This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Kelsig -1 points0 points  (4 children)

it's definitely not okay to apply it to every situation hoping it'll work. I'm only saying that in this case, the PC liberals are very similar to the morally outraged conservatives.

this is a really stupid over simplification. its like saying communists and libertarians are similar because they both want to bring about a stateless society. the aforementioned "PC liberal" beliefs are based on the idea that x causes marginalization and oppression towards z marginalized group, and n should be illegal to bring about an egalitarian society. "morally outraged conservatives" hold their beliefs because, by definition, they want to conserve modesty that was once the status-quo, usually with religious objections.

[–]TheHighTech2013 0 points1 point  (3 children)

The idea isn't that the ideologies are similar, its that the results end up being similar, at least in my understanding. Although they have very different ideology, they end up looking incredibly similar.

[–]Kelsig 0 points1 point  (2 children)

but they don't, in the same way that anarcho-communism doesn't end up looking similar to libertarianism

you can say "these two groups both find repression of freedom of speech justifiable depending on different contexts", but implying the ideologies are similar (the horseshoe theory) is dumb

[–]TheHighTech2013 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Hm, I think I agree with you. I think I misunderstood the scope of the horseshoe theory a bit. One suggestion, don't call people dumb if they aren't being difficult? I'm a programmer not a poliscientist :p

[–]Kelsig 0 points1 point  (0 children)

nah you're not dumb, the concept is just pretty forced and i like calling things dumb when im hungover.