The Orwellian redefining of the meaning of the words "centrist" and "moderate"

[Douglas Carpenter]

It is hard to argue when some one calls themselves "centrist" or "moderate" because those words imply that someone is in the middle and that their positions on issues are the middle way - the sensible way - not too far left - not too far right.

By any reasonable definition I suppose I am a centrist and a moderate. I don't believe that capitalism is all bad and I don't believe that capitalism is all good. I don't believe that socialism is all good and I don't believe that socialism is all bad. I believe there are some things better left to the private sector - while some things such as education, healthcare as well as fire and police protection are better handled by the public sector. I believe history has clearly shown that a balance between capitalism and socialism - a balance between altruism and individualism is what works best.

I don't believe that global projection of American military power is all a bad thing and I don't believe it is all a good thing. The sure size and scope of America and its interest in the world almost assures that it will be a major player on the world stage - but our own national interest as well as the issue of sustainability of international stability means that we cannot continue on the path of that we are currently on - one of endless military conflicts and quagmires.

President Obama was very honest, candid and forthcoming when he said that in the 1980's he would have been seen as a moderate Republicans. He was also very honest and candid when readily stated clearly and unambiguously on national television that President Nixon was in many way more liberal than him.

The Orwellian redefining of the meaning of the words "centrist" and "moderate" by the right wing seems to suggest that policies in line with 1980's moderate Republicans or policies closer to Richard Nixon's policies rather than New Deal/Great Society Democratic policies or something to the right of that is what is centrist and what is moderate.

This implies that finding a workable balance between capitalism and socialism - finding a sustainable foreign policy that doesn't have us in permanent military conflicts defending an unsustainable global military empire - establishing real universal healthcare such as is practiced in every other developed country in the world - Making sure our democracy is not something bought and paid for by hedge fund managers, Wall Street investment bankers and corporate lobbyist - Stopping and reversing the never ending redistribution of wealth from ordinary working people to the very few - Having a vision of an America where poverty has been at least as eradicated as it has been in most other advanced democracies - Striving to see in our time an America - socially just at home and at peace with the world - These are now seen as far left pipe dreams - although they were once mainstream opinions held by ordinary Americans - I see nothing extreme at all about this agenda - I say that in the real world it is simply being reasonable, sensible and indeed moderate and centrist.

.

[99Forever]

1. Nicely stated.

Personally, I lean further towards the socialist side but could come to peace with what you describe.

[Ferd Berfel]

2. We're taking our Party Back - to the Left where it belongs

The disenfranchised corporatist republican lite "centrists" can go back to the 'center' of the republican party and clean that mess up.

[CharlotteVale]

3. When a Democratic policitican descrbes him/herself that way, I think "Republican."

[Doctor_J]

4. Those now called "extreme" by the Republicans and DINOs really want very reasonable things

As Michael Parenti described so eloquently in Dirty Truths (and this was 20 years ago mind you - it's gotten worse), those of us called the radical fringe by the Clinton supporters want very mainstream things (for every American) - healthcare, living wage for an honest day's work - enough for an affordable mortgage, some free time, and retirement, a real safety net for those in need, safe water to drink and air to breathe, affordable education, application of public funds for the public good (instead of pentagon folly which makes our lives MORE dangerous), an honest tax structure, and some sort of even-handed justice system. These things are not fringe, and in fact are part of the system in every other developed country. Yet we have people here calling themselves liberal who believe these mundane necessities to be radical. Enough already.

[reformist2]

7. What's more, they tell us we can't have these things, that most of the developed world already has.

Enough of the lies. We're not even asking the US to be better than all these other countries, either... Is it too much to ask that we merely keep up with them??

Hillary seems to think so. It really chafes me that she said college students shouldn't have access to a free education - that they need to have some "skin in the game" - i.e., be saddled with debt. I suppose her reasoning for defending private health care goes along similar lines.

[Douglas Carpenter]

8. considering that many of the things that are now called "fringe leftist"

such as a National Health Service which goes well beyond Medicare for all or single-payer are things Margaret Thatcher supported - It is hard to imagine that people who would seriously call themselves liberals or progressives are now describing as far left free stuff.

[Uncle Joe]

5. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, Douglas Carpenter.

[reformist2]

6. The Clintons were the Dems (third) way of coping with Reaganism. Dems need togo back to their roots.

The corporatist Clintons may have helped the party feel better about themselves (winning in 1992 felt so good), but we paid a huge price - we practically sold our souls to get that victory. And time has shown that many of the fruits of that victory (welfare reform, bankruptcy reform, repeal of Wall Street regulations, cozying up with MIC warmongers and interventionists) have proven quite bitter indeed.

Obama has been an improvement, but truth be told, he is also quite beholden to the moneyed special interests. Contrary to what many claim, Obama's presidency was only a superficially transformative one - on substance, not so much. With Obama we did move back to the left, but not enough. Hillary will move us to the right. We need Bernie to keep us going in the right (and by right I mean left) direction.

[Armstead]

20. +100

[azmom]

26. Agree

[Vincardog]

27. No the Clntons was the RW nutz attempt to corrupt and subvert our party. I has been successfull and

Has to stop. We have to rally behind Bernie now and kick the sellouts out of our party in the future.
IF representing the working people is too difficult to do and keep your corporate backers run as a REPBLICAN.

