Giulianos Forum
Politics => Cetrists => Topic started by: Giuliano Taverna on April 20, 2009, 08:21:23 pm
-
With politics getting more and more polarized is there any such thing as a moderate politician anymore? How do we the true silent majority take back our country?
-
The moderate politicians are out there - they just get torn down and demonized until they finally give in and join the rest of the pigs in the mud pit. Few people want to listen to moderates. I honestly can't think of a way to fix the polarization. Any attempt to speak out usually doesn't end well.
-
In general centrists are the most hated of all political groups, in my experience wingnuts and moonbats will sooner get along with each other than they will get along with a moderate.
At least it seems to play out that way in elections, candidates on the right like Rudy were called out by liberals for his liberal policy stances and this helped him lose the republican primary. I suppose he wasn't quite liberal enough for them, and they were afraid he could actually win.
The same thing happens to people like Joe Lieberman.
Which is probably why people like McCain run as partisans even when they clearly are not.
-
The problem with "moderation" is that in the sacrifice and watering down of ideals, the individual invariably loses more support from his allies than he can hope to gain from his opposition for the throwing of mere bones.
-
what if your ideals are a watered down version of what each side thinks about a specific issue?
I mean take the economy, some people think we should have a command economy, some people think we should have a laze fare free market economy.
I tend to think we should have private ownership of goods, and a free market, with limits placed on corporations that become too powerful, or "too big to fail."
-
With politics getting more and more polarized is there any such thing as a moderate politician anymore? How do we the true silent majority take back our country?
You know me, I don't really believe the term moderate is an accurate term. I'm not even really sure Centrist is an accurate term either considering so many of the modern political philosophies start with completely different sets of premises and ideals.
-
Well since you are a radical libertarian I'm not sure you are the best judge of moderation.
Not everyone thinks Ayn Rand and Milton Freedman's vision of a capitalist society is either desirable or feasible.
-
What I think about the issue is that half-measures are always killer. Any pure philosophy, with the naturally attached and definite ways of handling issues, has a chance of success. But when you attempt to mix Communism and Capitalism, you end up with America. Or China.
Because we're unwilling to be unwilling to compromise, we end up with the ills of Capitalism (the people at the bottom struggling, starving, losing houses, losing property, going into debt) and the ills of Communism as well (such as Welfare, entitlement-based charity, lack of any punishment of failure for irresponsibility).
Mixed systems are killer, because in a mixed system you often end up with the ills of all and the benefits of none. The same is true with compromise of ideals; it's killer. Only if a philosophy is followed can it have the desired result; you don't start a sequence of moves on a chessboard designed to offer a definitive chekmate, then "compromise" with another strategy, or get cold feet halfway through and break off your resolve.
-
well in theory you could have the proper mix of both, combining their benefits, instead of combining their ills.
-
well in theory you could have the proper mix of both, combining their benefits, instead of combining their ills.
That's what everyone hopes for, but in reality it's not possible. The broad masses are so stupid that they don't know good from harmful, and have to be taught reactionarilly what to object to.
For example, if we lived in a pure Capitalistic Democracy, the people would know to object to welfare and bailouts. If we lived in a pure Socialist system, the people would know to object to the present state of the "middle" class.
The nature of the Politician is such that he is able to pass anything harmful off as beneficial, and the only defense against such is childhood indoctrination to a system that precludes whatever garbage the Politician happens to be trying to sell. In other words, "This is America; we don't do that here."
-
But you haven't effectively argued that it is not possible, your argument states that it is not politically possible in America. And I agree with you in theory, which is why a lot needs to change.
Real change, not Obama's change, which is the noun not the verb.
-
Well since you are a radical libertarian I'm not sure you are the best judge of moderation.
Not everyone thinks Ayn Rand and Milton Freedman's vision of a capitalist society is either desirable or feasible.
I'm not sure why an ad populum defense makes you right and me wrong but whatever.
And really? Just because I'm a libertarian I can't propose that "moderation" is a misnomer when it comes to politics?
All political ideologies start with different and varying premises, which means they are not inherently related. The dichotomy between "left" and "right" is false. Because there are plenty of political ideologies that do not fall within this narrow band of political philosophies. They all start from different origins.
So again, I ask moderate in relation to what?
-
moderate as in one who falls in the middle of the political spectrum. Moderates of any ideological lean generally have more in common than they do with any extremist.
(http://humanknowledge.net/PoliticalSpace.jpg)
-
moderate as in one who falls in the middle of the political spectrum. Moderates of any ideological lean generally have more in common than they do with any extremist.
I disagree with the validity of a comprehensive "political spectrum". I think different political ideologies are separate and unrelated to most other political ideologies because they stem from different sets of modus operandi.
And I think the use of terms such as centrist and extremist, moderate and radical are misleading.
Since anything strongly opposed to any one modus operandi could be classified as extremist or radical from the point of view of the individual. As well anything opposed yet not totally in disagreement with any one modus operandi could be classified as moderate or centrist.
