6 ms·

Horseshoe theory is real, but there's also the fact that politics has more than one axis. Authoritarianism is the common denominator; only the details vary.

by ronsor 1y ago

fooker 1y ago
Makes sense. If you think you have the best idea, the natural next move is to force everyone to follow that best idea, no room for disagreement or alternatives. This pops up everywhere, everywhere ideology is involved in decisions.
- mrkstu 1y ago
  A recent guest (historian) made that point on the Triggernomitry podcast. Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hitler- they were all 'idealists.' They were in it to improve the human (or some subset thereof) condition. And they weren't going to let anyone get in their way of making things better!
  - fooker 1y ago
    This is what's scary about Elon Musk talking about 'sustainable abundance'.
  - sherr 1y ago
    That guest is Dominic Sandbrook, one half of the excellent "Rest is History" podcast. You can't make an omellete without breaking a few eggs, after all. That was Lenin, supposedly. edit: spelling of "one"
  - sitkack 1y ago
    Idealists in the sense of a simplistic worldview. It is worth a watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf-bSAnW_E0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf-bSAnW_E0 but it itself is a somewhat simplistic take.
  - gtowey 1y ago
    It's probably more accurate to say they were reductionists -- it's easy to imagine an ideal system if you ignore the complexities of reality. Which is why they all failed. I bet it's related to the tendency for narcissism where you believe that you alone have all the right answers.
  - int_19h 1y ago
    On the contrary, Stalin was one of the most brutally pragmatic politicians of the 20th century.
anthem2025 1y ago
[flagged]
- fooker 1y ago
  Okay, click on the wikipedia link and you can find a reasonable number of credible sources the article cites. You can follow citations from these citations to find primary search that shows quite a bit of support for it in academic political science.
  - anthem2025 1y ago
    I think the obvious conclusion from my post is that I don’t find any of those people credible. At all. I’d go so far as to say I think anyone peddling horseshoe theory is a politically illiterate fool regardless of their supposed qualifications. It’s funny that you want me to read the imitation though. “ Several political scientists, psychologists, and sociologists have criticized the horseshoe theory.[3][4][5] Proponents point to a number of perceived similarities between extremes and allege that both tend to support authoritarianism or totalitarianism; political scientists do not appear to support this notion, and instances of peer-reviewed research on the subject are scarce. Existing studies and comprehensive reviews often find only limited support and only under certain conditions; they generally contradict the theory's central premises.”
    - int_19h 1y ago
      I grew up in Russia in early 90s when we had literal Nazis and literal Stalinists openly marching on the streets and running in elections. I don't know what to tell you except that the term "red-brown" became popular for a good reason. (And I'm far left myself, by the way.)
      - anthem2025 1y ago
        That’s nice. It’s not an argument at all IMO, but good for you. > I'm far left myself, by the way So you would, logically, describe yourself as a fascist then?
robocat 1y ago
> politics has more than one axis. The "political compass" has two dimensions: left/right horizontally and authoritarian/libertarian vertically. Unfortunately "political compass" is also for the quadrant memes: https://en.meming.world/wiki/Political_Compass https://en.meming.world/wiki/Political_Compass (which has some good commentary on the compass and great examples). And there's the Nolan Chart: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart which is even more confusing. The word "liberal" is not used in New Zealand much, although perhaps the US meaning is taking hold. Also centrist here is unclear so the Nolan Chart makes no sense to me.
uncircle 1y ago
Which is why it's so fun to see American leftists and rightists get at each other throats, while they share the common denominator of authoritarianism and are more similar than they would like to admit.

Horseshoe theory is real, but there's also the fact that politics has more than one axis. Authoritarianism is the common denominator; only the details vary.

by ronsor 1y ago

Horseshoe theory is real, but there's also the fact that politics has more than one axis. Authoritarianism is the common denominator; only the details vary.

fooker 1y ago

Makes sense. If you think you have the best idea, the natural next move is to force everyone to follow that best idea, no room for disagreement or alternatives. This pops up everywhere, everywhere ideology is involved in decisions.

mrkstu 1y ago
A recent guest (historian) made that point on the Triggernomitry podcast. Stalin, Mao, Castro, Hitler- they were all 'idealists.' They were in it to improve the human (or some subset thereof) condition. And they weren't going to let anyone get in their way of making things better!
- fooker 1y ago
  This is what's scary about Elon Musk talking about 'sustainable abundance'.
- sherr 1y ago
  That guest is Dominic Sandbrook, one half of the excellent "Rest is History" podcast. You can't make an omellete without breaking a few eggs, after all. That was Lenin, supposedly. edit: spelling of "one"
- sitkack 1y ago
  Idealists in the sense of a simplistic worldview. It is worth a watch https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf-bSAnW_E0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf-bSAnW_E0 but it itself is a somewhat simplistic take.
- gtowey 1y ago
  It's probably more accurate to say they were reductionists -- it's easy to imagine an ideal system if you ignore the complexities of reality. Which is why they all failed. I bet it's related to the tendency for narcissism where you believe that you alone have all the right answers.
- int_19h 1y ago
  On the contrary, Stalin was one of the most brutally pragmatic politicians of the 20th century.

anthem2025 1y ago

[flagged]

fooker 1y ago
Okay, click on the wikipedia link and you can find a reasonable number of credible sources the article cites. You can follow citations from these citations to find primary search that shows quite a bit of support for it in academic political science.
- anthem2025 1y ago
  I think the obvious conclusion from my post is that I don’t find any of those people credible. At all. I’d go so far as to say I think anyone peddling horseshoe theory is a politically illiterate fool regardless of their supposed qualifications. It’s funny that you want me to read the imitation though. “ Several political scientists, psychologists, and sociologists have criticized the horseshoe theory.[3][4][5] Proponents point to a number of perceived similarities between extremes and allege that both tend to support authoritarianism or totalitarianism; political scientists do not appear to support this notion, and instances of peer-reviewed research on the subject are scarce. Existing studies and comprehensive reviews often find only limited support and only under certain conditions; they generally contradict the theory's central premises.”
  - int_19h 1y ago
    I grew up in Russia in early 90s when we had literal Nazis and literal Stalinists openly marching on the streets and running in elections. I don't know what to tell you except that the term "red-brown" became popular for a good reason. (And I'm far left myself, by the way.)
    - anthem2025 1y ago
      That’s nice. It’s not an argument at all IMO, but good for you. > I'm far left myself, by the way So you would, logically, describe yourself as a fascist then?

robocat 1y ago

> politics has more than one axis. The "political compass" has two dimensions: left/right horizontally and authoritarian/libertarian vertically. Unfortunately "political compass" is also for the quadrant memes: https://en.meming.world/wiki/Political_Compass https://en.meming.world/wiki/Political_Compass (which has some good commentary on the compass and great examples). And there's the Nolan Chart: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nolan_Chart which is even more confusing. The word "liberal" is not used in New Zealand much, although perhaps the US meaning is taking hold. Also centrist here is unclear so the Nolan Chart makes no sense to me.

uncircle 1y ago

Which is why it's so fun to see American leftists and rightists get at each other throats, while they share the common denominator of authoritarianism and are more similar than they would like to admit.