The French philosopher Jean Pierre Faye was the first to develop the horseshoe magnet theory of politics in 2002. He proposed that the extreme left and extreme right were not on opposite ends of the political continuum. He called our attention to the fact that both poles were equally far from the political center but closer to each other. Using a horseshoe magnet as a metaphor, he said that the political continuum was more like a horseshoe magnet than the commonsense assumption of a simple bar magnet.
How is this possible in a political sense? What do the far right and the far left have in common? How can polar opposites agree or influence each other on anything?
Strangely, the far political right and the far political left typically operate like the two poles of a horseshoe magnet. Their overt propaganda might be dissimilar, but their modus operandi, magnetic field strength, and goals are virtually identical.
The Common Foe, the Center
Extremists on the right and the left HATE each other, but also those who advocate the centrist core values of peace, acceptance of differences, compromise, freedom of choice, and respect for all individuals. In other words, extremists hate democracy. They ridicule centrists and moderates as “pussyfooters,” “roadkill,” or worse. Instead of a centrist approach, those on the extremes advocate polarization, distrust of others, intolerance of differences, freedom restrictions on others (but none on themselves), antagonism toward those outside their group, and resistance to compromise. Today in America, extremists routinely prove they will win in the primary because their more highly energized and magnetized fanatical extremist voters vote in primary elections at higher rates than moderates. The problem with this strategy is that extremists have greater difficulty in the general elections. These extremists win the battle but lose the war unless they are lucky enough to live in a state or district filled with extremist voters. Extremists also chase possible moderates from politics during the primaries.
As we ponder this issue, we must suspend our thinking about the validity of the ideologies on the extreme left and right. We should instead confront the realities of the “real” world. The world is and has always been messy and chaotic. From the days of our caveman ancestors, ancient Greece, the Spanish Netherlands, and the British Colonies of North America, it has not been without chaos. No person or collection of people has the same experiences, opportunities, or problems. No one person or group has all the answers. Because we are all different, we have different needs and perspectives. To coexist, we must find ways to compromise and live together peacefully. Duh…that’s why the USA was founded, and we agreed after 1776 that DEMOCRACY is the best alternative.
The fringe extremists on the left and right believe they have all the answers and wish to impose THEIR answers on everyone else rigidly. This is true of far-left authoritarian communists and far-right authoritarian conservatives. There are no compromises, respect for individual choices, or differences in their separate but similar worlds.
The following list shows similarities and convergences between the extreme left and right political poles.
- While almost all centrist Americans (i.e., most Americans) are united against Vladimir Putin, there have been both far-right (Tucker Carlson) and far-left people (Noam Chomsky) who have implicitly supported or excused Putin’s regime.
- Members of the extreme left (who say that rich countries always exploit developing countries) and right (white Christian nationalists/nativists) have become extreme anti-globalists.
- There have been anti-vaxxers on the far-right (Trump’s PR man, Roger Stone) and far-left (Robert Kennedy, Jr. and Presidential candidate for 2024.)
- In 1996, a radical energy law was passed in California to DEREGULATE the electricity market. The extreme left supported it (seeking increased competition and lower prices for low-income people), as did the extreme right (Libertarians and corporations like Enron.) The new law resulted in blatant market manipulation by corporations like Enron and irrationally high energy costs for Californians in 2000-2001. California Governor Gray Davis, a Democrat, was recalled due to his mishandling of the crisis and replaced by Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger. Enron did not fare well either. Texas-based Enron went bankrupt, and most of Enron’s top executives found themselves in federal prison (except for the CEO, Kenneth Lay, who died of a heart attack before his extended stay in the slammer.)
- There has been political violence in America from the extreme left (civil unrest in Portland, the Black Panther Party in the 1970s) and the extreme right (January 6 Capitol riot, Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and the Aryan Nations), but how much centrist violence have we seen?
- Extremists on the left and right always seek quick, simple solutions that favor their specific ideologies. However, suppose public opinion does not condone their solutions. In that case, they then obfuscate and complicate the discussion of alternative solutions to nullify the efforts of centrists and those of the opposite pole.
- Political extremists use gerrymandering to segregate extremist-leaning voters that elect extremist politicians so that extremists on the opposite pole will have whipping horses to attack. Extremists work assiduously to segregate extremists of the opposite pole from weakly aligned moderates and independents. Extremists seek to isolate and divide.
- Do we see centrists attacking the spouse of the Speaker of the House with a hammer?
- Do we see centrists shooting bullets through the bedrooms of the children of county officials in New Mexico?
- Do we see centrists urging Congress to allow the sale of fully automatic rifles and to force all kindergarten teachers to carry firearms in their classrooms?
