The Australian today publishes Newspoll’s quarterly state and demographic breakdowns, the latter encompassing gender, age, education, income, working status, language, religion and housing tenure. This encompasses four Newspoll surveys conducted from mid-April to late June, with a combined sample of 4957, breaking down to 1567 for New South Wales down to 368 for South Australia.
The results show Labor deteriorating by a point on two-party preferred in four of the five mainland states, with the Coalition leading for the first time this term in New South Wales, by 51-49; increasing its lead in Queensland to 54-46; and continuing to trail in Victoria, by 54-46, and South Australia, by 53-47. Conversely, the volatile small sample result for Western Australia has Labor back in front by 52-48, after a 54-46 Labor lead in the last quarter of 2023 became a Coalition lead of 51-49 in January-to-March.
A few other bits and pieces from the past fortnight:
• The resignation of Western Australian Senator Fatima Payman from the ALP this week was the party’s first defection since it came to office, reducing its numbers in the 76-seat chamber to 25, with the Coalition on 31 (down one since the election with the resignation of Victorian Senator David Van in June 2023), Greens 11 (down one since February 2023 with Victorian Senator Lidia Thorpe’s resignation), One Nation two, Jacqui Lambie Network one (down one since March with Tasmanian Senator Tammy Tyrell’s resignation), United Australia Party one and five independents (the four aforementioned plus ACT Senator David Pocock).
• Nine Newspapers reports an alliance of Muslim groups that has been in talks with Glenn Druery “plans to run candidates against half-a-dozen Labor MPs in the lower house and in the Senate”. Alexi Demetriadi of The Australian reports target seats include Tony Burke’s seat of Watson, Jason Clare’s seat of Blaxland, and Wills in Lalor in Melbourne. The groups in question include The Muslim Vote, modelled on a similar enterprise in the UK that contributed to the loss of four Labour seats to independents yesterday in areas with large Muslim populations. The BBC reporting Labour’s vote share fell 23 points in seats where Muslims accounted for more than 20% of the population. Fatima Payman said she had met with the group last month, but said yesterday she did not intend to collaborate with them.
• Sean Ford of the Burnie Advocate reports Burnie deputy mayor Giovanna Simpson has nominated for Liberal preselection in Braddon, which will be vacated after incumbent Gavin Pearce announced his retirement a fortnight ago. Simpson ran in Braddon at the state election and polled 2.6%, the highest out of the non-incumbent candidates on the Liberal ticket.
Yes, because “death penalty enforced by the government” and “option for painless death given to those who choose it facing a life imprisoned” are the exact same thing…
@Entropy
There’s no set trial yet for Tate in Romania because he’s taken action to appeal the charges. Looks like he’s going to try and drag this on for years.
US Senate polling by Republican outfit Remington Research
Pennsylvania – Casey (D) vs. McCormick (R): 49-48 (D+1)
Ohio – Brown (D) vs. Moreno (R): 50-44 (D+6)
Montana – Tester (D) vs. Sheehy (R): 45-50 (R+5)
Nevada – Rosen (D) vs. Brown (R): 48-46 (D+2)
Arizona – Gallego (D) vs. Lake (R): 47-47 (Tie)
Wisconsin – Baldwin (D) vs. Hovde (R): 48-48 (Tie)
Michigan – Slotkin (D) vs. Rogers (R): 47-43 (D+4)
Texas – Allred (D) vs. Cruz (R): 43-53 (R+10)
Probably meaningless since it’s polling by a Republican-aligned outlet, but it’s polling nonetheless. Jon Tester in Montana looks like he’s in trouble while Ted Cruz in Texas looks fairly safe.
Lordbainsays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 3:32 pm
Yes, because “death penalty enforced by the government” and “option for painless death given to those who choose it facing a life imprisoned” are the exact same thing…
=================================================
There are very specific conditions we allow euthanasia in some states. While i support those laws and even expansion of those conditions in some cases. This is not a situation i would expand euthanasia laws to cover.
@C@T
“The Lunar Left and the Rabid Right joining hands across the horseshoe.”
And the spineless, milquetoast centre sticking with the safe, uncontroversial and utterly-bereft-of-solutions status-quo, no matter how many working class people suffer or stagnate because of it.
No matter how many times you repeat it, C@t, the Horseshoe ‘Theory’ is the political science equivalent of astrology/palm reading/phrenology/ *insert totally evidence-free woo-woo philosophy you’d like here*.
