Its been a tough week for moderates – at least if one were to try to read the Democratic zeitgeist. Earlier in the week, a New York Times Opinion piece questioned whether the Democratic party needs moderates anymore. And then yesterday, the media lit up with headlines of their latest liberal darling criticizing moderates for “worshiping the “meh”’. Hard to believe it is just a few weeks since David Brooks call for moderation in our political discourse was also in the Times.
For years this email has warned of the threat of a Democratic version of the Tea Party, and the demise of the success of the compromise in American politics. For years Senator Ted Kennedy, certainly not one to claim he carried the mantle of moderation, was lauded for a strategy that achieved incremental success. It seems under these new politics, practiced by the left and the right, where one must vilify their opponents – or anyone who has the audacity not to one-hundred percent agree with them – our cherished representative democracy seems trending towards two default positions.
Either a totalitarian regime, where the only achievements are portrayed as grand in scope but subject to reversal in the next election. Or impregnable gridlock, because any compromise must be viewed as a total defeat. But it doesn't have to be this way. The left may be decrying the moderate today, but it is because in our Democracy you need to convince others of your positions — and that is hard, and takes time. But having a real center, that has the ability to listen to both sides and try to find common ground – or at least acceptable alternatives is critical if we want our government to function.