• @RememberTheApollo_
    link
    -12 days ago

    I don’t think it’s necessarily bullshit as long as one is looking at the overall result. Authoritarianism, tyrants, and dictatorships are what they are, it doesn’t matter much which end of the horseshoe they ended up on. The differences are minimal, it’s what the people are told they’re (not) actually getting by the dictator that makes the difference. Are they getting socialism via communism, or are they getting socialism via a dictator? Maybe some theocratic sprinkles to spice things up?

    I mean, the point of the ends of the horseshoe is that they’re pretty much the same, if you haven’t reached the extreme of totalitarianism or dictatorship or whatever, you haven’t got the horseshoe yet.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      22 days ago

      How do radical ideologies (as percieved by the current status quo) that are non-authoritarian fit in then.

      Say some indigenous groups which had social systems similar to what westerners might call anarcho-communism.

      • @RememberTheApollo_
        link
        02 days ago

        I’m not sure that such a situation applies? IMO the horseshoe was intended to compare large scale negative extremes and such small-scale tribal groups don’t really fit the idea. The point is that the extremes are more similar to each other than the middle, not that a tribal council that favored communist features in governance should be considered an extreme.