But keep on repeating it. It goes down well in this centrist echo-chamber 🙂
Lordbain @ #1439 Thursday, July 11th, 2024 – 3:04 pm
Yep that’s what I’m saying.
Kirsdarkesays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 3:33 pm
@Entropy
There’s no set trial yet for Tate in Romania because he’s taken action to appeal the charges. Looks like he’s going to try and drag this on for years.
======================================================
Thanks, that is very unfortunate. The sooner his violent misogynistic ideology stops getting air on the internet, the better. Cracking down on him and others like him on the internet. Should be one of the first priorities on the war against domestic violence. He obviously has a lot of appeal to a certain sort of male in the younger generation. With some unscrupulous right wing politicians seem to be even promoting his deranged ideas. I assume to win votes in a younger generation, which in general want vote for them. He is the misogynistic equivalent of vapes and his deranged ideas appear to be nearly as addictive for some heading down that particular rabbit hole
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-64125045
The fossil fuel cartel vampires should be politically staked by the voters.
c@t: “Rex Douglas, a life sentence, and we have an expert here right now, Andrew-Earlwood, is only about 20 years. A lot can change in an inmate’s life in that time. Primary thing being that they can be paroled and go back to their life. If they agree to die at some stage of their sentence when they may be feeling really depressed, there’s no coming back. Something they may live to regret. But can’t. Because they’re dead.”
———————————————————————————
An US academic article I read some years back (but unfortunately I can’t find it online) suggested that, if they are not diagnosed as psychopaths, most men who are prone to commit violent crimes have calmed down enough by their early 40s to be relatively safe to let back into the community. It suggested that it would conceivably be possible to identify such men at a relatively early stage in their criminal careers and then lock them up as a preventive measure.
The article suggested that, in the absence of such measures, the overwhelming majority will just go on committing worse and worse crimes until they do get locked up for a very long spell.
I don’t really see how the idea of preventively locking young men up to protect the community could ever be a goer. But it’s an interesting thought, and far less objectionable IMO than the death penalty.
Rex Douglassays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 3:56 pm
“The science is clear: offshore wind farms don’t hurt whales. If you’ve heard o’wise, it’s because of a disinfo campaign funded by fossil fuel interests.The idea was dreamed up by conservative think tanks along with phrases like ‘wind factories’…” https://t.co/wPfXAZQpRN— Peter FitzSimons (@Peter_Fitz) July 11, 2024
The fossil fuel cartel vampires should be politically staked by the voters.
=========================================================
While oil spills kill a huge amount of wildlife including whales.
https://www.nbcnews.com/id/wbna42340813
In fact the most likely way an offshore wind turbine could be involved in a whale death. Would be if the ship involved in building/servicing the site had an accident, including a fuel spill.
The horseshoe theory works for me. The lunar left and the lunar right are both purveyors of dangerous fairy stories that appeal to people in western countries who feel that they are losing their agency and, most importantly, their access to the sort of comfortable lifestyle enjoyed by their parents’ generation.
Like most good fairy stories, these ones feature a wicked witch, who might be given the name “capitalism” or “neoliberalism” or, in the case of the lunar right, “the liberal elites.”
Isn’t it funny how the word “liberal” features in the stories told by both sides of the horseshoe. It makes sense, because the one element all these movements share is a fundamental illiberalism: often expressed as a desire to silence and humiliate their opponents.
meher baba says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:08 pm
The horseshoe theory works for me. The lunar left and the lunar right are both purveyors of dangerous fairy stories that appeal to people in western countries who feel that they are losing their agency and, most importantly, their access to the sort of comfortable lifestyle enjoyed by their parents’ generation.
_____________________________________________
While the brand ideologies differ, at their heart each proposes autocratic authoritarianism and heavy restrictions on individual freedom for those who even move an inch beyond orthodoxy.
In that most important regard it is a case of same-same. The ideological positioning with villains and heroes, so much of concern to players here, is just window-dressing in the authoritarian anti-democratic project.
The Washington Post reports Israel and Hamas have both signalled acceptance that in phase two of the ceasefire deal ‘neither Hamas nor Israel would rule Gaza’, and that security would be ‘provided by a force trained by the United States and backed by moderate Arab allies’.
Again, no1 in the actual field claims horseshoe theory to be a thing… so maybe a case of dunning kruger by some here?
