Zompist Bboard Again

The trouble with the term centrism is the same as with a lot of political terms: it looks like it should logically mean something, but it actually turns out to mean something quite different with pejorative connotations. This makes actually using it fraught with Danger, Peril, and Unintended Consequences.

I think the problem here is that the whole of the American political system is skewed to the right compared to other countries. Thus, a self-declared ‘centrist’ who is genuinely ambiguous between the two parties is in fact rather right-wing. Conversely, someone in, say, Australia who considers themself ‘centrist’ would align firmly with the Democrats in America.

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 9:04 pm I think the problem here is that the whole of the American political system is skewed to the right compared to other countries. Thus, a self-declared ‘centrist’ who is genuinely ambiguous between the two parties is in fact rather right-wing. Conversely, someone in, say, Australia who considers themself ‘centrist’ would align firmly with the Democrats in America.

Linguoboy has been talking about "third way" types who espouse a supposed alternative to both "left" and "right" - the very same thing that the original Italian fascists claimed they were for. I have been talking about people like Joe Biden and Angela Merkel who fall somewhere in a vague "middle" of the political spectrum.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 9:28 pm

bradrn wrote: ↑Thu May 04, 2023 9:04 pm I think the problem here is that the whole of the American political system is skewed to the right compared to other countries. Thus, a self-declared ‘centrist’ who is genuinely ambiguous between the two parties is in fact rather right-wing. Conversely, someone in, say, Australia who considers themself ‘centrist’ would align firmly with the Democrats in America.

Linguoboy has been talking about "third way" types who espouse a supposed alternative to both "left" and "right" - the very same thing that the original Italian fascists claimed they were for. I have been talking about people like Joe Biden and Angela Merkel who fall somewhere in a vague "middle" of the political spectrum.

I would most certainly call Biden and Merkel ‘centrist’ too. The ‘third way’ types do tend to lean in the direction of fascism, if not being fascists themselves.

to me there's very little difference between being a conservative and a centrist, in that both are mostly boil down to preserving the status quo, though using different rhetoric. I'm more suspicious of soi dissant centrists than of conservatives, though: if you don't want to move the overton to somewhere, though, what are you in politics for? answer: probably to advance some interest group's agenda.

okay, to be fair *some* people by centrist mean something like right wing economics but left-wing social stuff, a la anthony giddens. I never see those people advocating for anything actually left wing on social stuff other than not rolling whatever is in place back.

Both "centrism" and "third way" have two meanings.

In the United States, the "center" is where in Europe is the "right margin": the boundary between democratic conservatives and the anti-democratic far right.

"Third way" once meant "middle way between capitalism and socialism", i.e. "centrism" in the European sense, but it is also used as an euphemism for fascism. The German minor party "Der III. Weg" is not centrist but far-right.

The thing is what term do we have to refer to the likes of Biden and Merkel if we have decided that "centrist" really refers not to people at the general center of the political spectrum but to crypto-fascists?

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 9:02 am The thing is what term do we have to refer to the likes of Biden and Merkel if we have decided that "centrist" really refers not to people at the general center of the political spectrum but to crypto-fascists?

"Logical" centrists versus "physical" centrists", or something like that???

In Australia we talk about ‘big-L Liberals’ vs ‘small-l liberals’: the latter are actually liberal, whereas the former are members of the Liberal party, i.e. conservatives. I can’t think of a nice analogue for ‘centrists’, though.

bradrn wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 9:14 am In Australia we talk about ‘big-L Liberals’ vs ‘small-l liberals’: the latter are actually liberal, whereas the former are members of the Liberal party, i.e. conservatives. I can’t think of a nice analogue for ‘centrists’, though.

"Big-C Centrists" versus "small-c centrists" would confuse people as to which is "big-C" and which is "little-c".

I should note that "Center" has been used both in the past and at the present by center-right parties, akin to, say, the present-day Christian Democrats in Germany.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 10:23 am I should note that "Center" has been used both in the past and at the present by center-right parties, akin to, say, the present-day Christian Democrats in Germany.

