My Issue With the Modern Political Discourse

In political science, Horseshoe Theory asserts that the 'Far Left' and 'Far Right' are not quite opposites, but resemble each other much like the ends of a horseshoe curve towards one another. While many might attribute the 'Far Left' and 'Far Right' to Communism and Fascism, respectively, this is not the case; rather, the 'Left' would be attributable to Communism, and the 'Right' to Capitalism. For Fascism (I use the term here as a catch-all; Fascism is a third-position ideology comparable to Marxism and Leninism, not the economic theories of Capitalism and Communism) as an economic idea is by all means the proverbial middle of the spectrum, borrowing in its many forms from both Capitalist and Communist economic principles. Be it Jose Antonio Primo de Rivera's 'National Syndicalism' or Mussolini's 'Corporatism'.


Despite how they might pretend to despise each other, Communism and Capitalism actually complement one another. Both are international in their thinking, rather than national. Both work to prolong and benefit from the class-struggle, with the Communists setting the proletariat against the bourgeois, and Capitalism vice-versa. Both are materialistic, considering economic classes, profit, salary, and production before any truly essential and higher human purpose like religion, tradition, or nationalism. Both function regardless of what faceless, grey mass of humanoid-figures you have working in the factories, so long as the work gets done. Europe and China could swap populations and the economy would keep on going, with no regard for what ancient, sacred traditions are lost in this transfer, and the leaders would barely notice.


Both sides of this coin cry for 'egalitarianism', but what do they really mean by this? It doesn't mean 'freedom' or 'brotherhood' for others around the world, it's only a clever tactic by these economic forces to exploit not only their own people, but all those across the world equally. Consider what the British Empire did in China, or India, or Japan. The same situation is happening in our 'progressive' world. When Britain began exploiting these foreigners for cheaper goods and fatter profits, the industries of their own nation suffered, as did their own people alongside the Chinese, Indians, etc. In America today, there is hardly an industry which has not seen employment cuts or wholesale erasure by a government and financial willingness to produce their goods via Chinese slave-labor, where suicide nets are a necessity due to the conditions these people work in. With jobs being spare enough as they are, we still import millions of foreigners, and for what purpose? To fatten the labor market so these people might lower wages for an increasingly replaceable workforce. These bureaucrats, bankers, and corporations have no regard for the American or European people anymore than the Chinese do for their own. All that matters is profit, regardless of how or where you get it.


Yet for some reason our modern political discourse is overwhelmed by these principles. People fail to understand their similarities. Regardless where one stands on social issues, these economic systems don't produce figures or organized governments that care one way or another. They sway whichever direction the public does, or in the case of democracies, toward whichever bought politicians lie the hardest to the people. Their apathy and their salaries are preserved, regardless what the people do or decide, or even who their people are.


My question to anyone who read this tangent: What do you believe to be the best alternative to this false, exploitative dichotomy? What is your case for/against nationalistic governments and ideologies?