We know you have Liberals and Conservatives. A Liberal doesn't doubt for one milli-second that a Conservative is indeed conservative. And a Conservative doesn't doubt that a Liberal holds liberal beliefs. But a moderate?? And why should anyone care?
In his brand new blog Tutakai, Jason Steck (we quoted his review "Michael Moore's Mendacity" at the end of our Michael Moore post) looks at this issue very seriously -- and he argues that there are substantive policy reasons why it matters a great deal. In a post titled Militantly Moderate he makes several points you don't see on too many websites. A few excerpts:
- The first thing to understand about being a moderate is that almost no one will ever believe that you actually are a moderate. Bizarre as it may sound, people will believe that their right to label you trumps any right of yours to describe your own beliefs. They may create "tests" that you have to meet before they will consent to consider you a moderate -- generally, these tests will involve you agreeing with them in both style and substance.
That leads to the second curious experience about being a moderate -- most political junkies will not only label you, but will almost automatically assume that the appropriate label is "enemy". As a moderate, you will be assumed to be on the other side. ....
And that leads to the third strange part about being a moderate -- you will find yourself having far more in common with the politically disengaged than with your fellow political junkies. Because modern American political rhetoric has become so degraded and poisonous, most of the vast number of potential voters who are moderates have found themselves turned off by the stridency and unreasonableness of the extremists who deploy their shrill, loud voices to dominate the political stage.
This is where the militant moderate comes in. Its time that moderates stopped being rhetorical doormats for extremists of left and right......... Moderates are in a position to draw upon the intellectual and rhetorical resources of both sides and to begin to construct a genuine middle road for public policy that avoids the wild vacillations between left and right...
Being open and engaged with arguments from both sides has the effect of an innoculation against most forms of political pathologies, trendy ideologies, and fleeting infections of political passions.
And now comes that dreaded phrase you all fear: Read the whole thing.
Bravo.
If Bush loses, I know I'm in trouble with some of my readers. Because I'll support Kerry the same as I've supported Bush, and I will excoriate people who call him a liar when they merely disagree with him, for quoting him out of context, for calling him a traitor and worse, and for twisting the historic record, which too many Bush critics do right now. On 9/10 I would have shrugged that off as "annoying politics as usual" but the world changed for me on 9/11 and I no longer have much tolerance for that crap.
At least my conservative pals have finally started getting that I'm neither a conservative nor a Republican. The lefties who treat me with such contempt now will probably all of a sudden want to be my friends--but at this point I'm so embittered by some of those folks I'll probably just be mean to them.
I'll probably turn into one of those cranky old people, chewing my gums and talking to myself, waving my cane at anyone who wanders too close.
Damn good post. The really fun part of being in the middle (or near the middle) is the epithets you receive. In my time, I've been called:
* Liberal
* Conservative
* "Not a real liberal."
* Communist
* Pinko
* Socialist
* Too conservative
* Too liberal.
* A "typical liberal."
* A "conservative in drag."
And, once, in an extreme moment, I was once called:
* A "unwitting tool of the patriarchical hegemony."
Whatever that meant.
Being politically engaged and in the center can be pretty lonely at times.
--|PW|--
...that dreaded phrase you all fear: Read the whole thing.
Imagine the uproar if Cheney had said that to Leahey.
I don't fit at all on that 1-dimensional "Left-Middle-Right" spectrum. I need at least 2 or 3 dimensions. The neo-Marcuseans call me an Oppressive Dead White European Male Western Imperialist Zionist Warmonger. The Borkeans and Santorumites call me an Obscene Homosexualist Libertine Anarchist (the Buchananites would add Zionist). I've never been called a moderate, and would as soon call myself a forger. I am an extremist, absolute in defense of my values, passionate in defense of passion, for Polytheistic Godliness, Selfishness, Sexiness, and against all that which is against my values. Up With Beauty!
Nothing about being a moderate prevents me from eing passionate, engaged, energetic, or active in defense of my principles and beliefs. That's the whole point -- too many people believe that "moderate" is a synonym for "apathetic". Indeed, the popular conception of moderate is similar to the epithet that used to be thrown at liberals -- too open-minded to take one's own side in an argument.
However, Steven, this news flash is for you: your conception is wrong. If you don't think that us moderates can engage in passionate defense of our values and beliefs, stick around this and the other moderate web-sites a while longer -- our response will be coming straight at you.
I just ran across a new beast: a wacko Centrist. It was... both disturbing and confusing.