Is horseshoe theory valid?

Ummm sweetie your grand children will be brown PoC liberals deal with it

*Sips cum*

>

Dinesh is fucking insane.

You can draw similarities between certain aspects of authoritarian ideologies.
But if you're trying to say they're literally the same you're retarded, and honestly i don't think anyone is really doing that.

Not that I necessarily agree with your thesis, but some of the more rabid members of the nu-left (ie. Brianna Wu, Shanley Kane) were attack dogs of the right five or so years before. Something to think about I guess.

This

No
Horseshoe is just oberving that the same means may be used to reach entirely different goals

Not that fascism and soviet socialism are very different

that's precisely what they're saying. "fascism and communism are exactly the same so let's change nothing about the current system and just continue to embrace capitalism because it's the best system available and the end of history and [insert liberal platitude here]." no wonder self-satisfied brainlets flock to this bogus theory

Yeah, maybe it's because gullible people with a low sense of self worth will latch onto any bullshit that will allow them to feel superior to others.

>that's precisely what they're saying

>In political theory, the horseshoe theory asserts that the far left and the far right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear political continuum, in fact closely resemble one another, much like the ends of a horseshoe.

>closely resemble one another
>exactly the same

Stop strawmanning fagtron.

till the end of time

same difference. saying "communism and fascism closely resemble each other" is just as fallacious and blatantly moronic

It's not even my thesis. I stole it from a guy on /pol/ who got no replies because the ideas he presented were too advanced for the crowd.

>ideology is bad

says the globalist capitalist

>has anyone noticed that leftists and centrists both don't believe in right wing ideas?
HOLY SHIT

>communists and fascists both shot people
>therefore, fascism is left wing
Literally the only people who say this are Amerifat autismo-capitalists. Of course liberal democracies look "peaceful" in the modern era; NATO has almost total hegemony over global affairs and can outsource its violence to foreign wars and drone strikes, alienating tumblr democrats and MAGA neckbeards from the actual violence that sustains their lifestyle. They have the liberty of calling third-worlders barbaric for being forced to take sides in battles between radical factions of their own soil. But "left" and "right" are not unchanging points on the political tapestry - the modern western liberal orthodoxy was incredibly violent when attempting to seize power during the French revolution, and would have seemed like a totally anarchic position to take in the past... just look at Plato's description of democracy. Conflict is simply necessary at times, because it's one of the few things that ever permanently alters existing power structures.

spotted the alt right cuckhold

>communists and fascists both shot people
>therefore, fascism is left wing
where the fuck do you get this

that's the cringiest thing I've ever seen

Pretty basic argument you hear repeated by economically illiterate plebs.

>conservatives outbreed liberals 5 to 1
It's not even at a 2:1 ratio, and many of those conservatives become more liberal as societies urbanize. "SWEDEN YES" jokes aside, social democracies have the highest standards of living, whereas the most conservative states in the world are all third-world shitholes.

>conservatives children are brainwashed in college to be left leaning
It's called "having an actual education instead of regurgitating bullshit points about climate denial that were posted by right-wing think tanks masquerading as legitimate research institutes on the internet."

>their conservative genetic tendencies are in conflict with liberal ideas
Twin studies on the genetic components of political ideology have limited sample sizes. That aside, they tend to produce a correlation of 0.5, which is only moderate. Applying biological determinism to abstract shit like this is just as dumb as relegating everything to a social construct.

>liberalism becomes increasingly authoritarian and entirely about feelings(never facts), mainly anger
What, Bush and Trump weren't authoritarian in their own ways? Horseshoe theory is mostly bullshit around the world, but when it comes to American bipartisanism, there was very little substantial difference between the military-industrial surveillance state promoted by Bush and its continuance under Obama (and later, Trump).

>anger turns into violence
People are outraged these days because they spend way too much time on the fucking internet. 99% of SJW shit or creationists or whatever would have zero impact on people's actual lives if they just understood that the nature of consumer media is to sensationalize fairly rare events. I swear that half of my arguments between friends start because of some trivial facebook drama. The human element of communication is removed and the incentive for socially awkward people to latch onto digital tribalism and escapist fantasies is huge.

