June 07, 2005
Fundamentals:
What is a moderate?
By Jack GrantModerates are in the unenviable position of having rocks thrown at them by ideologues and extremists from both sides of the political spectrum, but there are far more moderates than are realized.
In fact, most are moderates without knowing they merit this designation, and they are in danger of allowing the ideologues and extremists to define moderation into an evil.
What do I mean?
First, who am I calling ideologues and extremists?
According to dictionary.com:
ideologue: noun - An advocate of a particular ideology, especially an official exponent of that ideology.That definition is inadequate in our current political climate. My personal definition is this:
An ideologue is someone who advocates a particular ideology and defends that ideology beyond all reason, up to and including excusing the hypocrisies and crimes of their fellow-travelers, the very same hypocrisies and crimes they condemn in any and all who do not follow their beliefs.In alignment with that definition, an extremist is merely an ideologue whose views and beliefs are so removed from the mainstream of the right-wing or the left-wing that their influence is solely due to their vehemence rather than any positive outcomes that would result from implementation of their agenda.
Next, let me list what a moderate is not, at the very least to counter the accusations of the ideologues and extremists who use negative connotations perhaps to make their own outrageous positions and inflexibility more palatable.
A moderate is not someone without deeply felt and held principles.A moderate does not always compromise at the expense of principles.
A moderate is not "squishy" or unwilling to defend their principles.
A moderate does not believe they hold the sole truth or the only "proper" way to think about the world.
Now, to the heart of the matter, what is a moderate?
A moderate does have deeply felt and held principles.A moderate will defend those principles if they are attacked.
A moderate recognizes that there are other beliefs and opinions and indeed, deeply felt and held principles, and is willing to listen to those advocating other beliefs and principles and weigh them against his own beliefs and principles and acknowledge when his come up short.
A moderate understands that if a diverse population is to live together (and even the population of the early United States was diverse, there were more loyalists than the hagiographic histories we are taught as children acknowledge), then listening, open and honest discussion, and compromise are not only necessary, they are the only path to avoiding the mutual murder that is so easily advocated by extremists, as has been illustrated with indisputable clarity in the Balkans and Rawanda, just to name two of the most egregious examples of the past two decades.
In other words, strongly held views are not an obstacle to being a moderate, not if the fact that other views may also have merit is acknowledged and those views are considered and discussed.
So, in essence, those who refuse to have knee-jerk reactions to every development but are willing to put in the effort and skull-sweat necessary to think about how events fit into their world-view, and how their world-view might actually need to change based upon events and what they learn as they go through life, those are moderates.
The ideologues and extremists are the ones who excuse crimes and advocate actions that lead to atrocities.
There are many who claim to think their positions through and evaluate opposing views; however many of those claims are proven spurious when crunch time comes.
There are some who claim to be absolute conservatives or liberals who do recognize that other, equally legitimate views exist that are not in perfect alignment with theirs, and they do not call for the destruction of those others. These are the ones I believe are true moderates, even if they themselves do not think so.
And you, are you an ideologue or a moderate?
Answer carefully, because the only one you will be lying to is yourself if you do not answer honestly.
Posted by Jack Grant at 19:44 on 7 June 2005GREAT POST!!
If you have ever read my blog, you wll find me asking similiar questions and hopefully arriving at the same conlusion.
Most recently, I outlined a set of views that I hold, and asked a simple question, What Am I
As you described, I was abused from both sides. I admit I have a right lean, but am very hesitant to think of myself as conservative or liberal.
Again nice post.
Posted by: Dean at June 7, 2005 10:05 PMYes, being a moderate AND politically visible makes you moderat-er, because you get hammered from both sides. A moderate who will speak up will have to very soon decide what his principles are and decide how and when to fight for them. And be prepared to swing that sword in both directions.
I've recently been experimenting with things that could bridge the left-mod/right-mod ditch: Like this.
Posted by: Callimachus at June 7, 2005 11:26 PMAgain, very good definition. Though I tend to call my myself left-center, liberal, or progressive here in the States, that's mostly because I believe the center here has moved so far to the right over the course of my life. (I'm 52.) You just defined me as a moderate, and I think that's fair. I've always sworn up and down I have no ideology. I'm can't directly quote Keynes here, but I'm a big fan of his statement to the effect that, "When the facts change, I change my mind. What do you do, sir?"
Posted by: Phaedrus at June 8, 2005 02:18 AMBrilliant comments. The distinctions between extremists and ideologues are right on target.
Posted by: Greg at June 8, 2005 06:53 AMI have been called, variously, due to my profession and because I lend my voice to 'so-called' liberal causes, such as the environment, human and critter rights, fairness and justice, collective rather than private goods, and so on: a leftie, liberal, communist, socialist, idealist, and similar other adjectives, some of which I don't wish to say out loud much less write, but never have I been called conservative, unless you are talking about how I dress for work! Strangely enough, while most people become more settled in their views, more narrow, I seem to have taken a different path. My interests are much wider and possibly more open to change, more stringent about ethics (which I distinguish from morality), and more liberal in my worldview as I am exposed to more 'man's inhumanity to man' and self-fulfilling prophesies of destruction (due to the destructive nature of man).
