There is No Such Thing as Moderate
We're going on a political journey, I hope you're ready to pick a side.
You are going to see a bit of a shift in the next couple of posts, what I mean by this is that you’re going to be getting a lot more essays where I am explicitly discussing politics. Why? Mostly because I want to, but also because I have a lot on my mind, and I’m hoping some of you might be interested in what I’m thinking. So far on this substack, we have discussed love, sex, masculinity, and lots of music. We have also spent a lot of time on personal growth and reflection. This substack is deeply personal, and if that’s true, how can I not discuss politics? Curious? Good, keep reading.
In this latest series of essays titled, “There’s no such thing as a moderate. Im challenging the idea that we have gone too left. Establishment democrats and consultants seem to be pushing for this idea of “centrist politics” but that ideas is bullshit. My promary goal is to show you why it is important to stand for something because those who stand for nothing are usually “Moderates” and Moderates don’t actually accomplish anything, they’re just saying a bunch of nothing and going where the wind blows.
You’re probably wondering why moderates are catching strays right now, the answer is simple. “Moderates want you to believe we now live in a world where both political leanings have shifted to extremes. That analysis is bullshit. Sure, there are some on the left whose politics can feel excessively idealistic, but to equate a desire for people to have healthcare, affordable housing, and equity, with a conservative movement fighting to overthrow our democracy and implement a fascist government that centers white supremacy, and homophobia. All while prioritizing the right to own guns over basic human rights is ridiculous. Anyone selling you the story that the problem is that “Progressives” and Conservatives have both “gone too far” doesn’t actually want to solve any problems, and the elected officials who claim this are the worst of them all.
That was harsh, but stick with me, I am well aware that some of my readers would consider themselves moderates. I would disagree. If you are someone who sees the problems facing our country, is interested in doing or having something done about it, and is willing to listen to different ideas, as long as they make sense and can be backed by evidence and research, you are not a moderate, you are a rational human being. If you are reading this essay, agree that our country has significant challenges, and believe that your ideology is the only way to solve our problems, you are neither conservative nor progressive, you’re an ideologue.
If you think everything is mostly fine, and want to prioritize symbolic gestures while changing nothing, you’re a moderate. Moderates govern based on what will piss off the fewest amount of people while requiring the least amount of effort or accountability.
Finally, while I feel strongly that people who call themselves “moderates” are full of shit, I have no intention of writing into an empty void, I want to hear from you, so feel free to ask questions, push back, make suggestions and engage in debate. Choose a side, even if it pisses someone off. If you’re feeling especially inspired by one of these upcoming posts, consider writing a response, maybe I’ll publish it.
Given that we find ourselves with extremes, we do have learn how to moderate…the verb. I’d say that’s what people really want from divided government. We don’t want them to be intransigent. Yet they are. To me this is the problem. What we have now is a zero-sum game. I think we are becoming entirely too tribal. Yes my views may be considered liberal by today’s lingo, but I’m not interested in a label or giving into the pick a side business. When I first started voting, especially for Senate races I would actually pick one from each party, because I expected that they would work together. In today’s political climate, I cannot use that strategy but the ideal of it isn’t less valid. Again for today’s climate, yes it is clear which side has the best interests of the people in mind. And we will likely have to vote that direction for generations to undo the damage of this era. But the ideals of unity and being less divisive should always be what we strive for. To me the “pick a side” stance is much more divisive in tone and can be off-putting.
I appreciate this: "If you are someone who sees the problems facing our country, is interested in doing or having something done about it, and is willing to listen to different ideas, as long as they make sense and can be backed by evidence and research, you are not a moderate, you are a rational human being." I've often wondered if hearing both sides of an argument with an open mind makes me a centrist. What's a conciliatory empath to do in these times?! I can't wait for what you've got coming.