|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics |
|
June 29, 2004Worth a Look!Stumbled across a new "militant moderate" blog called Tutakai that's worth a look. This post in particular caught my eye. 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. Ring any bells, folks? Posted by Tully at June 29, 2004 02:20 PMComments
Utterly, totally, completely on target. It's often paired with corollary observations, such as: The political spectrum has shifted, so that those currently called "moderates" are what used to be on the opposite (i.e. wrong) side of the spectrum. And those who used to be called "moderates" are now cozied up with us on the "correct" side of the aisle. Thus, they can claim that moderates are bad -- e.g., really batting for the other team -- and that their side of the aisle represents true moderation. A nifty twofer! Posted by: William Swann at June 29, 2004 02:50 PMJust read the rest of his piece, and I don't know that I've encountered a more eloquent single explanation or defense of a certain brand of centrism that he calls "militant moderation". I think it's pretty close to what I often call "bold centrism". He's right, and he's also an outstanding writer. I wonder if we can find ways to get this piece in front of more people. Posted by: William Swann at June 29, 2004 03:06 PMLet's try asking...I'm willing to beg! He just got the blog started--I sincerely hope he keeps right on rolling. I found it via Joe Gandleman. Posted by: Tully at June 29, 2004 06:12 PMCool. I left a message in his comments section, and also added his post as one of our "Hot Topics" links at the Centrist Coalition site. What would be really cool is if he were picked up by some of the more popular left or right blogs -- particularly the more reasonable ones like Kevin Drum or Tacitus. Posted by: William Swann at June 29, 2004 06:18 PMI appreciate the (very) positive feedback and hope I can continue to live up to these kinds of reviews! :) I'm fairly prolific in writing and hope to be able to contribute more broadly in the future. I'm very happy to see things distributed around and I would be quite thrilled is I were asked to write opinion or comment pieces anywhere. Posted by: Tutakai at June 29, 2004 07:40 PMHey ... welcome! We'd be more than happy to post any of your writings here, if you like. Email me at wswann@mindleaders.com, and I can send you a logon and password. There also might be other opportunities out there either in blog-land or traditional op-ed land to write from a centrist perspective. I've often wondered why there aren't at least a few columnists with an overtly centrist perspective. John Avlon is doing that in his New York Sun column, and you have guys like David Broder, who is generally centrist -- but, on the whole, very few actually argue overtly that moderate or centrist politics is the right direction. I've only read a few of your pieces, but you seem to have the skills for something like that. Posted by: William Swann at June 29, 2004 08:07 PMReally well written stuff, on target, well said. A welcome addition to the ranks. Posted by: bk at June 30, 2004 08:59 AMYou know there is a value to partisan politics. For one thing, it helps keep corruption down, b/c both sides will be quick to point out the other's corruption. And they will press for thorough investigations. Centrism is a good starting-point, but it should never be a final destination. Look, there are real differences btw liberals and conservatives, right and left, that cannot be compromised without compromising valuable principles. Posted by: Bo at June 30, 2004 08:31 PMBo, I think the kind of "militant moderate" philosophy Tutakai is advocating isn't necessarily a compromise of valuable principles. It's more of an acknowledgement that good ideas can come from both the right and the left, and that contrasting and weighing both perspectives will likely yield a more comprehensive and honest analysis. At least that's my take on it. Posted by: PurpleStater at July 1, 2004 03:00 PM |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|