Lordbainsays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:15 pm
Again, no1 in the actual field claims horseshoe theory to be a thing… so maybe a case of dunning kruger by some here?
=================================================
So who came up with horseshoe theory?
What field were they in?
HHB
Good. As long as Hamas goes, I’m happy.
Next step, the Taliban.
Entropy @ #1464 Thursday, July 11th, 2024 – 4:18 pm
At a guess, I’d say a group of political milquetoasts, huddled together in the centre for mutual protection, deathly afraid of both ends of the political spectrum.
Entropy, that would be a philosopher (Jean-Pierre Faye), based of his observations in WW2, and basically that because Germany and the Soviets invaded Poland, the extremes were the same.
So not only does this ignore history (again, note that the Soviets sought alliance with the West before the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact because they knew very well that any peace with the Nazis would be short-lived, and needed as long as possible to prepare; this should also go without saying, but I think the Soviet government was evil, and the only loss in its death was the end of multipolar world balance) but it also ignores that putting things as simple left centre right is a useless simplification of actual policy.
Again, I would like someone to list what the far left and far right have in common other then “doesnt agree with the current system” and “doesnt really like the centre”.
But then again, im sure someone with a pithy one liner will come along and ignore the actual point…
@meher baba
“The horseshoe theory works for me. The lunar left and the lunar right are both purveyors of dangerous fairy stories that appeal to people in western countries who feel that they are losing their agency and, most importantly, their access to the sort of comfortable lifestyle enjoyed by their parents’ generation.
Like most good fairy stories, these ones feature a wicked witch, who might be given the name “capitalism” or “neoliberalism” or, in the case of the lunar right, “the liberal elites.”
Isn’t it funny how the word “liberal” features in the stories told by both sides of the horseshoe. It makes sense, because the one element all these movements share is a fundamental illiberalism: often expressed as a desire to silence and humiliate their opponents.”
1. I’m glad Horseshoe Theory works for you. For people who actually study this stuff for a living and dive into things like, you know, evidence and logic, it makes about as much sense as astrology does to astrophysicists or phrenology does to neuroscientists. But you do you.
2. The reason ‘both sides’ tend to use liberal as a slur is largely a result of the Overton Window shifting so far to the right that reactionaries actually think centre-right policies and positions now are communist, as well as a general misunderstanding as to the economic and social philosophy of liberalism. It’s funny – centrists are always hand-wringing over agency, free speech, individualism, tolerance of opponents, ‘the marketplace of ideas’ and democratic virtue…except for in the workplace! Whenever anyone argues that these virtues should, for any consistency in ethical application, be instituted in the workplace we get the predictable cries of ‘capital flight!’, ‘unrealistic!’, ‘bad for growth!’ and all the other centrist pearl-clutching that happens whenever anyone dares challenge the INCREDIBLY illiberal economic model at the foundation of all Western nations. You know, the model that depends and thrives off the exploitation of incredibly vulnerable and poor people in the global south to produce the things that we in the West think come from our own genius and work ethic – go and talk to them about how enlightened and liberal you are.
I’ve not even gone into the total ignorance of power dynamics that centrists simply refuse to incorporate into their analysis, but to be honest it’s largely a waste of time getting into the nitty-gritty with people who actually give any quarter or credence to a thoroughly discredited and academically unsound pile of pigeon shit like ‘Horseshoe Theory’.
… don’t protest unless a Nazi, that way there’s a police escort.
Anyone else goes to jail over inconveniencing …
(First Dog on the Moon)
Here’s the Wikipedia article
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_theory
________________________________________
The main objectors seem to be ideologues of the left, but also the right to some extent, who are outraged by the concept and seek to differentiate between the ideologies, rather than the outcomes in practice. It’s the very thing that Orwell addressed in Nineteen Eighty-Four.
At the end of the day, both extremist ideologies, whatever the difference in content, lead in actuality to brutal regimes that blight the lives of many if not most of its citizens. Ideologies never survive reality. They can’t because they exist only in theory not in practice. Like purist economics of the right and left varieties, to which these ideologies are closely aligned.
And there is your horseshoe.
Lordbainsays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:24 pm
Entropy, that would be a philosopher (Jean-Pierre Faye), based of his observations in WW2, and basically that because Germany and the Soviets invaded Poland, the extremes were the same.
