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
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

I’ve asked Byers to clarify, but as I read this tweet, it seems that Bret Stephens included an unredacted use of the n-word in his column this week to make a point, and the column got spiked—maybe as a result?

Four times. The column used the n-word (in the context of a quote) four times.

For context: In 2019, a Times reporter was reprimanded for several incidents of racial insensitivity on a trip with high school students, including one in which he used the n-word in a discussion of racial slurs.

That incident became public late last month, and late last week, after 150 Times employees complained about how it had been handled, the reporter in question resigned.

In the course of all that, the Times' executive editor said that the paper does not "tolerate racist language regardless of intent.” This was the quote that Bret Stephens was pushing back against in his column. (Which, again, was deep-sixed by the paper.)

You May Also Like