Fuck DWS and all the third/new way frauds.

[valerief]

9. Word meanings change over time to the point where they make no sense.

Last edited Mon Jan 4, 2016, 02:11 PM - Edit history (1)

Decades ago when I was young, a vegetarian didn't eat fish or eggs or dairy. Now, they do. But what do fish, eggs, or dairy have to do with vegetables?

This is what's happened to "moderate" and "centrist." The oligarchs who own the media get to define their meanings. Meanwhile, today we have vegetarians stuffing shrimp, omelettes, and milkshakes down their gullets and centrists who want to take away our Social Security and Medicare.

BTW, I love the Bernie, He's Not an Asshole graphic. Hope you don't mind I stole it for my sig line.

[Douglas Carpenter]

31. "Hope you don't mind I stole for my sig line" - no problem - I took

it from someone else myself

[Yallow]

10. How About "Sellout"

Gee Mr. Politician. What lobbyist are you working for today?

[treestar]

11. I think I am a liberal

and so do most people. Only on DU am I found to be a "centrist."

The center is what it is, not what we wish it were.

[Phlem]

13. OKEE DOKEE!

Um............You support a thirdway candidate.

[Armstead]

25. On what issues and to what extent? That's always the difficult part

I started realizing what a lie the Democrats were perpetuating in the 1990's.

For example, when the Clinton administration was pushing crap like deregulating media ownership. Media ownership had already become concentrated, but there were at least some efforts to retain diversity, such as laws that no company could own more than 6 radio and television stations (or a close figure) nationally, and no company could own more than one type of station in a single market.

But Clinton gleefully pushed a set of "telecommunications reforms": that removed that, which freed up monopolistic media empires to buy as many damn stations as they wanted. As a result, many cities now are under the thumb of monopolies like Viacom and Clear Channel, with 5 or 6 six of their stations owned by one company, and those companies owning hundreds of sound-alike stations all over the country.

That's just one example. Same kind of thing happened in banking and most otehr industries.

That was far worse than definitions like "moderate" and "ultra liberal" or anything. That was pure crony free market corporate capitalism at its worst.

And the Dems did it gleefully. That's when I decided they no longer represent anything remotely liberal on issues of wealth and power.

[Douglas Carpenter]

33. well said

[Agony]

34. Right On.

which is why you got reply crickets...

[Phlem]

12. K&R! Thank you for this excellent post.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

14. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice. Thomas Paine

A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice. Thomas Paine

[Live and Learn]

18. I love that. nt

[Proserpina]

15. There's a saying in Arizona, I think

The only things in the middle of the road are yellow lines and dead armadillos.

[Live and Learn]

16. K&R Very welll said. nt

[PowerToThePeople]

17. In the Fascist States of America

You are an extreme left fringe person who has so little popular support as to be politically powerless.

I would think your ideas are nice, but capitalism will constantly work in opposition to those ends.

Capitalism, by it's very nature, is an unstable system thus a great threat to everything in proximity to it.

[Douglas Carpenter]

19. but we know from endless examples that pure capitalism and pure socialism

simply do not work. We know from a number of examples that only a mixture of the two actually work - That is Bernie's kind of democratic-socialism and it is my kind of democratic-socialism - Nothing else works

[PowerToThePeople]

21. Please cite an example of

where pure socialism has even been tried.

Thank you in advance.

[Douglas Carpenter]

22. there have been attempts at pure socialism in almost all the

Leninist states of Eastern Europe as well as a number of other places. As we know they all turned into totalitarian and impoverished societies with fewer rights for working class people than in the more advanced primarily capitalist first world societies.

If your saying that socialism has never really been tried - taking on a more pure definition of socialism - that is kind of like saying Christianity has never been tried - so we don't know if it works or not. At the very least we can say attempts at overwhelmingly collectivist societies where capitalism had been largely eradicated have been tried and have failed miserably.

I agree with Senator Sanders that we should look to Scandinavia for examples of what has been tried and what works. We don't need to copy Sweden or Denmark. But we can examine social-democracies of different varieties particularly the Scandinavian model to figure out what would be adaptable and what would work in America. That is pretty much Bernie's point of view and I strongly subscribe to it.

[PowerToThePeople]

23. Native americans

Had societies which were very similar to the socialist model. They survived for centuries before the capitalists genocided them to privatize the resources.

I would not claim eastern Europe even tried socialism. It was totalitarian from the start as the totalitarians removed the pure socialists during the russian revolution.

[Proserpina]

24. In Europe and Asia they just traded one Elite for another

The native Americans must have reached a crisis, I think, after hunting the largest animals to extinction, and developed strong communitarian and ecologically neutral societies, as a last resort, to ensure survival. That is my theory at least, and it fits with all the stories and legends I am aware of, that came down to us.

[Vincardog]

29. After hunting the largest animals to extinction. Which animals the wooly mamoth? What about Bison?

The US government had to pay a bounty to kill them off.

[Maedhros]

28. In America, "Centrist/Moderate" means "Status Quo." [n/t]

[mhatrw]

30. I could not agree more. nt

[Douglas Carpenter]

32. thanks