The Moderate Myth

[Flake]

http://www.vox.com/2014/7/8/5878293/lets-stop-using-the-word-moderate

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[King]

Calling yourself an "independent" is a great way for extremists to troll like they are a voice of reason.

You know the type. "Both parties are terrible. Democrats are evil marxist socialist pussy fucbags and Republicans are too eager to compromise with them. I am a non-partisan independent for this reason."

Or vice versa.

[Rockefeller GOP]

I guess I've always looked at moderate as more of a collection of views, rather than being moderate on everything (which is, literally, a Moderate Hero).  If a Democratic Senator is staunchly pro-life and against gun control but extremely liberal on issues like taxation and regulation, I don't think it's fair to call him or her a left-winger with a few conservative positions, especially when there are so many hacks in Washington who simply share every single view of their party's platform.

[pbrower2a]

So for most of us, "moderate" applies to a politician that one largely agrees, but "extremist" to someone that we disagree with on about everything. That's when we refrain from using terms like 'fascist' and 'communist'.

[Mercenary]

I guess I've always looked at moderate as more of a collection of views, rather than being moderate on everything (which is, literally, a Moderate Hero).  If a Democratic Senator is staunchly pro-life and against gun control but extremely liberal on issues like taxation and regulation, I don't think it's fair to call him or her a left-winger with a few conservative positions, especially when there are so many hacks in Washington who simply share every single view of their party's platform.

Why is it so many people seem to be able to fit in a table of views anyway? I find it odd how it seems like almost everyone is in a box and very rarely leaves that box. Indeed it is true of elected officials, but it is also true of many voters. If the candidates broke out of that box more, it would be far easier for me to find candidates to support.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I guess I've always looked at moderate as more of a collection of views, rather than being moderate on everything (which is, literally, a Moderate Hero).  If a Democratic Senator is staunchly pro-life and against gun control but extremely liberal on issues like taxation and regulation, I don't think it's fair to call him or her a left-winger with a few conservative positions, especially when there are so many hacks in Washington who simply share every single view of their party's platform.

Why is it so many people seem to be able to fit in a table of views anyway? I find it odd how it seems like almost everyone is in a box and very rarely leaves that box. Indeed it is true of elected officials, but it is also true of many voters. If the candidates broke out of that box more, it would be far easier for me to find candidates to support.

     People have broadly been conditioned to be loyal to labels, and to judge others by their adherence to a set of criteria. You're not a real X unless you hold this, this, and that view. It has a real stifling effect on discourse, as people come to espouse a certain viewpoint largely because it is a commonly accepted viewpoint within a group that they identify with.

[smoltchanov]

Disagree heartily. If author would write "committed to some set of views" - would agree: moderates are no less commited to their views then right-wing or left-wing radicals to their. But "extremist"? Surely no. At least - moderates are, usually, willing to consider an alternatives. "Ideologues" - almost never.

[BaconBacon96]

I guess I've always looked at moderate as more of a collection of views, rather than being moderate on everything (which is, literally, a Moderate Hero).  If a Democratic Senator is staunchly pro-life and against gun control but extremely liberal on issues like taxation and regulation, I don't think it's fair to call him or her a left-winger with a few conservative positions, especially when there are so many hacks in Washington who simply share every single view of their party's platform.

Why is it so many people seem to be able to fit in a table of views anyway? I find it odd how it seems like almost everyone is in a box and very rarely leaves that box. Indeed it is true of elected officials, but it is also true of many voters. If the candidates broke out of that box more, it would be far easier for me to find candidates to support.

     People have broadly been conditioned to be loyal to labels, and to judge others by their adherence to a set of criteria. You're not a real X unless you hold this, this, and that view. It has a real stifling effect on discourse, as people come to espouse a certain viewpoint largely because it is a commonly accepted viewpoint within a group that they identify with.

I couldn't have said it better. A lot of self-identified conservatives are more likely to take the typical conservative position on an issue because it is the typical conservative position rather than coming to their own conclusion about it. That's the same for both parties and ideologies.