Note that there is no such theory outside of Internet slang. There is no merit in it. Just as horseshoe theory is without merit. There are complex, underlying causes for it making so much sense, but do not be baited by comfort.
In a german state election the BSW, a left wing splinter party, just just gave their support to the afd, an extreme right-wing party, getting fascists in to power within germany for the first time since WW2.
“authoritarianism” is a concept made up by an anti-semetic CIA stooge in order to be able to equivocate between Nazis and communists. Its a completely meaningless term where every definition is either so broad that it describes all states (and almost just all social structures organised for any purpose) or so narrow it is just a synonym for whatever designated enemy you are being told is evil. It’s about as cogent as “badguyism”.
Sure, what would you like links for? The stuff about Hannah Arendt or the critique of the theory of “authoritarianism”? The first I can provide, but let me know more specifically what so I dont overwhelm.
The latter I cannot since the link is just Hannah Arendt and successors works’. I’d encourage you to actually read it with a critical eye and notice how vague it is. It is a theory that only cares about whether a state does stuff, not why or how or for whom or with what support. This is completely silly. Every state is authoritarian, every hierarchical organisation is authoritarian. Its a word used to make you think negatively of a group - Like how enemy states do not have governments, they have regimes and their VPs aren’t VPs they’re “hand picked successors”.
What I would really recommend is that you read “Blackshirts and Reds”, “Inventing Reality” and Engels’ “On Authority”
I personally care a lot more about what the state suppresses, how it does it, for whom it does it, against whom it does it, why it does it, with how much public support it does it and what the effect of it is, rather than some simplistic black-and-white view that merely cares about whether a state does things or not.
Note that there is no such theory outside of Internet slang. There is no merit in it. Just as horseshoe theory is without merit. There are complex, underlying causes for it making so much sense, but do not be baited by comfort.
The only part of horseshoe theory that tracks is that if you go far enough left you get your guns back.
The part that tracks is that authoritarians exist orthogonal to left/right.
And that those unwilling to compromise on anything with anyone tend to get authoritarians
Funny, it’s usually the centrists who partner with and allow authoritarians into power
In a german state election the BSW, a left wing splinter party, just just gave their support to the afd, an extreme right-wing party, getting fascists in to power within germany for the first time since WW2.
Oh, the party of the Kreml-bankrolled ”leftist” backed up the far-right party. Oh my.
The point being they splintered from a true leftist party and were not from the centre.
Moving the goal post. They arose from the SED. They are of leftist origin.
“authoritarianism” is a concept made up by an anti-semetic CIA stooge in order to be able to equivocate between Nazis and communists. Its a completely meaningless term where every definition is either so broad that it describes all states (and almost just all social structures organised for any purpose) or so narrow it is just a synonym for whatever designated enemy you are being told is evil. It’s about as cogent as “badguyism”.
Tankie tears is music for my ears
?
links please, this is certainly unfamiliar
Sure, what would you like links for? The stuff about Hannah Arendt or the critique of the theory of “authoritarianism”? The first I can provide, but let me know more specifically what so I dont overwhelm.
The latter I cannot since the link is just Hannah Arendt and successors works’. I’d encourage you to actually read it with a critical eye and notice how vague it is. It is a theory that only cares about whether a state does stuff, not why or how or for whom or with what support. This is completely silly. Every state is authoritarian, every hierarchical organisation is authoritarian. Its a word used to make you think negatively of a group - Like how enemy states do not have governments, they have regimes and their VPs aren’t VPs they’re “hand picked successors”.
What I would really recommend is that you read “Blackshirts and Reds”, “Inventing Reality” and Engels’ “On Authority”
Stalinism.ml
“Horseshoe theory” is the idea that I don’t really care if I’m being killed by Hitler or Mao if I’m being killed.
Death by centrist is impersonal. It’s your fault for not hustling hard enough for AC.
I personally care a lot more about what the state suppresses, how it does it, for whom it does it, against whom it does it, why it does it, with how much public support it does it and what the effect of it is, rather than some simplistic black-and-white view that merely cares about whether a state does things or not.