Horseshoe theory: why extremes seem to touch each other

Do the most radically opposed ideologies tend to resemble each other?

We have all heard the expression that extremes touch, speaking in contexts related to political ideology.

But not everyone knows the rationale behind this statement. One of the models that support it is that of the the horseshoe theoryThis will be the central theme of this article, so that we can learn more about its origin, characteristics and implications.

What is the horseshoe theory?

The theory of the horseshoe is a model that is framed within political science, although also outside of it, in the most popular circles, to give to understand that, within the distribution of the different political ideologies, the further away from the center two opposing positions move, paradoxically, the more things they begin to have in common..

The simile is based on the shape of a horse shoe, creating a sort of unfinished oval at the bottom. If we attribute political positions to this figure, we could place the center at the top, and the left and right on either side, respectively.

By following each of the two paths, we observe that the more polarized the thought is, following the trajectory of this element, which gives its name to the theory of the horseshoe, the closer the two points are physically. These would represent precisely the extreme left and the extreme right, just where the oval is incomplete.

This peculiar way of resembling political positions with an object that has little to do with them but whose shape serves to illustrate the idea to be expressed, We owe it to Jean-Pierre Faye, a French writer and philosopher.. It was in his work "The Century of Ideology", published in 2002, when he mentioned the horseshoe theory to explain this phenomenon.

In this work, he also talks about the relationship between totalitarian ideologies that emerged in the twentieth century, such as the Soviet regime, on the extreme left, supported by the theses of Karl Marx, or Nazism, on the extreme right, whose philosophical basis, in part, has been related to the author Friedrich Nietzsche.

However, this is not the only origin attributed to the horseshoe theory. Some sources suggest that this simile is actually very old and was already used in the time of the Weimar Republic, between 1918 and 1933, to talk about a political faction.The Black Front, a political faction of extreme ideologies, and its similarities with other groups, also radical, but of opposite ideology.

In a more recent stage, it was different sociologists who used this model to explain the coincidences between opposing ideological positions. The German Eckhard Jesse, on the one hand, or the Americans Daniel Bell and Seymour Martin Lipset, on the other, were some of the authors who worked with the horseshoe theory.

The horseshoe theory in today's politics

If we come to the present time, already in the 21st century, we can find new authors who in some way continue to use the horseshoe theory. Jeffrey Taylor, American political scientist, is one of them. For Taylor, the continuum in which the different ideologies are grouped can be placed in a horseshoe shape, leaving the elites in the center and populism, either to the left or to the right, at the extremes..

As an example to illustrate his reasoning, this author spoke of how anti-Semitism was re-emerging in recent times from very different, and in fact, opposing positions. These positions would come from the extreme right, on the one hand, and from the extreme left, on the other, thus reflecting the horseshoe theory we were talking about.

For his part, Josef Joffe, the editor of the German publication, Die Zeit, speaks of the resurgence of populist political parties in the wake of the 2008 crisis, especially in countries such as Germany and Austria, noting that such groups have experienced significant growth from both the left and the right.

Joffe points out that, on occasions, political parties of a populist nature, ultra-left on the one hand and ultra-right on the other, share certain features in their ideology, such as protectionist economic policies or isolationism with respect to other nations and international organizations. This author also graphically points out that when the iron of the horseshoe is twisted, the points of the horseshoe get closer and closer..

These are not the only contemporary analysts who use the horseshoe theory to explain current phenomena. Maajid Usman Nawaz, an activist against Islamist extremism, denounces the aggressive strategies used by both right-wing and left-wing groups. He mentions the creation of lists of political enemies and gives the example of the similarities between Nazi Germany and the USSR.

Another author, Kyrylo Tkachenko, compares the ultra-right and ultra-left groups that have emerged in Ukraine in recent times, which have in common such factors as their opposition to liberalism and their. He also warns of the danger of a possible alignment between such opposing groups, if they were to achieve a position of sufficient strength.

Criticism of the horseshoe theory

Although the horseshoe theory, as we have seen, has been reasonably popular and has been used by a multitude of authors to support different observed political phenomena, the reality is that not everyone approves of this comparison, and other analysts prefer to use other models, since they are not convinced by the simile of the curve that brings the extremes closer together.

Many of these criticisms, as is logical, come from the very political groups that are located in the most polarized places, that is, the ultra-left and the ultra-right, which in no way conceive the possibility of sharing part of their ideology precisely with those who are furthest removed from their political position.

Simon Choat, a British professor at Kingston University, is one of the most active voices in criticizing the horseshoe theory. This author positions himself on the left of the political spectrum, and from there, he assures that all those apparent similarities that can be observed on both sides of the horseshoe are generalities and do not have a solid basis on which to be sustained.

He gives the example of the shared hatred towards the neoliberal elites, since he considers that there is a fundamental factor that differentiates both groups, and that is the identification that each one makes of these elites, which is totally different and therefore does not justify this illusory rapprochement between the positions of such radically opposed groups.

Another example Choat uses to dismantle the horseshoe theory is the opposition of the extreme left and the extreme right to globalism. Although it may seem that both sectors agree on this issue, the motivations are very different.. According to the author, the right-wing group would justify it because of the danger it poses to national identity, culture and traditions.

On the other hand, groups on the left would oppose globalization for very different reasons, which have to do with the possible socio-economic inequalities that this phenomenon could provoke in the population. We note, with this example, the reasoning that Simon Choat uses to criticize the use of the horseshoe theory, which he considers to be too superficial a way of thinking.

Alternative to the horseshoe theory

We have already seen that some authors consider that the horseshoe theory is not a valid line of reasoning because it lacks sufficient depth to support the phenomenon it is trying to explain. In contrast to this model, there are others that, for some people, are more valid.

This is the case of known as the political compass. This model uses two coordinate axes to place an individual or a group, according to their ideology, within the quadrant. Although there are different versions, the liberal-authoritarian continuum is usually used on one of the axes, and on the other, left and right.

Contrary to what happened with the horseshoe theory, in the quadrant resulting from the political compass, there is no rapprochement between the left and right groups, beyond those located in the central positions of the quadrant. Therefore, according to this model, the most extreme positions would be farther and farther away, and not closer, as suggested by the horseshoe model..

In any case, they are different tools, and some authors will show preference for one while others will show preference for the other.