Horseshoe theory

Proponents of horseshoe theory argue that the extreme left and the extreme right are closer to each other than either is to the political center.

In political science and popular discourse, the horseshoe theory asserts that the extreme left and the extreme right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear political continuum, closely resemble each other, analogous to the way that the opposite ends of a horseshoe are close together.

The theory is attributed to the French philosopher and writer Jean-Pierre Faye. Proponents point to a number of perceived similarities between extremes and allege that both have a tendency to support authoritarianism or totalitarianism. Several political scientists have criticized the theory.

Origin

The horseshoe metaphor was used as early as during the Weimar Republic to describe the ideology of the Black Front.

The later use of the term in political theory was seen in Jean-Pierre Faye's 2002 book Le Siècle des idéologies (The Century of Ideology). Faye's book discussed the use of ideologies (he points out that "ideology" is a pair of Greek words that were joined in French) rooted in philosophy by totalitarian regimes with specific reference to Hitler, Nietzsche, Stalin, and Marx.

Others have attributed the theory as having come from the American sociologists Seymour Martin Lipset and Daniel Bell, as well as the Pluralist school. Because the theory is also popular in Germany, a co-contributor to the theory is said to be the German political scientist Eckhard Jesse.

Modern usage

In a 2006 book, the American political scientist Jeff Taylor wrote: "It may be more useful to think of the Left and the Right as two components of populism, with elitism residing in the Center. The political spectrum may be linear, but it is not a straight line. It is shaped like a horseshoe." In the same year, the term was used in discussing a resurgent hostility towards Jews and a new anti-Semitism from both the extreme left and the extreme right.

In a 2008 essay, Josef Joffe, a visiting fellow at the conservative think tank the Hoover Institution, wrote:

Will globalization survive the gloom? The creeping revolt against globalization actually preceded the Crash of '08. Everywhere in the West, populism began to show its angry face at mid-decade. The two most dramatic instances were Germany and Austria, where populist parties scored big with a message of isolationism, protectionism and redistribution. In Germany, it was left-wing populism ("Die Linke"); in Austria it was a bunch of right-wing parties that garnered almost 30% in the 2008 election. Left and right together illustrated once more the "horseshoe" theory of modern politics: As the iron is bent backward, the two extremes almost touch.

In 2015, the reformist Muslim Maajid Nawaz invoked the horseshoe theory on lamenting a common tendency on both extremes towards the compiling and publishing of "lists of political foes;" he added:

As the political horseshoe theory attributed to Jean-Pierre Faye highlights, if we travel far-left enough, we find the very same sneering, nasty and reckless bully-boy tactics used by the far-right. The two extremes of the political spectrum end up meeting like a horseshoe, at the top, which to my mind symbolizes totalitarian control from above. In their quest for ideological purity, Stalin and Hitler had more in common than modern neo-Nazis and far-left agitators would care to admit.

In a 2018 article for Eurozine, "How Right Is the Left?", Kyrylo Tkachenko wrote about the common cause found recently between both extremes in Ukraine:

The pursuit of a common political agenda is a trend discernible at both extremes of the political spectrum. Though this phenomenon manifests itself primarily through content-related overlaps, I believe there are good reasons to refer to it as a red-brown alliance. Its commonalities are based on shared anti-liberal resentment. Of course, there remain palpable differences between far left and the far right. But we should not underestimate the dangers already posed by these left-right intersections, as well as what we might lose if the resentment-driven backlash becomes mainstream.

In a 2021 article for Reason, Katherine Mangu-Ward wrote:

[Horseshoe] theory is typically used to explain why 20th century communists and fascists seemed to have so much in common, though it likely predates the last century. But in the United States in 2021, a softer version of this iron law is at play, with the center-left and the center-right mushily converging toward expensive authoritarian policies that look astonishingly similar despite their supposedly opposite goals. Still a horseshoe, but more like one of the marshmallow ones you can find in bowls of Lucky Charms.

The theory has also been quoted when referring to American far-right and far-left organisations both supporting Putin in the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Criticism

Horseshoe theory does not enjoy support within academic circles; peer-reviewed research by political scientists on the subject is scarce and existing studies have generally contradicted its central premises.

Chip Berlet has characterized the theory as an oversimplification of political ideologies, ignoring fundamental differences between them.

Paul H. P. Hanel, a research associate, wrote

Likewise, some even argue that all extremists, across the political left and right, in fact, support similar policies, in a view known as "horseshoe theory". However, not only do recent studies fail to support such beliefs, they also contradict them[...] Van Hiel also found that left-wing respondents reported significantly lower endorsement of values associated with conservation, self-enhancement, and anti-immigration attitudes compared to both moderate and right-wing activists, with individuals on the right reporting greater endorsement of such values and attitudes[...] Overall, van Hiel provided evidence demonstrating that Western European extremist groups are far from being homogenous, and left- and right-wing groups represent distinct ideologies.

Leon Trotsky wrote in 1938:

The fundamental feature of [arguments comparing disparate political movements] lies in their completely ignoring the material foundation of the various currents, that is, their class nature and by that token their objective historical role. Instead they evaluate and classify different currents according to some external and secondary manifestation[...] To Hitler, liberalism and Marxism are twins because they ignore "blood and honour". To a democrat, fascism and Bolshevism are twins because they do not bow before universal suffrage[...] Different classes in the name of different aims may in certain instances utilise similar means. Essentially it cannot be otherwise. Armies in combat are always more or less symmetrical; were there nothing in common in their methods of struggle they could not inflict blows upon each other.

Simon Choat, a senior lecturer in political theory at Kingston University, criticizes horseshoe theory from a leftist perspective. He argues that far-left and far-right ideologies only share similarities in the vaguest sense in that they both oppose the liberal democratic status quo; however, the two sides both have very different reasons and very different aims for doing so. Choat uses the issue of globalization as an example; both the far-left and the far-right attack neoliberal globalization and its elites, but have conflicting views on who those elites are and conflicting reasons for attacking them:

For the left, the problem with globalisation is that it has given free rein to capital and entrenched economic and political inequality. The solution is therefore to place constraints on capital and/or to allow people to have the same freedom of movement currently given to capital, goods, and services; they want an alternative globalisation. For the right, the problem with globalisation is that it has corroded supposedly traditional and homogeneous cultural and ethnic communities – their solution is therefore to reverse globalisation, protecting national capital and placing further restrictions on the movement of people.

Choat also argues that although proponents of the horseshoe theory may cite examples of alleged history of collusion between fascists and communists, those on the far-left usually oppose the rise of far-right or fascist regimes in their countries. Instead, he argues that it has been centrists who have supported far-right and fascist regimes that they prefer in power over socialist ones.

See also


This page was last updated at 2022-12-25 08:26 UTC. Update now. View original page.

All our content comes from Wikipedia and under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License.


Top

If mathematical, chemical, physical and other formulas are not displayed correctly on this page, please useFirefox or Safari