I am struggling to deal with the demands from some liberal
readers that I define centrist.
Here are some thoughts as I stumble along that may be of value.
I thought a friendly definition of conservative and liberal might help.
Do you have any comments or suggestions?
1. “The Liberal is impatient
because his country is not more perfect.
The Conservative is concerned that his country will become less
perfect.”
2. My sense of things is that
the liberal is a dreamer and the conservative is a realist.
(both of which are required for progress)
3 I think the
conservative's basic approach is : "The burden of proof is on the
advocate of change."
while a
liberal would agree with Jefferson
4.
“I like the dreams of the future better than
the history of the past."
and
most liberals would agree with the quote by RFK et al
5
"Some people see
things as they are and say why?
I dream dreams
that never were and say, “Why not?"
6
But I wonder if the liberal's basic approach
might be better captured by: "Improvement is always an alternative."
Interesting that the request for definition is coming from liberals since I generally find that liberals are usually less comfortable with definitions that have hard edges, but that is another story.
ReplyDeletePrevious definitions you have provided seem entirely sufficient to me and I can accept the concept of centrist as a blurry spot that is more or less equally distant from the far right and the far left. This, of course assumes that I can clearly define the far right and the far left, which I cannot.
I would suggest that language is part of the problem. For example, when someone is spoken of as a conservative it is often done so as derogatory and meant to imply the unspoken idea that conservative = far right, which of course is not the case. Liberal is misused the same way – i.e. liberal = far left.
Politically and philosophically I consider myself just to the right of center and here are some of the things I believe (using “we” as both individuals and as a collective as in”we” the USA):
1. We should obey all laws – even if we don’t like the laws and even if no one is around.
2. We should live within our means – that means a balanced budget.
3. I think change is great but we should never change unless we consider the consequences associated with the change.
4. The absence of change is destructive – this does not contradict item number 3.
5. I would like for everyone in the world to have free health care, but if we cannot afford it we should not advocate it (but we can still strive for it).
6. I have no envy or resentment for “the rich”.
7. Rich people should pay more in taxes than individuals with lesser income.
8. Helping people in need is a valid function of government.
9. Dependency on government is a negative consequence of government handouts.
10. I would like to do as much as possible for my brother, but me and my family come first.
11. Making a profit is not evil.
13. Regulation(s) is a valid function of government.
13. Fewer government regulations is usually better.
14. Selective enforcement of regulations/laws should not be an option.
15. We should not condone torture.
16. Water boarding is an acceptable means of interrogation.
17. If everyone is entitled to government benefits then everyone should make a contribution. Not necessarily in cash, but still a contribution.
So, am I a centrist? I would say that I am, but it is still a judgment call by the viewer and I am sure others would think my claim ridiculous.
I liked Wayne’s list of contrasting items for liberals and conservatives especially item 3 with the qualification that I think dreamers and realists CAN be attributes incorporated in a single person or group. To support that assertion I like to use the example of the building of the transcontinental railroad (1863-1869). The dream was huge, the reality seemingly overwhelming, the profits almost unimaginable, the graft virtually unchecked, all built (initially) with private funds in return for land grants. All accomplished by the dreamer/realists.
One last thought on Wayne’s challenge to define centrists. This being the 7th attempt it may be time to be a “realist” and accept that those asking the question will find no definition acceptable. Indeed, the question suggests that they may be rejecting the concept (of centrist) entirely.
Very good list.
DeleteThe centrist concept is perhaps the most difficult to nail down of all the political pigeon holes from extreme left to extreme right. The word itself would imply that the centrist believes that the answers he or she seeks are in the political center. Wayne's "middle of the road" quote from Jim Hightower would tend to support that that is his contention.
ReplyDeleteTom seems to be of the opinion that the viewer judges whether someone is a centrist. And while it is clearly a fact of life that viewers will judge, it is not the judgement that defines that which is judged. And perhaps it was Tom's meaning to say that he is "arguably" a centrist, meaning that some could argue, and perhaps with some considerable evidence, that he is not, to the point that his claim could be considered ridiculous (his word not mine) by some.