So not only does this ignore history (again, note that the Soviets sought alliance with the West before the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact because they knew very well that any peace with the Nazis would be short-lived, and needed as long as possible to prepare; this should also go without saying, but I think the Soviet government was evil, and the only loss in its death was the end of multipolar world balance) but it also ignores that putting things as simple left centre right is a useless simplification of actual policy.
Again, I would like someone to list what the far left and far right have in common other then “doesnt agree with the current system” and “doesnt really like the centre”.
But then again, im sure someone with a pithy one liner will come along and ignore the actual point…
=================================================
I think you’ll find when most people quote the horseshoe theory on PB. They not writing a long thesis trying to say the extremes of both sides show broad general convergence. There generally doing it on a single issue. To what extent they believe that the single issue involved is indicative of the whole is debatable too. It generally used as throw away line in a specific circumstance. It is probably not something to get to carried away with though.
Lordbain says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:15 pm
Again, no1 in the actual field claims horseshoe theory to be a thing… so maybe a case of dunning kruger by some here?
_____
Tut, tut. I have recently provided academic links addressed to your good self on how radicalisation at either extreme have commonalities. You state you do not like repetition so surely I don’t need to? 😉
Now here is one for A_E.
A Sydney businessman has been charged with 10 counts of rape after paying sex workers with dud checks.
https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/sydney-businessman-charged-with-raping-10-women-in-case-unlike-any-other-20240711-p5jsqm.html#
sne
2. The reason ‘both sides’ tend to use liberal as a slur is largely a result of the Overton Window shifting so far to the right that reactionaries actually think centre-right policies and positions now are communist, as well as a general misunderstanding as to the economic and social philosophy of liberalism. It’s funny – centrists are always hand-wringing over agency, free speech, individualism, tolerance of opponents, ‘the marketplace of ideas’ and democratic virtue…except for in the workplace! Whenever anyone argues that these virtues should, for any consistency in ethical application, be instituted in the workplace we get the predictable cries of ‘capital flight!’, ‘unrealistic!’, ‘bad for growth!’ and all the other centrist pearl-clutching that happens whenever anyone dares challenge the INCREDIBLY illiberal economic model at the foundation of all Western nations. You know, the model that depends and thrives off the exploitation of incredibly vulnerable and poor people in the global south to produce the things that we in the West think come from our own genius and work ethic – go and talk to them about how enlightened and liberal you are.
________________________________________
This is the sort of gobbledegook that one can expect from left-wing ideologues. To the extent that it makes any sense at all it reeks of cognitive dissonance (especially taking into consideration the accusations of same-same in regard to the ALP government and the previous Coalition government).
VTC Et3e says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:33 pm
… don’t protest unless a Nazi, that way there’s a police escort.
Anyone else goes to jail over inconveniencing …
(First Dog on the Moon)
________________________________________________
If that were true and not bullshit hyperbole, that would make all the authorised peaceful pro-Palestinian protests in recent times full of nazis.
Griff, and I would point out that there’s points where every political concept has overlap; ie, the sheer amount of positions that agree that capitalism is the greatest, and then disagree on pretty much everything.
So identifying where theres an overlap and shouting “horseshoe theory!” is as useful as pointing out where the centre and fascists meet and shouting “fishhook theory!”.
I mean, most centrists and far right people iv met support capitalism and dislike the left… coincidence? (and lets not get started again on the historical role the centre right/centrists have played in empowering the right; hell, only today Macron is seeking to form a coalition to fight both the far right and left, ignoring that a) when he tried this last time it only empowered the right, and b) that basically he came third…)
And I notice that the wiki link given literally notes “The horseshoe theory does not enjoy wide support within academic circles; peer-reviewed research by political scientists on the subject is scarce, and existing studies and comprehensive reviews have often contradicted its central premises, or found only limited support for the theory under certain conditions”
Also if you think 1984 was Orwell criticising communism/the far left, then oh boy you need to go back to school chum.
Entropy, your right, but horseshoe theory is a pet peeve on mine, the same way that if you talk to a biologist about creationism you can see their souls die just a little…
Oakeshott Country:
Was it dud Czechs who conducted the dud checks on the dud cheques?
Not sure Fargo but he did order extras including double acts and a Trump (Golden Shower) and still didn’t pay
Given the numerous time the Greens have combined with the coalition to block or defer sensible Labor reforms, I would say that they are both reactionary.
