3 ms·

Are you saying that the far right and the far left have the same policies? If they have different policies, how are they the same? Are they essentially the same

Are you saying that the far right and the far left have the same policies? If they have different policies, how are they the same? Are they essentially the same? Does that mean the content of one's political beliefs is not essential to their political identity? I don't get it so please clarify.

dijit 9y ago
Political beliefs are on a horseshoe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory The far left and far right have similar policies but for different reasons. The far right will censor to ensure that nobody questions the regime. But the far left will censor to ensure nobody questions the idea of the day. Which is functionally equivalent to a social regime.
- danharaj 9y ago
  There's a criticism section specifically answering the point you're trying to make, mate. Am I supposed to accept Horseshoe Theory because it has a wikipedia page? All that means is that people hold the view that extreme ideologies are the same. I already acknowledged that people hold that view. > The far right will censor to ensure that nobody questions the regime. But the far left will censor to ensure nobody questions the idea of the day. Which is functionally equivalent to a social regime. Ok, I see. Your politics boil down to what you can say or cannot say in public without being publicly criticized.
travmatt 9y ago
Not OP, and US centric, but far left and far right are both united in seeing the status quo as their enemy, and both believe they're better able to harness any chaos that will ensue from overthrowing it. That's why you had Snowden and Jill Stein throwing soft support to Trump, telling their followers that the previous election was a choice between Goldman Sachs (who apprarently clinton represented) and freedom from banker rule (which apparently trump represented), and why you have Bernie supporters now attacking minority centrist candidates, who would be a challenge to him in democratic primaries. It's pretty standard for any revolution, to be able to come together to kill the status quo without necessarily needing to agree on what would come next.
- matt4077 9y ago
  > but far left and far right are both united in seeing the status quo as their enemy That's just a truism. The extremes of the political spectrum are, by definition, not the mainstream that defines the status quo.
  - travmatt 9y ago
    Then that truism should make it self evident why the far left and far right have the same goals.
    - danharaj 9y ago
      "Once we throw out everything that makes them different, they're the same." Going 500 miles north of here is the same as going 500 miles south of here because they are both going away from here.
      - travmatt 9y ago
        Or maybe people that have the same short term goals, actually have the same short term goals and should be treated as though they have the same short term goals. Other than the fact they have the same short term goals, they're totally different.
cirgue 9y ago
> Does that mean the content of one's political beliefs is not essential to their political identity If your political ideology allows you to think that 'people who disagree with me about policy but agree with me in principle are still bad people and deserve as much righteous indignation as I can muster from others' then no, the virtue of your particular policy positions do not distinguish you in any meaningful way. That attitude is how the Republican party manages to churn out bulllshit platforms year after year
- danharaj 9y ago
  How about we talk about Trump's actual policies. Let's take healthcare specifically. If Trump and the republican congress's healthcare policy were put into effect, millions of people would lose their health insurance. I know how shitty it can be to go about health insurance with a chronic illness. I expect thousands of people to die if this policy were put into place. What the fuck does it mean to disagree with me about policy but agree with me in principle, in this case? Am I supposed to ignore the fact that political decisions impact the material lives of actual human beings? Am I supposed to play polite with politics that will harm people I care about because it's more important to agree in principle than to agree on actual concrete policy? People who complain about how close-minded it is to be vehemently against Trump and by corollary people who put Trump into power never mention actual policies and how those policy differences actually impact people. It is always vague statements about politics in the abstract. Politics in the abstract is never the reason for anything.
  - supremesaboteur 9y ago
    If you listen to these types of arguments you would think that the Democrats have figured out how to synthesize healthcare out of thin air and the Republicans are putting a stop to it
    - heurist 9y ago
      Democrats have produced several viable options based on existing models across the world. The ACA was the most conservative option and Republicans still fought to stop it.

dijit 9y ago

Political beliefs are on a horseshoe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory The far left and far right have similar policies but for different reasons. The far right will censor to ensure that nobody questions the regime. But the far left will censor to ensure nobody questions the idea of the day. Which is functionally equivalent to a social regime.

danharaj 9y ago
There's a criticism section specifically answering the point you're trying to make, mate. Am I supposed to accept Horseshoe Theory because it has a wikipedia page? All that means is that people hold the view that extreme ideologies are the same. I already acknowledged that people hold that view. > The far right will censor to ensure that nobody questions the regime. But the far left will censor to ensure nobody questions the idea of the day. Which is functionally equivalent to a social regime. Ok, I see. Your politics boil down to what you can say or cannot say in public without being publicly criticized.

travmatt 9y ago

Not OP, and US centric, but far left and far right are both united in seeing the status quo as their enemy, and both believe they're better able to harness any chaos that will ensue from overthrowing it. That's why you had Snowden and Jill Stein throwing soft support to Trump, telling their followers that the previous election was a choice between Goldman Sachs (who apprarently clinton represented) and freedom from banker rule (which apparently trump represented), and why you have Bernie supporters now attacking minority centrist candidates, who would be a challenge to him in democratic primaries. It's pretty standard for any revolution, to be able to come together to kill the status quo without necessarily needing to agree on what would come next.

matt4077 9y ago
> but far left and far right are both united in seeing the status quo as their enemy That's just a truism. The extremes of the political spectrum are, by definition, not the mainstream that defines the status quo.
- travmatt 9y ago
  Then that truism should make it self evident why the far left and far right have the same goals.
  - danharaj 9y ago
    "Once we throw out everything that makes them different, they're the same." Going 500 miles north of here is the same as going 500 miles south of here because they are both going away from here.
    - travmatt 9y ago
      Or maybe people that have the same short term goals, actually have the same short term goals and should be treated as though they have the same short term goals. Other than the fact they have the same short term goals, they're totally different.

cirgue 9y ago

> Does that mean the content of one's political beliefs is not essential to their political identity If your political ideology allows you to think that 'people who disagree with me about policy but agree with me in principle are still bad people and deserve as much righteous indignation as I can muster from others' then no, the virtue of your particular policy positions do not distinguish you in any meaningful way. That attitude is how the Republican party manages to churn out bulllshit platforms year after year

danharaj 9y ago
How about we talk about Trump's actual policies. Let's take healthcare specifically. If Trump and the republican congress's healthcare policy were put into effect, millions of people would lose their health insurance. I know how shitty it can be to go about health insurance with a chronic illness. I expect thousands of people to die if this policy were put into place. What the fuck does it mean to disagree with me about policy but agree with me in principle, in this case? Am I supposed to ignore the fact that political decisions impact the material lives of actual human beings? Am I supposed to play polite with politics that will harm people I care about because it's more important to agree in principle than to agree on actual concrete policy? People who complain about how close-minded it is to be vehemently against Trump and by corollary people who put Trump into power never mention actual policies and how those policy differences actually impact people. It is always vague statements about politics in the abstract. Politics in the abstract is never the reason for anything.
- supremesaboteur 9y ago
  If you listen to these types of arguments you would think that the Democrats have figured out how to synthesize healthcare out of thin air and the Republicans are putting a stop to it
  - heurist 9y ago
    Democrats have produced several viable options based on existing models across the world. The ACA was the most conservative option and Republicans still fought to stop it.