Yes. In the 19th century, the "centre" was between liberals (those who favoured democratic reforms) and conservatives (those who tried to preserve as much as they could from the ancien régime). Since then, it has moved leftward in western Europe as the western European countries became more and more democratic.

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 9:02 am The thing is what term do we have to refer to the likes of Biden and Merkel if we have decided that "centrist" really refers not to people at the general center of the political spectrum but to crypto-fascists?

establishment ? institutionalists? neoliberals? The Cathedral, a la moldbug?

Torco wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 11:48 am

Travis B. wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 9:02 am The thing is what term do we have to refer to the likes of Biden and Merkel if we have decided that "centrist" really refers not to people at the general center of the political spectrum but to crypto-fascists?

establishment ? institutionalists? neoliberals? The Cathedral, a la moldbug?

The problem with "establishment" is that the term is loaded, as a favorite right-wing bogeyman.

The problem with "neoliberals" is that the term is loaded, as a favorite left-wing bogeyman.

The problem with "Teh Cathedral" is that the term is loaded, as a favorite far right-wing bogeyman.

As for "institutionalists", that doesn't really quite capture the overall position between left and right that people like Biden and Merkel represent in and of itself, even if it is accurate.

if what you want is terms without loading that might be hard: even if you find one, it'll acquire loading shortly after its adoption. everyone -who is a politician, at least- is a centrist in the sense that they aspire to *be* the center, and the only reason the bidens and merkels are the center is because they've won, so to speak. in Chile we have an adequate term, el partido del orden (the party of order), which would include the PP and the PSOE from spain, the democrats and the old republicans (before Trump etcetera), and in general the sort of people who are just for the status quo. the merkels and the bidens and the macrons etcetera.

It's inevitable that a vague term like centrist would be easy to define in various ways. I think if someone seeks out an identity as a centrist, then all the icky stuff people say about them is probably true: the both-sides-ism, the crypto-conservatism, etc. But if someone just happens to land in the middle of the Overton window, I think it's fair to call them a legitimate centrist. In the US, the Republicans and Democrats follow broadly the same overall philosophy, so it's not hard for someone to sincerely hold a position in the middle of that large block of like-minded politicians.

We could look at what people call themselves— in 2022 it was conservative 36%, moderate 35%, liberal 26%. (FWIW the "liberal" number has been going up, not down, over the last 30 years.)

On the other hand, political scientists generally find that most people who call themselves moderate or independent actually vote consistently for one party— which is why you'll find polls that group together "Democrats" and "lean Democratic" etc.

There is quite high support for the idea of a third party (56%), but actual third parties usually perform pretty badly.

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 6:38 pm In the US, the Republicans and Democrats follow broadly the same overall philosophy

Are you joking?

bradrn wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 8:22 pm

Moose-tache wrote: ↑Fri May 05, 2023 6:38 pm In the US, the Republicans and Democrats follow broadly the same overall philosophy

Are you joking?

Maybe Democrats and "moderate" Republicans from back in the days of yore - but these days there's hardly any "moderate" Republicans left.

I feel as if americans can underestimate how broad political divides can be: in other countries, you have parties which are communist northkoreaphiles, you have just very thinly veiled nazi parties, you have confessional parties which are for literal, on the books, explicit theocratic government, parties that are for or against being in the sphere of power of this or that stronger country, parties which are formally and by writing pro-degrowth and banning of fossil fuels. in the UK and Spain, for example, there are significant political sectors who want to fundamentally change the system of government, from constitutional monarchy to a liberal republic. There are formally seccessionist movements holding elected office in the states of the countries they want to secede from. yes, the republicans and the democrats are, all in all, pretty close ideologically. It's just that, because of hegemony, the entire world media can't stop speaking about the relatively few issues where they diverge. relatively in the grand scheme of things.