I took great delight in putting Labor first and the Greens last in the recent Brisbane council election.
TPOF
I don’t have to prove Horseshoe theory.
However let’s say it’s true. It does not apply to a democracy. If you are democratic and accept multiple parties with checks and balances the rule of law including human rights the so called Horseshoe theory is the wrong tool to use in an argument, You are just not talking to some advocating for a dictatorship of one kind or another,
Fargoe, how does that mesh with the fact that on record the Libs and Labor work together more then the Greens and Coalition do?
Is this another classic example of “its bad when the other team does it, but not when mine does it?”
TPOF @ #1474 Thursday, July 11th, 2024 – 4:39 pm
Yeah. They are full of vituperation for those that deal in reality. And that’s about it. No means to achieve their desired ends though.
Hey CAT, you still defending Minns supporting gambling on ANZAC day but not food and essential shopping?
Man, you truly are the model of a modern Labor rusted on 😉
Lordbain says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:52 pm
Fargoe, how does that mesh with the fact that on record the Libs and Labor work together more then the Greens and Coalition do?
___________________________________________
Do they?
Also if you think 1984 was Orwell criticising communism/the far left, then oh boy you need to go back to school chum.
________________________________________________
Orwell was critiquing totalitarianism of whatever colour.
@TPOF
“This is the sort of gobbledegook that one can expect from left-wing ideologues. ”
I know. Big words confuse you. It’s alright, we’ve all been there.
“The main objectors seem to be ideologues of the left, but also the right to some extent, who are outraged by the concept and seek to differentiate between the ideologies, rather than the outcomes in practice. It’s the very thing that Orwell addressed in Nineteen Eighty-Four.”
Shooting the messengers. Nice. All those pesky, evil Marxist academics conspiring to destroy the centre, hey? Tell me – who now has a conspiratorial predilection for explaining something unpalatable? How do you respond to this, from your oh-so deep and reflective dive into the lofty academic world of…Wikipedia?
“A 2022 study about antisemitism concluded: “On all items, the far left has lower agreement with these statements relative to moderates, and the far right has higher agreement with these statements compared to moderates. Contrary to a ‘horseshoe’ theory, the evidence reveals increasing antisemitism moving from left to right.”
Anti-intellectualism and hostility to academia aren’t exactly liberal, enlightenment virtues, buddy 🙂
@Griff
“Tut, tut. I have recently provided academic links addressed to your good self on how radicalisation at either extreme have commonalities. You state you do not like repetition so surely I don’t need to?”
I actually read that article and I agree with the findings. After all, I am thoroughly distressed with how international capitalism seems to be driving our world towards an unliveable climate catastrophe, and how completely and utterly frustrating it is to feel powerless and vulnerable in the face of such a thing. But sure – wanting to hold the purveyors of these systems and organisations to strict account is exactly the same as blaming the Jews for all my ills and wanting to gas them all to death. I would argue that the accuracy of a theory is completely independent from the personality of it’s proponents – Sir Isaac Newton was a vicious, grumpy, selfish little pissant who actually had people executed under his authority as Warden of the Royal Mint, and this has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not his Laws of Motion are correct.
Lordbain says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:43 pm
Griff, and I would point out that there’s points where every political concept has overlap; ie, the sheer amount of positions that agree that capitalism is the greatest, and then disagree on pretty much everything.
So identifying where theres an overlap and shouting “horseshoe theory!” is as useful as pointing out where the centre and fascists meet and shouting “fishhook theory!”.
I mean, most centrists and far right people iv met support capitalism and dislike the left… coincidence? (and lets not get started again on the historical role the centre right/centrists have played in empowering the right; hell, only today Macron is seeking to form a coalition to fight both the far right and left, ignoring that a) when he tried this last time it only empowered the right, and b) that basically he came third…)
And I notice that the wiki link given literally notes “The horseshoe theory does not enjoy wide support within academic circles; peer-reviewed research by political scientists on the subject is scarce, and existing studies and comprehensive reviews have often contradicted its central premises, or found only limited support for the theory under certain conditions”
Also if you think 1984 was Orwell criticising communism/the far left, then oh boy you need to go back to school chum.