- Do we see centrists trying to destroy the electrical grid?
- Do we see centrists restricting voting rights?
- The ideological purity of extremist political factions, both Left and Right, allows them to repeat boldfaced untruths with impunity. If extremists follow their party line, their lies and untoward proclivities will go unpunished and excused by their fellow extremists. Since extremists do not express guilt or regret, their lies become “the truth” for their followers. When centrists lie or have untoward propensities, they almost always admit their mistakes. Extremists become more emboldened after their bad behavior goes unpunished, and they get elected by their supporters. The more they blatantly harm American institutions, the more magnetically powerful they become with their support base. Thus, as America weakens, extremists become more powerful.
Criminals and the mentally ill sometimes perpetrate violent acts. In times of war or for peacekeeping, society allows soldiers or police officers to commit violent acts to nullify violent people. These are sanctioned actions when legally and morally applied. When politicians on the extreme left or right urge followers to take the law into their own hands without the full force of the law, this promotes chaos, lawlessness, and vigilantism. America either strives for law and order, or it doesn’t. Vigilantism leads to anarchy and institutional failure. In extreme cases, there might be a missing piece on the political horseshoe magnet. We might call it a highly energized slug of anarchy suspended between the two “opposite” poles. More on this later.
In summary, both left and right extremists operate with similar tools, policy blinders, and motivations. Once extremists become energized and revved up, they are virtually identical, whether on the magnetic left or right pole.
Above are two Latin American riots. Can you tell which one was started by the left or the right? Centrists do not perpetrate riots; extremists do. Centrists demonstrate peacefully in public; extremists often act clandestinely with violence. Extremists also commit crimes while masquerading as their opposite extreme so they can say, “I told you those people were evil and crazy!”
Must Centrists Remain Passive in the Face of Extremism?
I am not saying that centrists will always stand by idly trying to wish away or compromise on the day’s politics. When attacked or provoked by uncompromising extremists, even centrists act. Before Germany and Japan declared war on the USA in December 1941, the USA was officially neutral. However, the centrist, neutral nation quickly transformed itself to meet the challenges of World War II, which foreign extremists created. However, unlike extremists, violence and confrontation are not centrists’ default stances. Centrists typically use the tools of honest discussion, compromise, and patience. Extremists, on the other hand, use deception, coercion, impulsivity, and even violence.
Eventually, American centrists have always responded forcefully to fanatical extremism. Let’s hope this 232-year trend continues. The sooner, the better.
The Arguments Against the Horseshoe Theory
The people on the extreme ends of the political poles are the first to debunk the horseshoe theory. Instead of looking at similarities in their operations, they say, “Look at those crazy, evil people on the opposite end of the spectrum. We are nothing like them.”
Opponents of the Horseshoe Theory typically ignore the similarities in tactics and operations of extremists and focus instead on ideological purity. The critics compare the number of ideological angels on a left-wing pinhead against those on a right-wing pinhead. However, the two horseshoe political poles have the same single goal: to pull people away from the center ground of freedom, liberty, honest dialogue, independence, and compromise.
In 1844 America had one major Baptist Church organization. However, the Southern Baptist Church split from the American Baptists in 1845 due to a single issue of slavery. In 1846 were the Bibles and hymnals radically different between the Baptists in the North and South? Probably not. However, despite their commonality, the extreme, lightning rod issue of slavery ultimately caused the two groups to be on opposite poles and essentially say, “We are nothing like those crazy people.”
A 2022 University of Chicago poll found that 71 percent of Americans favored stricter gun laws. Although most Americans have favored more stringent gun laws for decades, gun laws have become less strict since the Reagan-era assault gun ban in 1994.
How can a country supposedly governed democratically by its citizens be controlled by a few large gun manufacturers and fanatics? The answer is simple. Aside from owning the GOP, the extremist gun lobby has scrambled the debate over guns to the point of a nationwide mental illness. Recreational gun ownership is one thing, but the compulsion for one person to own 66 AK-47s and 5,000 rounds of ammo…that’s a mental defect for the individual and the country that allows it. Like Pavlov’s dog, the diehard supporters of NRA positions have been conditioned by their extremist sub-culture to salivate after hearing a rumor about changing gun ownership rules. The rest of the world undoubtedly looks disgustedly at America’s unrestrained gun fetish like a normal person views an old man with a fetish for young girls. The NRA folks on the extremist political pole respond to criticism by saying, “America needs more guns. We need to be safe. We should require kindergarten teachers to have guns strapped to their hips. Those WOKE liberals make us LESS safe and want to take our guns away!”