12/2/2011 11:17:06 A.M. Pacific Standard  Time, [email protected] 
writes:
 
Well said  --for the most part. Not  much to disagree with and your points 
deserve
future discussion. Some points ,  especially, are very well put. But there 
are 
a few comments below in  BF
Billy
 
 
 

Two different centrisms:

1- Radical  Centrism:
At its most basic level, we're attempting to develop a specific  system
of thought, which is termed "radical centrism".  In actuality,  it's
probably a misnomer - not strictly geared toward what the  "average"
centrist thinks; in actuality, it's supra-ideological.  We  are
utilizing the term "centrism" in radical centrism because, a)  it
coincides with the non-right and non-left position on a  traditional
political spectrum that people understand, b) we don't  feel
ideologically locked down to policy positions from any specific  place
on the spectrum, and c) we look for the excluded middle in  political
arguments.  Criticism of the name?  Probably a valid  criticism.



NOT a valid criticism. Think it through. We  have had good reasons for the
nomenclature from the outset. Look at  it this way, after seven years don't 
you
think we would still be  using the phrase "Radical Centrism"  if serious 
negative
implications were an issue ? Most  of us became involved precisely because
we came across the terminology,  found in provocative, looked into it,
thought about the meaning, and  decided it expressed what we actually think.
 
Take pride in Radical Centrism.  Never be defensive about "Radical 
Centrism."
We are more than "centrists," we  are Radical Centrists.
 
 

2- Moderates
The relation to the concept of radical centrism to  the "center" is the
same as conservative & right and liberal &  left.  Not all leftists are
liberals and not all rightists are  conservatives.  Not all people in
the middle will be "radical  centrists".  Radical centrism is an
attractive and hopefully  preferable alternative to what's out there,
and not simply an attempt to  placate every single person who doesn't
ascribe to rightist or leftist  ideologies.

There's some overlap, I think, which causes the  confusion.  An all-
around dislike of left and right extremism is  certainly shared by both
radical centrists and moderates.  I'd point  to Eric Hoffer's The True
Believer as covering the disturbing tendency of  extreme rightism
turning into extreme leftism, and vice versa.   Basically, they're both
the same at the extreme ends.

I've gotten  lazy about terms over the last couple years.  I usually
refer to those  who are just "in the middle" as "moderates".  I refer
to "centrists"  as those with a specific ideology (pragmatists, radical
empiricists, Third  Way, radical centrism).  I think most of the other
guys on the forum  do the same.  But that's fine, as long as those in
the discussion  understand the terminology. Naturally, the average
person thinks  "moderates", "centrists", and "radical centrists" are
the same thing, and  that will be a battle to wage down the road.  I
don't care about what  the term for the ideology will end up being,
though.  Call it "cookie  monster" if you want, as long as it's
understandable.
 



The RC terminology has an educational  dimension, it is not simply a label.
People react to either Radical  Centrism or Radical Centrist. That is all 
for the good.
When they raise objections or  raise questions we have an opportunity to 
explain,
viz, to educate  them.
 


Internationally-
Nick Clegg, Britain's Deputy Prime Minister,  has said on numerous
occasions that his party's ideology is radical  centrist and, based on
what he's been saying, I agree with him.  On a  further level, if a
party adopts a platform that is substantially similar  to "radical
centrism", then it's a "centrist" (my lazy term)  ideology.  When we
develop our own ideology, we get to choose what  coincides with it.
That "a moderate Islamic party" is in the middle in  relation to the
politics of that country is a given; the question is  whether radical
centrism should disqualify those who advocate implementing  religious
doctrine, even if they are otherwise have the same  ideological
inclinations that we do.
 


How is Radical Centrist Fascism possible ?  It isn't. Nor is RC Islamism.
Or RC  Communism. Those are  oxymorons. In the case of Islam in particular,
we have discussed this at some  length in the past. Will try to get you  
--and  others--
up to speed on this soon as  possible , without belaboring things.
 



On Dec 2, 9:49 am, Rise of the Center  <[email protected]>
wrote:
> I'm going to be a  sticker on terms here, which I'm usually not, but this 
is
> an important  point.
>
> It makes zero sense to use the word centrISM. That  implies a system of
> thought is in place... and there isn't. There are  centrISTS, but all that
> means is those people are between the left and  right. It makes as much
> sense to say centrism as it does to say  rightism or leftism. Positions on
> the ideological spectrum do not an  ideology make. Liberalism is an
> ideology. Conservatism is an ideology.  Socialism, libertarianism,
> anarchism, communism, etc... ideologies.  There *is no centrism*.
>
> This is an entirely different subject,  but the branding of 'radical
> centrism' is horrible. Most mainstream  voters are very turned off by the
> idea of anything labeled radical,  and one of the appeals of
> moderate/centrist politics is that it is the  very opposite of radical
> politics. That's why the social network for  centrist/moderate activism 
I've
> been working on (still in pre-beta,  using a primitive design and some 
major
> functionality is still not up)  is called Uniters.org - branding is
> important, and the center is where  our country unites, which you even
> touched on in your comment. Calling  it radical is a big mistake.
>
> And as far as the political  developments in Britain and France go... they
> were heavily infuenced  by Anthony Giddens, who either came up with the 
term
> Third Way, or  popularized it. They do not call it radical, and have been
> quite  successful. All three of the biggest parties in Britain have
> moderated  since the 90's.
>
> Actually you can fairly call yourself a  centrist party and be theocratic 
if
> you happen to be in a country that  is steeped in hard core religion. As I
> keep saying, centrist doesn't  have anything to do with any particular 
idea,
> it just means you are in  the center of the political spectrum in the 
place
> you are talking  about. In our country being centrist on religion roughly
> means you're  not anti-religion, but you want a healthy separation of 
church
> and  state.
>
> Weird that I never found this place before... I have a  daily email of
> centrist searches that caught this in it's net a couple  weeks back.
>
> Solomon Kleinsmith
> Rise of the Center  <http://www.riseofthecenter.com/>

-- 
Centroids: The Center of  the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
Google Group:  http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and  blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org


 

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to