>violence turns to genocide
I doubt it.

>communists and fascists both advocate public ownership of means of production
>therefore, fascism is left wing
fixed that for you

t. illiterate retard

the fact that you can only understand people in terms of political philosophy and not their inherent humanity
only shows how sick you are in treating and labeling others.
Im not willing to die for anyone's right to gold

Well they do, at least the parts of both ideologies that have actually existed in the real world.

why? because both did violence? by that logic, liberal democracies must also closely resemble fascism and communism

>nazi germany outlawed trade unions and the right to strike, increased privatization, and literally gave your boss legal authority over you in a chain of command with no right to negotiate wages or change employment without permission
>public ownership xd

>nazi germany outlawed trade unions and the right to strike
as did the soviet union and pretty much every other socialist state, ironic you're using lenin when he was in charge of destroying the worker's councils and unions
>increased privatization
over industries that were overseen and under the supervision of the state
>literally gave your boss legal authority over you in a chain of command with no right to negotiate wages or change employment without permission
replace the boss with your local commissar and it's no different from soviet union

>because both did violence?

No, because they both overextended the role of the state to include both public and private matters. In both societies the ideology of the state seeped into the private sphere of individual people's lives.

and liberal democracy doesn't do that, i'm guessing is your position

No, it really doesn't. You can in fact believe whatever you want in your own home and in the privacy of your head.

I do not approve of everything the Soviet Union did, but that doesn't mean fascism was based on public ownership. Far from it.

>ironic you're using lenin when he was in charge of destroying the worker's councils and unions
That's not how you spell Skobolev.

>replace the boss with your local commissar and it's no different from soviet union
A three-year working period was mandatory for many graduates, yes, but that was only after receiving free education. What was the point of negotiating for wages when most people working the same occupation had extremely similar salaries and government provided benefits?

you honestly believe the state and the media who grovel at it, don't push their ideology onto peoples' lives?

>mass media is omnipresent in the modern west
>participation in the media is almost completely monitored by corporations and government
>smartphones are basically tracking devices that listen to your everyday conversations and market you Google Ads based on it
>can't go 3 seconds without someone mentioning Trump
>not intrusive on the private lives of citizens

>Liberal democracy isn't a perfect utopia
>therefore we should just become fascists or stalinists

Fuck off.

>I do not approve of everything the Soviet Union did, but that doesn't mean fascism was based on public ownership. Far from it.
Seems like you've misunderstood. Public ownership is ownership by the government of an asset, corporation, or industry.

lol exactly as predicted. go polish your horseshoe, brainlet

The average poor family in America only has access to internet, a smart phone, a small apartment, food, clean water, basic healthcare at CVS that would have been a dream to people in the soviet union, public education, and a car. The rich have mansions and stuff. How is that corporate oppression any different from everyone being employed by a state run bureaucracy?

Except that wasn't what I was saying at all you fucking faggot.

>liberal democracy isn't perfect
>therefore stalinism or fascism is better

This is you. I never said we should change *nothing* about our current system.

Talk about being a fucking brainlet yourself.

Behold the true horseshoe!

stalinism and fascism aren't the only alternatives, retard. you are still defending liberalism
>small apartment, food, clean water, basic healthcare, public education, and a car
those things all existed in the soviet states, dumbass. they also had better access to healthcare than most americans do currently

That is the most USA-centric political spectrum I have ever seen.

>all socialism is stalinism
>every other non-liberal ideology is fascism

>stalinism and fascism aren't the only alternatives

Then give some examples of something that can function in real life and isn't a meme ideology that you wank to in your bed at night.

That, and a lot of directionless rage looking for a scapegoat to ground itself in.

>give me an example but only one that i agree with
yeah nah

ok, so you are just a /pol/fugee shitposter then. Good to know.

Only in the sense that /pol/cucks' methods of engaging in "debate" are literally the same as the leftytards'.

YES, I dont get people that are stuck with having to pick goddamn sides/black and white thinking...

>my side is good and what's good is right, right? w-wait you're not on my side? F-fuck off, I dont conversate with EVIL!

