum is a circle, rather than a line, with both extremes at the bottom

I consider myself libertarian, which is at the top of the circle. Before the media switched to being so focused on being anti-Trump I would have considered myself left leaning, but both parties suck. I was also a Bernie supporter and would still take Trump over Hillary primarily due to distance from both parties.

I'll say, I would describe myself as an agnostic Libertarian from an upper-middle class/Conservative/Jewish background and for many years now have lived with and love an Eco-Socialist raised by a Liberal atheist family of activists on public assistance. Pretty much polar opposite and both very set in our ways. I've talked to a lot of other Lefty's and find similar, but I'll just use him because he's the one I've spoke to the most. We agree on the ends of almost everything, but disagree on the means.

The main difference I've noticed is our outlook on humanity. He doesn't believe people will behave well or responsibly without being forced to. I believe people are mostly good, and have faith that when left mostly to their own devices, most will be kind and responsible.

But to answer your question specifically, here's things I've found we agree on:

-mainstream media is fully corrupt and exists to push specific agenda. Current racial tensions are being manufactured into something much larger than they were. The worship and obsession over celebrity, body politics and sports is Roman bread and circuses and we wish we could stop it. Hopefully current upheaval over politics and science breeds a new generation of better humans.

-big pharma conspiracy to create a pliable, drugged population.

-that identity and religious issues are used by both parties to confine the majority of the population into accepting 2 political platforms only.

-that our disposable product consumer culture is a real problem with terrible consequence but the idea of "climate change" creates an argument where the entire point easily gets lost. Our entire modern human culture needs to change to be responsible for our waste, and we need to produce less waste and rehabilitate/maintain a healthy environment. Negative climate effect would be handled as a result. No one could logically argue for pollution, and the argument over climate models, etc. wouldn't matter.

That's a few anyhow.

Neither of us were Trump supporters, but I viewed him more favorably. As time goes on, we keep up to date on the world and the country, and notice there are things Trump has done that we favor, and things we don't.

We both agree that the best thing that came out of this election are all the people who realized that if you just turn of the fricking screen and go outside, people are mostly kind and life is happening.

This is what I learned in poli-sci. It's actually a circle. At the top so 11 and 1 o'clock are the far Right. The very top is actually the same because both fascism and communism both turn into giant hell holes. The fringes are always the most loud and obnixious, but the actualy represent a very small population. Don't let these idiots polarize you remember we are all individuals.

Horseshoe theory kind of works for some stuff, but not the right/left dichotomy.

If you really understand where these concepts came from you'll see why they are so irreconcilable.

Leftism did not exist until recently. Before the urbanization and mass production no one thought that way. It's origins are in a merchant mindset whereby everything is interchangeable. Everything is a commodity. Even people. The rural people knew basic realities of nature. The rabbit eats grass, the wolf eats the rabbit. This wasn't a moral issue, it just was. Your neighbors were your friends and they were the only people you knew. You knew maybe 100 people, but you really knew all of them. Your steak wasn't just something you bought at the market, you watched the cow be born, you fed it, you probably named it, and now you're eating it.

Leftism came from people who never experienced these things. One steak is no different from any other. It was just a blob of meat wrapped in plastic with a price tag. Your neighbors changed on a daily basis. You "knew" thousands of people, but possibly not the person who lives next door. Even today leftists are mostly city people. Because it's a different way of thinking.

The leftists, seeing everything as interchangeable, tried to enforce this through policy. The right is just people who said "That's stupid, inequalities and hierarchies exist and in fact they must exist or else everything falls apart." The left's response was "inequality is immoral."

From this separation everything else flows. To a leftist a wolf eating a rabbit is immoral. A woman watching the children while the man goes out work is immoral. The farmer laughed and said such a concept was insane these things just are the way they are, and thus was labeled a Nazis, a bigot, a racist.

But the leftist can't escape the human desire to be unique. When everything is of equal value what is valuable? Novelty. Diversity is just novelty. Male/Female? Passe. You need to be a genderfluid demikin. The leftist doesn't an invading army as an enemy, they see it as interesting new people with a novel culture. The right sees an invading army as people who need to be repelled so they don't destroy their monuments and culture and rape their women.

