RADICAL CENTRISM
the lonely search for common ground

America's two great political parties, and the general populace which comprise them, continually forsake objectivity and common sense for partisanship. Instead of empathy and compromise, we would rather deeply entrench ourselves in a particular ideology and throw stones at the opposition. Too many Americans refuse to go beyond their previously held beliefs or suspend their biases long enough to make fully informed decisions. We try to inflict the maximum damage upon those who disagree with us, ignorant to the fact that the whole of society suffers from such militant ignorance in our political system. We become so mired in subjective debates over What's Right or What's Wrong, inevitably we lose sight of What Works.

In Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, Brutus, a good-intentioned but easily manipulated young man, is advised by the old and wise Cassius that "the fault, dear Brutus, lies not in the stars, but in ourselves." We would benefit from taking Cassius' advice. Liberals insist that they are the victims of a vast right-wing conspiracy, some unholy alliance of corporations and churches. Conservatives maintain that they are constantly attacked by the liberal media and some consortium of leftist academics. Rarely does either side stop to consider that their failures do not result from some invisible boogeyman, but from the simple fact that their opponents support a cause that is more worthy and more logically than their own.

Election season is a lonely and frustrating time for me, personally. I describe myself as a radical centrist. I am a centrist because I see almost an equal number of flaws and virtues in both of the currently popular political ideologies. I am a radical because my desire for compromise and seemingly quixotic search for middle ground often leaves me with few allies.

Perhaps my greatest frustration lies in what I see as a deep contradiction held by both Democrats and Republicans. Nearly every facet of American society can be separated into two markets: the market for ideas and the market for goods and services. The former would include mainly social behavior, while the latter would include economic activities.

Democrats staunchly defend a Free Market of ideas, vehemently opposing any government intervention in the form of censorship or social control, which they consider an inherently evil violation of the First Amendment. Yet they are typically the first to insist that the State infringe upon the free market for goods and services in the form of consumer protection laws, minimum wages, and State ownership. Conversely, Republicans tend to favor a free market for goods and services, supporting free enterprise, reductions in corporate taxes, etc. But they do not allow for the same protections in the market for ideas, promoting State intervention through unlawful surveillance, bans on stem cell research, and prohibitions on gay marriage.

Why can't we have both? No one has yet adequately described what fundamental difference exists between the two markets so that one needs extensive State regulation while the other deserves expansive liberty. We should not have to choose between our constitutionally guaranteed right to free expression and our equally protected right to private property. The public is capable of discerning a good idea from a bad idea, just as the public is capable from discerning a good product from a bad one.

Contrary to what many politicians and ideologues would have us believe, there is always room for middle ground. The truth inevitably lies somewhere between two extremes. We must stop the ad hominem attacks which unfairly label every conservative as a greedy, money-grubbing imperialist, and every liberal as an ill-informed, bleeding heart hippie. The two parties have monopolized political power in this country, forcing us all to choose between the lesser of two evils: the welfare state and the warfare state. If the parties continue moving towards the radical corners of their respective ideologies, I fear that the words of W.B. Yeats may prove all too prophetic: Things fall apart. The center cannot hold.


Read more...

BARACK OBAMA
the more things change

HILLARY CLINTON
palatable progressivism

JOHN MCCAIN
expanding the empire

MITT ROMNEY

RON PAUL

CONCLUSION