Friday, March 27, 2015

When walking "in the middle of the road" gets you killed

As mentioned before one of my logical pet peeves is when "the center" of a position is treated as ultimately correct simply by manner of positioning. No more is this degree of lazy rhetoric evident then in the realm of politics, where every potential candidate is supposed to chase after the legendary "moderates" who, like the mythical Bigfoot, is always claimed into existence despite no one actually witnessing one. Nevertheless, if the political blather is any indication, these are the only voters anyone should hove notice to and this is the only political philosophy a candidate should follow, lest you appear partisan. Luckily, there are people far smarter than I who are breaking down why this line of thinking doesn't work. Take it away, Digby.

Particularly noteworthy is Digby's explanation of why this is a problem:
None of this is to say that the only voters with any sense are partisans who blindly follow the party line. That has its own problems. But the belief that there exists a majority of Real Americans who just want everyone to compromise and “get the job done” is a chimera. When voters say they want everyone to get along they mean they want everyone to agree with them.
But the use of the term “moderate” does have its uses and they are not good for the country. You have to wonder why if the moderates aren’t really moderate, what the point of valorizing the concept might be? The author of the study explains:
“When we say moderate what we really mean is what corporations want,” Broockman says. “Within both parties there is this tension between what the politicians who get more corporate money and tend to be part of the establishment want — that’s what we tend to call moderate — versus what the Tea Party and more liberal members want.”
I know that when people long for more "bipartisanship" they envision two parties coming together to the benefit of the people they serve. Instead what ends up happening is "bipartisanship" being a political code word for both sides teaming up to conspire against the American public. I would also add that another problem is the vast shift and reclassification of where the political "middle" is. Let me get all metaphorical on your assess and put it this way: I'm not a big follower of the sportsball or anything but I'm pretty sure that if that one game (the one with the pigskin big steroidy players) moved the goal of one of the endzones to the 40 yard line it would be more that a little disingenuous to claim the 50 yard line as the middle of they, wouldn't you say?

No comments:

Post a Comment