Of course the right is correct in saying that leftism just doesn't work. USSR was a living hell. Not one single leftist policy has been an outstanding success. Affirmative action? Failure. Pouring money into inner city schools? After 25 years of this policy in LA none of the schools have significantly improved. It all goes back to the original proposition of the "right" ... inequalities and hierarchies are natural, and necessary. Leftists must go out of their way to pretend this isn't true and it backfires every time.

Most "right wing" people just want the leftists to fuck off and stop ruining everything they touch.

wtf

Thank you, that was very well-said and will give any young redditor a good background as to why the country is in its current state of affairs

Holy shit. I'm 26 and am just seeing it in this light. I've always leaned left but this puts it in a much better perspective of the differences between the two sides and I can understand it so much clearer now.

Couple articles...

http://www.actualanarchy.com/2017/06/02/its-the-horseshoe-theory-stupid/

https://www.joshuakennon.com/horseshoe-political-theory/

https://www.halseynews.com/2017/03/21/totalitarianism-does-the-road-veer-right-or-left-video/amp/

http://www.activistpost.com/2017/01/beware-the-authoritarian-right-and-left.html

I think the issue here is terms of absolutes. Me for example am an Anarchist and Agnostic. That you'd think would make me extreme because I believe in no government or not a particular God or heavenly thing (although I think the existence of one is at least in spirit possible, no proof of which God is best or real sooo). I'd say my sympathies are far more in the "left" though.

I believe in social justice and equality, I strongly believe in separation of church and state (or no church at all) I'm THOROUGHLY Pro Green (one of the things I'm in complete and total disagreement with on James Corbett, that and science), I'm egalitarian and but not third wave feminist, these things amongst other say Liberal.

Yet, I sympathize with the gun rights and have no issue with firearms, I despise government spending and intervention in my life, I strongly favor lowering or keeping my taxes outright as I'd prefer putting my tax money into my family and my communities helping my poor and sick people out rather then giving taxes to fund illegal wars, drug and human trafficking, bailing out banks and corporate, ponzu schemes, and lining the pockets of bureaucrats. The thing our tax dollar ACTUALLY go to.

This to me is what's wrong with the current political landscape. It's become a contest of extremes and either your with YOUR group or your an enemy. This is thread the far left (Communism) and far right (Fascism) tend hold together quite nicely. There is no in between and no common or middle ground for both sides to agree on. That's why the wealthy 1% and up dominate so. They may have differing ideologies, but they all share the same desire, to keep their dominance and control over the middle and poor classes.

It because of this that they have no issue acting in accord with one another when it suits them (like setting up false flags to cause further hate and division) and going their separate ways when the deed is done. That's where the middle and poor classes have to come to a similar conclusion. Socially sure we all have differing views and opinions, but ECONOMICALLY we are or should be in lockstep with one another. That's why we MUST remain together rather then divided as the elite desire.

The problem is that people are using this to justify their far right beliefs in america thinking that the left is just as left. This is far from the case and left in america is center and right in america is far right.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/02/this-astonishing-chart-shows-how-republicans-are-an-endangered-species/

I'm a liberal and a bernie supporter and I have found that I agree with the more libertarian conservatives on many things. Although I agree with some left wing ideas such as healthcare, education, and maternity leave being funded by taxes.

The issues I think we both agree on are: the war mongering needs to stop, the clintons are criminals and need to be in jail, podesta needs to be in jail, we need to repeal citizens united to stop the legal bribery in politics, Zionism = racist supremacist Judaism, the mainstream media is fake news, the NSA surveillance is unconstitutional, SJWs are idiots, antifa are violent idiots, and the world is run by satanic pedophiles.

anyone who resorts to breaking things down in to left vs right is either imho disingenuous or an idiot.

personally im socialy liberal (as in if it doesnt harm anyone do what ever the fuck you want) economically conservitive (stop pissing away our tax dollars on wars and stupid social experiments) in favour of enviromental regulations (via massive fines for companies breaking the rules, and using them to fund clean ups and inspections instead of tax dollars) and against any religious interference in the state.

ive been called everything from a russian shill and communist, to a neo-nazi over the last year. there are active campaigns to attempt to silence and attack anyone who falls outside this left vs. right narrative.

had bernie won, it would have destroyed any chance of this war of the minds happening which is why i am pretty confident both sides made sure to sink bernie.

I was thought it was a circle of sphere with various axises representing government, religion, the public, corporations etc and the volume/area is your freedom