Horseshoe theory sets off my bs detector & the divisions on the left leave me at a loss for an explanation- Venn diagram? Another shape? What's going on?
Enter @bastardspod! They really break this down & sort it out in a way that helped me out a lot.

Three of their points I found particularly useful in explaining why the horseshoe looks correct to some or why/how some ppl that look left-ish are really extreme right or take that turn (ally with boogaloo or proud boys, for instance?). 2/10
📍as you go farther left, some are more attracted to authoritarianism or violence like those on the right. BUT this is NOT a horseshoe bc the ideals of left & right are starkly different. That's important - this isn't a horseshoe. 3/10
Their examples are Kessler (of Unite the Right) who started in Occupy Wall St NY & Mussolini who started out against imperialism. Seemingly left-ish ppl turned fascist - why? I agree with the hosts when they said if you're anti-authoritarian, you won't end up a fascist. 4/10
📍(surprise!) toxic masculinity (they don't use those words) or wounded masculine pride is a factor. The pod says~getting the shit kicked out of you can push men in a violent authoritarian direction. Feeling disenfranchised like MRAs and white nationalists seems related too. 5/10
📍authoritarians on left & right align only bc they see what we have now isn't working & they want change - some not really out of a concern for the collective good, equality, well-being - which is a problem. 6/10
It's tempting to want to amass the largest group of ppl possible who want change, but it's actually pretty important to confront fascism & throw that out as soon as possible. That seems obvious, right? 7/10
8/10
I feel like some ppl get confused on what differentiates the left who is anti-capitalist, anti-imperialist, anti-racist, anti-fascist & pro human rights for the collective good vs...
...those who ppl assume are left but are really ready to stir things up & use violence & authoritarianism against others to combat their feelings of helplessness against a system that isn't working for them. 9/10
This confusion/conflation gives centrists and conservatives ammo to say "see, socialism bad" when that's not it at all. I see how they could get confused, but demonizing socialism is a lazy/unhelpful/backwards policy if you're a liberal claiming the moral high ground. 10/10

More from For later read

You May Also Like

A brief analysis and comparison of the CSS for Twitter's PWA vs Twitter's legacy desktop website. The difference is dramatic and I'll touch on some reasons why.

Legacy site *downloads* ~630 KB CSS per theme and writing direction.

6,769 rules
9,252 selectors
16.7k declarations
3,370 unique declarations
44 media queries
36 unique colors
50 unique background colors
46 unique font sizes
39 unique z-indices

https://t.co/qyl4Bt1i5x


PWA *incrementally generates* ~30 KB CSS that handles all themes and writing directions.

735 rules
740 selectors
757 declarations
730 unique declarations
0 media queries
11 unique colors
32 unique background colors
15 unique font sizes
7 unique z-indices

https://t.co/w7oNG5KUkJ


The legacy site's CSS is what happens when hundreds of people directly write CSS over many years. Specificity wars, redundancy, a house of cards that can't be fixed. The result is extremely inefficient and error-prone styling that punishes users and developers.

The PWA's CSS is generated on-demand by a JS framework that manages styles and outputs "atomic CSS". The framework can enforce strict constraints and perform optimisations, which is why the CSS is so much smaller and safer. Style conflicts and unbounded CSS growth are avoided.