Entropy, your right, but horseshoe theory is a pet peeve on mine, the same way that if you talk to a biologist about creationism you can see their souls die just a little…
________
In reverse order,
1. Political theory is not the same thing as Biology. False equivalence.
2. I might still be at school. Perhaps that is why I think Orwell was critiquing Stalinism (among others)?
3. Wikipedia provides useful summary but is not the best reference to refute a study (which I previously linked)
4. anecdata from a person with skin in the game? You may use Capitalism to draw a link. How about civil liberties? Both human rights and economic systems are adjacent to political theory.
5. You had a go at Macron prior to the election to say they the centralists won’t remove themselves from the ballot when placed 3 or lower. You were wRONg. Are you sure you want to come back for seconds?
Griff @ #1472 Thursday, July 11th, 2024 – 4:35 pm
What a bunch of elitists the Lordbrain Greens types are! *sniff* ‘No one in the actual field…’ Pfft!
So, what happens when I google ‘Horseshoe Theory’? Well, blow me down, someone ‘in the actual field’ has described it:
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horseshoe_Theory
TPOF, how about you show me the numbers that show the Greens and Libs work together more and ill show you mine.
Heres some work by an actual political scientist, based on actual data;
Sharing the Same Political Ideology Yet Endorsing Different Values: Left- and Right-Wing Political Supporters Are More Heterogeneous Than Moderates
With findings summarised as follows;
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.
Or this one; https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10659129221111081
Antisemitic Attitudes Across the Ideological Spectrum
“On all items, the far left has lower agreement with these statements relative to moderates, and the far right has higher agreement with these statements compared to moderates. Contrary to a ‘horseshoe’ theory, the evidence reveals increasing antisemitism moving from left to right.”
Now, please show me the studies that support horseshoe theory, noting that for this purpose it is defined as asserting that advocates of the far-left and the far-right, rather than being at opposite and opposing ends of a linear continuum of the political spectrum, closely resemble each other, analogous to the way that the opposite ends of a horseshoe are close together.
Sne says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:57 pm
@TPOF
“This is the sort of gobbledegook that one can expect from left-wing ideologues. ”
I know. Big words confuse you. It’s alright, we’ve all been there.
“The main objectors seem to be ideologues of the left, but also the right to some extent, who are outraged by the concept and seek to differentiate between the ideologies, rather than the outcomes in practice. It’s the very thing that Orwell addressed in Nineteen Eighty-Four.”
Shooting the messengers. Nice. All those pesky, evil Marxist academics conspiring to destroy the centre, hey? Tell me – who now has a conspiratorial predilection for explaining something unpalatable? How do you respond to this, from your oh-so deep and reflective dive into the lofty academic world of…Wikipedia?
“A 2022 study about antisemitism concluded: “On all items, the far left has lower agreement with these statements relative to moderates, and the far right has higher agreement with these statements compared to moderates. Contrary to a ‘horseshoe’ theory, the evidence reveals increasing antisemitism moving from left to right.”
Anti-intellectualism and hostility to academia aren’t exactly liberal, enlightenment virtues, buddy
@Griff
“Tut, tut. I have recently provided academic links addressed to your good self on how radicalisation at either extreme have commonalities. You state you do not like repetition so surely I don’t need to?”
I actually read that article and I agree with the findings. After all, I am thoroughly distressed with how international capitalism seems to be driving our world towards an unliveable climate catastrophe, and how completely and utterly frustrating it is to feel powerless and vulnerable in the face of such a thing. But sure – wanting to hold the purveyors of these systems and organisations to strict account is exactly the same as blaming the Jews for all my ills and wanting to gas them all to death. I would argue that the accuracy of a theory is completely independent from the personality of it’s proponents – Sir Isaac Newton was a vicious, grumpy, selfish little pissant who actually had people executed under his authority as Warden of the Royal Mint, and this has absolutely zero bearing on whether or not his Laws of Motion are correct.
_______
And you want to equate political theory to physics? That is arguably worse than biology 🙂
Lordbainsays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:43 pm
Griff, and I would point out that there’s points where every political concept has overlap; ie, the sheer amount of positions that agree that capitalism is the greatest, and then disagree on pretty much everything.
====================================================
Maybe horseshoe theory has been applied to the wrong political spectrum. It shouldn’t be applied to the left vs right political spectrum but the libertarian vs authoritarian political spectrum. Possibly at the extremes libertarian and authoritarian values become intermixed. So take Trump, as an example of these extremes. He is a libertarian as much as he believes he should be able to do anything and not be bound by the law. He is authoritarian as he believes his power over everyone else should be absolute. Fortunately we can just label him an extreme narcissist and not worry about applying horseshoe theory here though.