>Alludes to enlightened centrist debating methods
>"I'm totally immune to the internet tribalism and reductive caricatures that you inbred stormfags and triggered SJWs believe in, hahaha."
>"If we apply the golden mean fallacy to every problem the solutions will probably be somewhat functional, maybe."
>"Let's talk about pragmatism with no clearly defined idea of what values should determine our actual goals."

Case in point.

>"I am offended by the discussion of pragmatism
and the lack of clearly define ideas."
>"I will therefore subscribe to clearly defined but very harmful extreme positions because muh clarity."

both national socialism and communism are not opposites of each other but the two sides of the same shekel

Or course

No, it´s just perspective of a liberal.

No. Reducing politics to a binary spectrum is just retarded

>refusing to commit to pre-fabricated ideological answers to questions makes you a fallacious arguer

This is a pretty thorough demolition of your contention:
pseudoerasmus.com/2015/05/03/fascism-left-or-right/
pseudoerasmus.com/2015/05/06/fascists-part-2/

Why the hell do political beliefs always get reduced to a simple linear sliding bar? Shouldn't it be more nuanced than that?

because americans

Am I the only one who thinks this looks kind of like a broken record?

>fucking up the formatting
Hah! Opinion discarded, you absolute FAGGOT.

>posts a blog as a source
Dude come on now. I was rooting for ya up until this.

Kys

POO

nice broscience

>Bernie sanders is a centrist

There needs to be a law that deports all social democrats from the planet

The problem is that horseshoe theory assumes that the center/"default" ideology is moderate liberal democracy, which is an incredibly West-centric worldview. There are definitely some parallels between Stalinism and fascism/Nazism, but they originated from different currents.

>east india trading company

both far left and far right play within the confines of identity politics, while more liberal leaning people reject that matrix all together. This is why the horse shoe meme exist. Also because both sides are authoritarian power worshipping boot lickers

t. butthurt commiefashes

no, it's just a way to smear communism by equating the ussr with nazi germany

Unironically a good post.

umm no sweety its worse ;)

thats... thats not what the picture meant

only fascists think that

Is horshoe theory VLAD>

>I-It's a b-b-b-blog
stunning argumentation

>A theme common to Goldberg, the people at his comments section, and many who have tweeted at me is that fascists should be judged from a classical liberal or a Hayekian perspective. I agree that’s a possible and valid way of looking at things — if you’re interested in an ahistorical ethical or ideological evaluation of fascist economics. Or if you’re interested in characterising a figure from history in terms of the current definitions of left and right.

>But, historically, ‘pro-business’ or ‘pro-property’ fits the definition of the right in politics much better than ‘laissez-faire’. Businesses everywhere and always want pro-business policies — not laissez-faire, unless that happens to be consistent with pro-business at that point in history.

>For example, when tariffs were considered beneficial for business, the pro-business party in the USA supported them during the 19th century, and the more populist party wanted to reduce or eliminate them. It was the same in the UK: the liberals advocated free trade while the conservatives wanted protection. In 1901-2, the Tories sought to abandon free trade, but the liberals waged a successful populist campaign to keep it.

>The common thread to the right in history is not laissez-faire, but the tendency to support business or property. The common thread to the left is to redistribute income and property.

>ayo they was nazis

Jokes on you, I will never breed.

A daring synthesis

Wherever we get deported to will become a Utopia.

No but it sures makes commies butthurt so it's okay.

Yes, it's absolutely valid. Authoritarian regimes are much more similar to one another than any of them are similar to non-authoritarian regimes.

Is that with or without the millions of Mexicans, Africans, Arabs and Turks?

They have directly opposing goals so compromise isn't an option and they use fire to fight fire.

even if you win, muslims are not liberal at all and catholhispanics are a bit commie but not the same kind of leftist as you

the world will never be trigger free, you will just have to commit suicide

i dont even know if this is b8 considering the leftupol shills here

Kinda

Some faggot youtuber made a video on a three-way horseshoe, based on people's perception of ideologies from their own ideological standpoint. I forgot what his name was but it was interesting.