And since these things (to me at least) seem to all stem from different modus operandi the use of moderate and centrist extremist and radical seem quite misleading (from my perspective).
-
Yes but of the major political ideologies a moderate is one who takes a stance in between apposing view points.
Its not a philosophy or an ideology, it is a category.
And this forum was intended to be centrists only, meaning you shouldn't be posting here if you don't consider yourself a centrist.
If you want to debate the legitimacy of centrists, we have a debate forum. If you want to discuss political ideology we have a theory forum.
Please respect the rules of this forum.
-
A lot of the people you hear from (The people who make the news that is) are generally from one end of the other, there aren't really any centrist. A lot of people I just think are idiots in the house and wonder how on earth they got into the house or senate.
Personally I would say I like Brad Sherman from California, I actually don't know to terribly much about him but when I was watching CSPAN during the first bail-out he made a real impression on me as a democrat that was against it, and not in a Kucinich sort of way either.
I don't believe in that many politicians but he seems pretty consistent from what I've read about him and seen on the senate floor. I've not much more to add he seems socially liberal and fiscally conservative to me, so possibly he could count, but as he doesn't seem to have that much pull in the house, as I think people tend to go with one side or the other and just vote for a (D) or an (R) and not really on issues.
Anyway this is just the first time I saw him and was impressed.
http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77531&id=8902076 (http://www.c-spanarchives.org/congress/?q=node/77531&id=8902076)
-
There's a very large difference, whether it's recognised here or not, between having watered-down ideals and having a strong, mixed set of ideals.
Just because someone is socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative doesn't make them Lord Neutral of the Neutral Planet.
-
There's a very large difference, whether it's recognised here or not, between having watered-down ideals and having a strong, mixed set of ideals.
Just because someone is socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative doesn't make them Lord Neutral of the Neutral Planet.
No one said we were arguing for watered down ideals alia. You should know full well just how black and white my positions are.
They just happen to contradict the extreems of right and left in this country, and for that matter the extremes of anarchy and totalitarianism.
-
There's a very large difference, whether it's recognised here or not, between having watered-down ideals and having a strong, mixed set of ideals.
Just because someone is socially Liberal and fiscally Conservative doesn't make them Lord Neutral of the Neutral Planet.
Well by centrist I don't mean neutral, that implies lack of resolve or opinion. I usually just think of beliefs that don't land them firmly on one side of the political spectrum or the other, which overall could land them close to the middle (of course leaning one way or the other).
To find a true centrist would be hard to do, you can really only get close.
-
Yes but of the major political ideologies a moderate is one who takes a stance in between apposing view points.
Its not a philosophy or an ideology, it is a category.
And this forum was intended to be centrists only, meaning you shouldn't be posting here if you don't consider yourself a centrist.
If you want to debate the legitimacy of centrists, we have a debate forum. If you want to discuss political ideology we have a theory forum.
Please respect the rules of this forum.
Everyone else posting in here is a centrist? O.o
I think you'd be hard pressed to call Alia a centrist. And I thought this place was just a section for discussing centrist philosophy not that you had to be a centrist to post in here, that seems a bit dubious to me. But whatever...
-
She also will not be permitted to go off topic.
To clarify, my intention was to give different partisan groups separate forums for them to talk amongst themselves without being attacked.
Something every other forum I have ever been part of has been sorely lacking.
The general topics for everyone are debate, and theory.
I'll allow people who aren't part of a given group to post there only provided that they don['t argue against the political philosophy that forum represents.
You are arguing against centrism and that is not permitted in this particular board, that belongs as I said in debate.
-
I think "there might not be any" is a legitimate answer to, "Where have all the Centrists gone?"
-
Well that might be part of the answer. I prefer to think centrists are the true silent majority, because if they weren't I should be a lot less popular than I am considering how openly political I am and the fact that I lean right in Massachusetts.
-
She also will not be permitted to go off topic.
To clarify, my intention was to give different partisan groups separate forums for them to talk amongst themselves without being attacked.
Something every other forum I have ever been part of has been sorely lacking.
The general topics for everyone are debate, and theory.
I'll allow people who aren't part of a given group to post there only provided that they don['t argue against the political philosophy that forum represents.
You are arguing against centrism and that is not permitted in this particular board, that belongs as I said in debate.
Oh I don't blame you, that's a very good idea in theory. Though the last such forum I saw that institute such a policy was a **** christian fascist apologetics forum.
Although, I wasn't attacking I was just giving my view on the thread title I don't think they've gone anywhere because I don't think they really exist in the form their title seems to suggest. ;)
-
Does this look like a christian fascist forum? I mean to my knowledge Alia is the only fascist here, and she's an atheist. Lenny maybe but he's more of a neo confederate.
Anyway, I just want people to have a sanctuary. I'm trying to encouraged the formation of factions. I want gangs of right and left wingers to set up shop here and go at it in the debate forum. Under my light but fair moderation.
That way we can get some real meaningful debate going.
People of all ideologies are welcome here. In time I may expand and give other parties their own categories. In fact I am considering making a separate libertarian one, at least 3 people here belong to that already.