So, its hard to say what I am. I know what I think or believe is ethically the right thing to do, and I also acknowledge that the world is not black and white. But, I will not prostitute my'ideals' to compromise for choices abhorent to the thresholds I have set for myself (personally). On the other hand, I don't hold that standard to a specific person other than myself.
I think, I just wish, people would try to be better than their inherent nature, and maybe we wouldn't have so many problems in the world.
So, I will give myself an idealist, rather than an ideologue or a moderate label(which I doubt I could be labeled, since I don't feel centered within any political realm.)
Ask me next year and the answer may well have changed again.
Posted by: Sinequanon at June 8, 2005 09:21 AMSo, what ARE your deeply held beliefs and principles? That is the problem with "moderates:" they never take a stand on anything until they know which way the wind is blowing.
Posted by: Di at June 8, 2005 01:51 PMLimbaugh is right -- most so-called "moderates" are really liberals.
Posted by: RW Chick at June 8, 2005 02:49 PMI disagree with both Di and Chick; it is possible to have moderate views and still have principles. The problem is that there is not really a definably "moderate" political position in the same way there is a definable conservative or liberal political position. Of course, there are unprincipled vote whores out there, but let's not confuse them with centrists.
In fact, Limbaugh (via RW Chick) and Jack have made the same mistake: defining political positions based on personal judgement. To Rush, anyone less conservative than he (i.e. someone more moderate) probably is a liberal. In Rush's world, anyway. :)
Jack, on the other hand, creates a definition of "ideologue" which is literally a personal definition, and a highly subjective one, to boot.
Just who determines "beyond all reason," or "vehement" in this case? And how is the remainder of your definition different from the garden variety of "hypocrite?"
That's the problem with trying to define "moderate;" the best you can do is explain what you aren't, in general terms.
Me, I'm not a moderate. Nor am I a conservative, nor a liberal. I'm a me. I'm also the president, vice-president, treasurer, and sole member of the Casey Tompkins Southwest Ohio Federalist Party.
The closest I've come to a definition of my ideology is here.
I can't stand this binary thought when it comes to politics like Di seems to have. Why must one be extreme in their views? I have deeply rooted beliefs and principles, yet I am not a round peg that fits in any hole.
Jack is a moderate, yet has some pretty strongly held beliefs... unless you have never bothered to read this blog.
And RW, I'm a moderate, yet anyone I know knows I'm not a liberal. Most lliberals I know don't feel the way I do about our economy or capital punishment, just to cite two examples.
I'm pretty sick and tired of having to fit into one of 'two parties' or the other side says, I'm a 'Conservative' or a 'Liberal' like they are the curse words of the day.
I'm a damn American who thinks independently and thinks extremism is killing this country.
Posted by: Boudicca at June 8, 2005 11:11 PMI love you guys, I really do, but take a look at the post and the comments and tell me where the "moderate" principles or beliefs are defined? All I see are liberal leanings or comments to the effect that you don't have strong beliefs one way or the other.
What surprises me is that you seem to be defensive about it. Certainly nobody on the right is criticizing you for being a "moderate," whatever a moderate is. Rush doesn't criticize moderates; he simply says that most of them are really liberals, which seems to bear itself out in reality.
I am curious, though, and still waiting, to hear what the strong beliefs and prinsiples of moderates are. t's not enough to just say that you have some, you know?
Have a great weekend.
Posted by: Di at June 10, 2005 02:17 PMDi and other like-minded (do you have a mind)sheep,
I think I made it quite clear in my post that I have quite strong beliefs and thresholds. So, I'm sure the liberal you are referring to is myself and possibly one other commentor. It amazing to me that you infer conservatives can have ideals but not anyone else. I didn't see you putting yourself out there for the condescending attitude you expressed toward others here.
Do you not understand the definition of moderate? It seems pretty clear to me. And, Jack did a nice job of trying explain the spectrums he was analyzing and trying to define. What you are saying is wrongheaded and very narrow Di. ALL people feeling strongly about some thing, issue, principle, or ideal. ALL! Because it may not be normally expressed by those who consider themselves moderate in politics or anything else for that matter, you attack them because they don't like RUSH Limbaugh? Oh please. Give me strength.
(On Rush, he is little more than an overblown radio actor who clued in to the bias/prejudice and yes, extremism, of fragmented groups, created a sense of belonging for these poor misunderstood folks, most of whom hate anyone who isn't lilywhite and a god-fearin' Christian like them. I have met these people.) This guy has no moralor ethical standing, no background in politics and policy, the environment, the economy, and he is not a voice (of moderation as you infer)I would listen to without having the info confirmed 20 times before I could say it was true.
Ignorance, in his case and his listeners, is bliss.
(I'm sorry Jack, I couldn't help it, she ticked me off)
