First they ignore you, then they mock you, then the fight you, then we win.
I'm impressed we've made it to stage 2! E On Jan 11, 2012, at 11:49 AM, [email protected] wrote: > attackerman.firedoglake.com > > “Radical centrism”, like the tooth fairy or Detox, is a myth > > Radical centrism”, like the tooth fairy or Detox, is a myth > > By: Jamelle Bouie Monday April 26, 2010 > > By: Jamelle Bouie Monday April 26, 2010 > > Hello Attackerman readers, and thanks to Spencer for letting me hang out here > for a few days. It’s always a pleasure. > While Tom Friedman’s reading of the Tea Party Movement is hilariously wrong — > a movement of GOP stalwarts isn’t going to embrace anything “green” — it > isn’t the worst thing about his column today in the New York Times. Those > honors belong to this passage, where he extolls the “radical centrism” of > Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman: > > Yes, I know, dream on. The Tea Party is heading to the hard libertarian right > and would never support an energy bill that puts a fee on carbon. > > So if there is going to be a Green Tea Party, it will have to emerge from a > different place — the radical center, a center committed to a radical > departure from business as usual. Acting on that impulse, Senators John > Kerry, Lindsey Graham and Joseph Lieberman had forged a bipartisan > climate/energy/jobs bill that deserves an energetic centrist Green Tea Party > to support it. > > This critical piece of energy legislation was supposed to be unveiled by the > three senators on Monday, but it was suddenly postponed late Saturday because > of Senator Graham’s fury that the Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of > Nevada, and the White House were planning to take up a highly controversial > immigration measure before the energy bill. > > The term “radical centrism” is absolutely incoherent. The New Oxford American > Dictionary defines radical as “relating to or affecting the fundamental > nature of something; far-reaching or thorough.” Which, incidentally, is the > precise opposite of “centrism.” For centrists, public policy is only “good” > when it offers a concrete benefits to existing stakeholders and entrenched > interests. By and large, centrism is an ideology of the status quo, and > centrists are most concerned with maintaining existing institutional > arrangements. Reform is rarely pursued, and then, only when it can be > achieved through tepid incrementalism (the exception, of course, being wars > and defense spending). > > But even if “radical centrism” were a real thing and not nonsense prettied up > by the gloss of a New York Times column, it’s still the case that Friedman’s > praise is completely misplaced. Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman are > consummate insiders. Indeed, this is why its even possible for a climate bill > to move forward; each has intimate knowledge of the players involved and the > experience necessary to navigate their concerns. Pace Friedman, there is > absolutely nothing radical about the Kerry-Graham-Lieberman proposal; it > provides $10 billion to the coal industry for “clean coal technology” and has > garnered support from “the nation’s largest electric utilities association > and three of the country’s biggest oil companies.” Of course, that’s not to > say that the bill isn’t good — tepid incrementalism is the only real option > we have for moving the ball forward — but radical it isn’t. > > Like I said at the beginning of this post though, “radical centrism” is a > complete contradiction in terms, and it would please me to no end to see the > phrase mocked, denounced and completely excised from political dialogue. > > > -- > 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
