The Moderate/Centrist Discussion Thread

[LiberNovusAmericae]

I think a lot of centrists are just liberals and conservatives who are abhorred at how far to the extremes their sides are moving, so they find themselves tuck in the center.

Some are actually pretty far to one side. I've encountered many who just wanted to act like they're above it all.

[The Archregimancy]

In the last year alone, I swear I've seen at least a dozen different "centrist threads." They never amount to anything here. It has nothing to do with the individual participants who describe themselves as centrist, most of them are awesome posters, but there just isn't much of a community here that is genuinely excited by centrist politics.

This certainly isn't the first attempt to start a centrist thread.

But I think the real problem is that 'centrism' isn't an ideology; it's more defined by being the middle ground within a specific socio-political context. 'Centrism' in the United States isn't necessarily the same as 'centrism' in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Iceland, Russia, or Australia. I've lived and worked in several different countries on multiple continents, and have been defined by others as centrist, centre-left, or centre-right depending on which country I'm living or working in at any one time. Likewise, someone who considers themselves a centrist in Utah is likely to see a Venezuelan centrist as a hopelessly muddled crypto-socialist, while the Venezuelan in turn will likely see the Utahan as an unwitting agent of right-wing yanqui imperialism.

So unlike the right-wing and the left-wing discussion threads, where at least everyone has a fairly good idea of where the far sides of both manichean poles lie, centrism has no coherent ideological ground to agree on other than opposition to right- and left-wing politics within a poster's - or group of posters' - own specific sociocultural milieu.

Which is why these threads tend to die.

[The Blaatschapen]

In the last year alone, I swear I've seen at least a dozen different "centrist threads." They never amount to anything here. It has nothing to do with the individual participants who describe themselves as centrist, most of them are awesome posters, but there just isn't much of a community here that is genuinely excited by centrist politics.

This certainly isn't the first attempt to start a centrist thread.

But I think the real problem is that 'centrism' isn't an ideology; it's more defined by being the middle ground within a specific socio-political context. 'Centrism' in the United States isn't necessarily the same as 'centrism' in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Iceland, Russia, or Australia. I've lived and worked in several different countries on multiple continents, and have been defined by others as centrist, centre-left, or centre-right depending on which country I'm living or working in at any one time. Likewise, someone who considers themselves a centrist in Utah is likely to see a Venezuelan centrist as a hopelessly muddled crypto-socialist, while the Venezuelan in turn will likely see the Utahan as an unwitting agent of right-wing yanqui imperialism.

So unlike the right-wing and the left-wing discussion threads, where at least everyone has a fairly good idea of where the far sides of both manichean poles lie, centrism has no coherent ideological ground to agree on other than opposition to right- and left-wing politics within a poster's - or group of posters' - own specific sociocultural milieu.

Indeed, I always find it funny when Americans put liberals in the left wing column. VVD, FDP, MR, all liberals and quite firmly on the right wing side in their respective countries (Netherlands, Germany, Belgium{Wallonia}).

But what can you expect from a country that associates the colour red with the main right wing party

[Dumb Ideologies]

This certainly isn't the first attempt to start a centrist thread.

But I think the real problem is that 'centrism' isn't an ideology; it's more defined by being the middle ground within a specific socio-political context. 'Centrism' in the United States isn't necessarily the same as 'centrism' in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Iceland, Russia, or Australia. I've lived and worked in several different countries on multiple continents, and have been defined by others as centrist, centre-left, or centre-right depending on which country I'm living or working in at any one time. Likewise, someone who considers themselves a centrist in Utah is likely to see a Venezuelan centrist as a hopelessly muddled crypto-socialist, while the Venezuelan in turn will likely see the Utahan as an unwitting agent of right-wing yanqui imperialism.

So unlike the right-wing and the left-wing discussion threads, where at least everyone has a fairly good idea of where the far sides of both manichean poles lie, centrism has no coherent ideological ground to agree on other than opposition to right- and left-wing politics within a poster's - or group of posters' - own specific sociocultural milieu.

Indeed, I always find it funny when Americans put liberals in the left wing column. VVD, FDP, MR, all liberals and quite firmly on the right wing side in their respective countries (Netherlands, Germany, Belgium{Wallonia}).

But what can you expect from a country that associates the colour red with the main right wing party

Red should be the colour of the main right-wing party, because real conservatism is anti-capitalist

[The Archregimancy]

This certainly isn't the first attempt to start a centrist thread.

But I think the real problem is that 'centrism' isn't an ideology; it's more defined by being the middle ground within a specific socio-political context. 'Centrism' in the United States isn't necessarily the same as 'centrism' in the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Iceland, Russia, or Australia. I've lived and worked in several different countries on multiple continents, and have been defined by others as centrist, centre-left, or centre-right depending on which country I'm living or working in at any one time. Likewise, someone who considers themselves a centrist in Utah is likely to see a Venezuelan centrist as a hopelessly muddled crypto-socialist, while the Venezuelan in turn will likely see the Utahan as an unwitting agent of right-wing yanqui imperialism.

So unlike the right-wing and the left-wing discussion threads, where at least everyone has a fairly good idea of where the far sides of both manichean poles lie, centrism has no coherent ideological ground to agree on other than opposition to right- and left-wing politics within a poster's - or group of posters' - own specific sociocultural milieu.

Indeed, I always find it funny when Americans put liberals in the left wing column. VVD, FDP, MR, all liberals and quite firmly on the right wing side in their respective countries (Netherlands, Germany, Belgium{Wallonia}).