My sense of this issue is that centrists are self professed. That is, they have determined that they are most comfortable seeking the truth in the center rather than to the left or right, and therefore reject aligning themselves with a political organization that may tend to lean one way or the other (keeping in mind that political left and right are relative terms. Eg., Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II, all made many a remark that would make the right cringe as if they were hearing someone scratching a chalkboard today). I would guess that the left and right of center have been judged to be excessively biased and therefore not trustworthy (as in being primarily motivated by gaining or keeping political dominance by their respective parties) or deserving their alliance. This belief would naturally, it seems to me, push one away from the left and right placing one, in the one dimensional world of politics, squarely in the middle, aka the center.
One might argue, however, that proclaimimg to be a centrist is a copout (I wouldn't argue that, but some might ((notice my copout))), a means of remaining above or outside of the fray as merely an observer, or even self-appointed referee. Being "in it but not of it". I'm just saying some might argue that. Perhaps Jim Hightower was arguing that very thing with his quote.
Of course a lot of this is just semantics. From my readings on here I would "judge" that the prime posters are, for the most part, right of center, the evils of entitlements and especially how they relate to deficit spending and the rising national debt being very high, if not at the top, on their list of concerns. Professing a desire to help the needy but fearing even more that their money, meant for the poor, might end up in some underserving person's pocket leading to distrust of any system designed to help the "truly needy" that can't be controlled, to some extent, by the "contributor", even if by no other means than just withholding their contribution.
In the end though, it's not really important what you call yourself or where you would place yourself on the political spectrum of the day, is it? Of course that's just me, and I am fully capable of being wrong.
Pelois once stated that she was in the political center. Obviously she and I share different concepts of "center" together.
ReplyDeleteMy sense is that pretty much everyone believes they are in the political center and that those who disagree with them are not. Given the difficulty in defining "centrist" could it be that the center is in the eye of the person making the claim to it?
ReplyDeleteNo.
ReplyDeleteThe left would like to believe that because the country has recently moved to the right.
The evidence for this includes the fact that conservatives are now proud to call themselves that, but liberals have transformed themselves into progressives.
The difficulty is not in defining "centrist" it is (as Tom noted) in finding a description that is acceptable to liberals. It is their position that is precarious right now and they are reluctant to accept a definition that demonstrates that fact.
Spoken like a true conservative convinced that his views represent the center. If Nancy Pelosi is claiming the center I think that shoots a hole in your argument that only conservatives are proud to call themselves centrists, unless she was proclaiming her shame in being a centrist. I didn't actually hear her say it so maybe she said "I'm sorry to say I'm a centrist" or " damn it, why do I have to be a centrist?".
ReplyDeleteThrough reading these posts and thinking through the concepts I have become convinced that there are no true centrists only moderates on both sides. I think when Tom described himself to be to the right of center he was, in effect, saying he was a moderate conservative.
I myself have never felt that I was in the center. At one time I was just to the right of center, then the center moved over me and now the center is to the right of me.
You claim that conservatives are proud to call themselves centrists. Not here in Texas. The only contests here are to prove who is the MOST conservative. One ad claims that candidate A is a solid conservative, followed by the opponent's ad claiming to be even MORE conservative. A move to a place where you can even see the center is political suicide in Texas state politics.
I believe the subject was the “Dream Act” when Pelosi claimed wide spread popular support. A reporter suggested that support was far stronger among liberals to which Ms. Pelosi replied “I am in the center on this”.
ReplyDeleteThe remark was precisely to avoid being labeled as being in the Liberal camp, at least on that issue.
Tom this story is consistent with my suspicion that the centrist claim is used for that precise purpose...by both sides...and is inconsistent with the claim that liberals are averse to calling themselves centrist.
ReplyDelete