Canada Kicks Ass
We should admire compromise and the "mushy middle"


Previous  1  2

JaredMilne @ Wed Oct 21, 2015 4:40 pm

Public_Domain Public_Domain:
Argument to moderation...

I believe the middle is extreme in its own disruptive and ambiguous way.

Often when the choice is between true and false, a compromise will betray the truth just to please the false.

The moderates have their own bloody hands, usually from inappropriate inaction and appeasement. They compromise themselves and the rest of us by demanding we appreciate and consolodate deep political contradictions and issues, muddying them up into a gross brown mess. Problems don't get solved, they get patched, or redefined as compromise. Allowed to continue for nothing more than a false and undeserved demand for fairness.

In fact, the only type of self-styled moderate I feel any sympathy for is the truly apathetic. They accept the compromises and move forward, but don't purposefully propagate the idea of moderation as an actual solution, or back-pat themselves for how 'rational' it is to find the middle ground between information and misinformation.

Not all ideas are equal, and not all ideas deserve equal time. There are incorrect people out there and bending my stance just to appease their chop-licking base will do only them favours.

For all of Canada's great compromising, the Natives sure have a different perspective on the grand wisdom and open views of moderates.

What I have more of a problem with, in writing the original article, is pigheadedly sticking to a particular approach or set of ideas and arrogantly dismissing other peoples' concerns out of hand when developing policies or ideas in favour of a rigid, blunt solution. That has as many hazards as the endless moderation you quite rightly decry.

It's one thing to refuse to compromise with racists, terrorists or sociopaths...but it's another to refuse to compromise with people who are concerned about issues like how much to increase taxes, or changes to the provisions of a trade deal. That's more of what I'm talking about-the people who are so devoted to market ideas that they decry even small tax increases as leading to big-government socialism, or the people so devoted to government action that a spending cut means the government wants to implement a slash-and-burn mentality.

Constant moderation and appeasement is no good, but neither rigid, inflexible ideology. I never advocated compromise all the time in all things...but I'm just pointing out that in the political sphere, compromise and collaboration can often lead to better results than a more narrow set of ideas.



Previous  1  2