I almost used the FDP myself; they're a good example of this sort of issue.

The difference in perspective is a function of European (and Australian) liberalism's association with classical Victorian liberalism, which originated in a conservative-liberal dichotomy. As socialist and labour political movements arose in Europe, classical liberalism was pushed to the centre or the right, with those liberal parties focusing primarily on economic liberalism becoming right of centre parties for the most part, while those that came to espouse both economic and social liberalism generally becoming considered 'centrist'.

The United States never had a mass national socialist labour movement on European lines, however, so the conservative-liberal dichotomy remained the main way of seeing a two-party political spectrum, with 'liberals' therefore staying on the American left.

I oversimplify for the sake of a short post NSG, of course; but it does help to explain why 'liberal' (as opposed to 'centrist') as a term can encompass anything from the economically 'neo-liberal' right through to the American centre-left.

[The Archregimancy]

But what can you expect from a country that associates the colour red with the main right wing party

Well, red certainly worked for the Nazis; and everyone knows that any politician even a millimetre to the right of Jeremy Corbyn/Bernie Sanders/Lilian Marijnissen [insert your national left of centre leader of choice, as appropriate] is a crypto-Nazi.

[Bienenhalde]

How are Christian Democrats centrist?

We might consider ourselves right-wing, but some people would call us centrist because they view our economic policies as centrist or center-left.

[The Blaatschapen]

Indeed, I always find it funny when Americans put liberals in the left wing column. VVD, FDP, MR, all liberals and quite firmly on the right wing side in their respective countries (Netherlands, Germany, Belgium{Wallonia}).

I almost used the FDP myself; they're a good example of this sort of issue.

The difference in perspective is a function of European (and Australian) liberalism's association with classical Victorian liberalism, which originated in a conservative-liberal dichotomy. As socialist and labour political movements arose in Europe, classical liberalism was pushed to the centre or the right, with those liberal parties focusing primarily on economic liberalism becoming right of centre parties for the most part, while those that came to espouse both economic and social liberalism generally becoming considered 'centrist'.

The United States never had a mass national socialist labour movement on European lines, however, so the conservative-liberal dichotomy remained the main way of seeing a two-party political spectrum, with 'liberals' therefore staying on the American left.

I oversimplify for the sake of a short post NSG, of course; but it does help to explain why 'liberal' (as opposed to 'centrist') as a term can encompass anything from the economically 'neo-liberal' right through to the American centre-left.

And here I thought it was just because socialism was deemed evil so anyone somewhat left wing started calling themselves 'liberal' in the US.

[The Archregimancy]

I almost used the FDP myself; they're a good example of this sort of issue.

The difference in perspective is a function of European (and Australian) liberalism's association with classical Victorian liberalism, which originated in a conservative-liberal dichotomy. As socialist and labour political movements arose in Europe, classical liberalism was pushed to the centre or the right, with those liberal parties focusing primarily on economic liberalism becoming right of centre parties for the most part, while those that came to espouse both economic and social liberalism generally becoming considered 'centrist'.

The United States never had a mass national socialist labour movement on European lines, however, so the conservative-liberal dichotomy remained the main way of seeing a two-party political spectrum, with 'liberals' therefore staying on the American left.

I oversimplify for the sake of a short post NSG, of course; but it does help to explain why 'liberal' (as opposed to 'centrist') as a term can encompass anything from the economically 'neo-liberal' right through to the American centre-left.

And here I thought it was just because socialism was deemed evil so anyone somewhat left wing started calling themselves 'liberal' in the US.

There are likely elements of that, too; they're not incompatible. Before the Bolshevik Revolution, socialism did have a sort-of base in the US - though never at a European level - with Eugene Debs getting 3% to 6% of the vote in the presidential elections of 1904-1920 (peaking at 6% and over 900,000 votes in the 1912 election). After that, it was dead in the water and 'un-American', so the US stuck with the conservative-liberal dichotomy (though the main political parties weren't so easily classified along narrow ideological lines until quite recently).

[LiberNovusAmericae]

I realized that RWDT and LWDT exist, so I thought to myself "Why not create a discussion thread for centrists?" This thread is for discussion of all topics related to centrism and centrist ideologies.

May I ask why classical liberalism is listed as a centrist ideology? I've always thought of it as right wing, not that that's a bad thing.

[New Bremerton]

I attempted a liberal discussion megathread not too long ago with a far more detailed OP to kick things off. It didn't last one night (and apparently, light green text is difficult for players to see using the default light theme; my bad). Hope this thread turns out different. I'm what you would call a liberal centrist, as I consider liberalism to be a fundamentally centrist ideology with left- and right-leaning offshoots such as neoliberalism and social liberalism, and centrist offshoots such as libertarianism.

[Nor Portland]

Cucks

[LiberNovusAmericae]

Cucks

That insult is pretty lame. I also fail to see how it pertains to the discussion at hand.

[Audioslavia]

Cucks

2/10

*** Warning for trolling ***

[Purpelia]

I realized that RWDT and LWDT exist, so I thought to myself "Why not create a discussion thread for centrists?" This thread is for discussion of all topics related to centrism and centrist ideologies.

May I ask why classical liberalism is listed as a centrist ideology? I've always thought of it as right wing, not that that's a bad thing.

It's actually the extreme left of its time. Than the extreme left happened and it became right. Than the extreme right appeared and it became center. And now it's just the best proof that the left-right dichotomy is idiotic.