Kirsdarke @ #1451 Thursday, July 11th, 2024 – 3:33 pm
That guy has a LOT in common with Trump.
Sne
I know. Big words confuse you. It’s alright, we’ve all been there.
_________________________________________
Nup. Big words don’t confuse me. Big words used by people who piece them together in ways that would sent James Joyce’s head spinning confuse me. Ad hominem abuse, which is what you then go on to indulge yourself in is not really interesting – although I did understand that. Also, this weird thing about “shooting the messenger”. These hypothesists (how’s that for a big word) are not messengers, except for the dissemination of their own dirgeful self-referential nonsense.
Re Horseshoe Theory, I’ve often thought that extremists for any cause more closely resemble each other than they do the moderates for their cause, in their absolute certainty, their utter ruthlessness in achieving their objectives and their intolerance of other views, not least more moderate versions of their own.
Hey Griff, if your going to do this, then actually take a good shot;
With regards to Macron; heres an article pointing out how much he vilified the left going into the elections
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/07/02/french-elections-macron-made-key-mistakes-vilified-the-left.html
Heres an article pointing out how there was no unified message about dropping out to support the left, while the left did have a unified message to support the centrists
https://www.theguardian.com/world/article/2024/jul/01/french-left-centrists-scramble-unite-against-far-right-election-runoff
Note that while the left had a unified message, Macrons was supporting “only clearly republican and democratic” which would by his own admission exclude the France Unbowed (LFI) party of Jean-Luc Mélenchon. The left said Macron’s position, and that of his centrists, had to be made more clear.
Also your study is about the sense of certainty voters have, and its relationship to either the left or right… and? As noted, you found one shared commonality, and then used this to say “look, they are both the same!” My study (which you seem to claim ignores populism even though it doesnt but anyway) notes that the centre and the right share a favouring of autocratic systems… does this mean that fish hook theory is right?
Also, the biology comparison is an analogy, and I am very well aware the differences of the hard sciences and the soft sciences.
And the comment about 1984 was directed at TPOF.
Cool, lets use civil liberties; are we talking about theocratic systems? We talking anarchic? We talking left anarchist vs right anarchist? We talking soc dems vs ancaps vs monarchists?
Thats the point; the moment you look at the sheer volume of the systems, you can find commonalities of at least 1 point between most, even those that are extreme polar opposites. But thats like saying “hitler liked x, ergo your a nazi” its a stupid argument that doesnt actually say anything.
Lordbain says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 5:00 pm
TPOF, how about you show me the numbers that show the Greens and Libs work together more and ill show you mine.
__________________________________________-
You were the one who asserted the opposite. I just questioned it. He who asserts must prove and all that.
Entropy says:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 5:05 pm
Lordbainsays:
Thursday, July 11, 2024 at 4:43 pm
Griff, and I would point out that there’s points where every political concept has overlap; ie, the sheer amount of positions that agree that capitalism is the greatest, and then disagree on pretty much everything.
====================================================
Maybe horseshoe theory has been applied to the wrong political spectrum. It shouldn’t be applied to the left vs right political spectrum but the libertarian vs authoritarian political spectrum. Possibly at the extremes libertarian and authoritarian values become intermixed. So take Trump, as an example of these extremes. He is a libertarian as much as he believes he should be able to do anything and not be bound by the law. He is authoritarian as he believes his power over everyone else should be absolute. Fortunately we can just label him an extreme narcissist and not worry about applying horseshoe theory here though.
__________
This would be akin to the two axis political model. Nolan is the one I learnt about. The political compass the most recent variant.
Actually TPOF, the person who made the intial claim was Fargo; “Given the numerous time the Greens have combined with the coalition to block or defer sensible Labor reforms, I would say that they are both reactionary
I took great delight in putting Labor first and the Greens last in the recent Brisbane council election.”
I then pointed out that the Labor party works with the Coalition more times then the Greens have, and asked how that logic works?
If you want, ill start listing all the policies that Labor and the Coalition have worked on together, and you can list all the Greens/Lib policies.
Oh, and that doesnt include not liking policy for different reasons; even thought im sure youll whine about it chum 🙂
I would expect an average Year 9 Social Studies student to easily reel off five and an advanced student ten things of almost mirror image, starting with crimes against humanity killing millions and then go on from there.