Helpful.  Why not apply a label that is clearer with respect to the core 
beliefs here?  Radical and Centrism suggest thinking styles, or perhaps maybe 
even personality characteristics, or even a preferred outcome as in wanting to 
achieve a middle ground so that people can get along.

Frankly I think it comes across as holier than thou to purport a specific 
philosophy as centrist as if it reflects the majority view.  I don't think it 
does today. Fiscal conservatism is the clear winner today although when people 
are asked about their particular goodies they usually vote in favor of them.  
Also, social liberalism outdistances social conservatism.  So, and while 
appreciating that you want to make a distinction between centrist and centrism, 
the centrist position in the US today would be economic conservative and social 
liberal.  These are only slight majorities but they do exist.

By the way, I'd identify as a social and economic conservative but without the 
religious views that many social conservatives embody.

If we need an enemy to fight, as Mike suggested, I would hope the primary enemy 
would be economic and cultural progressives.  I don't see the value in 
separating those two factions.  They are cut from the same cloth.  When 
Marxists realized they could not rue the day in the US with their economic 
victim-mongering, they shifted their emphasis to cultural issues - feminism, 
gay rights, peace, afro-centrism, etc.  But they are the same academic Marxists 
just wearing different uniforms. The American Progressives were caught up in 
the same authoritarianism folly of their Marxist cousins.  We've been stuck 
with them for 100 years.  They need a permanent furlough.

The secondary enemy are the religious fundamentalists.

As it stands now I could not support the Radical Centrism platform because of 
its allegiance to central planning and government solutions.  I see the world 
in crisis and a dramatic deconstruction needed that must begin with government 
largess.

Kevin




  Comments below in BF

  12/2/2011 9:12:17 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected] writes:
    Hello Solomon:

    Interesting post.  I am new here also.  These folks have put a lot of 
effort into developing their brand so I don't want to be disrespectful to that.

    The Centrist label interested me because as I became interested in Ron 
Paul's platform it became clear to me that he is centrist in that he is drawing 
support from limited government conservatives and anti-war liberals.  He is a 
classical liberal.  Our very liberal paper here in Portsmouth did a positive 
full scale article about Paul this week. At the same time, his economc emphasis 
is the most traditionally conservative of all the candidates.

    I think Paul would embrace the Independent label but eschew the centrist 
label.

    I call myself a common sense conservative because I agree with you that a 
brand that says something about one's beliefs is important.  I had considered 
new centrism or new conservative but decided to go in a clearer direction.

    As I read posts here and look at the platform, my impression is that these 
folks are pragmatic and apply reason rather than loyalty to ideas.  The slant I 
get, without oversimplifying too much is social conservative/economic 
progressive. 

    That is more-or-less true, but RC really is issue-by-issue, and the general 
tendency you
    identify is only a general tendency. On any given issue we can be hard 
Left, hard Right,
    or Other. We seldom are "soft" anything.

    We also use terms our own way, and this usage may have little to do with
    commonplace usages in the press or on TV. "Progressive," for instance, 
    for us, has the preferred meaning of Teddy Roosevelt's philosophy, which is 
    generally admired, with some reservations, but we have a strong aversion 
    to so-called "progressivism" as it is practiced by the contemporary Left.

    We also have little use for doctrinaire "conservatism." Other kinds of 
conservatism
    are in a different category.


    I hear a disdain for cultural Marxism too.  

    More than disdain, more like seething contempt.

    There are some lessons in Marx, but essentially only his 1844 Manuscripts
    in the era before he became a hard core Leftist. This can be debated,
    the man was thoughtful even when wrong, but we decidedly are
    non-Marxist and strenuously opposed to people like Gramsci.

    FYI
    Billy



    I see centrism in that most tribes are either both economic and socially 
progressive or socially and fiscally conservative.

    Kevin


      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



  -- 
  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