Radical middle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The term radical middle is a type of third way philosophy as well as an associated political movement. Followers of this philosophy claim to improve understanding by simultaneously affirming both sides of apparently contradictory issues, whether that be disagreement amongst Left-Right politics or other disagreement or dilemmas. In politics, followers of this philosophy often call themselves the Radical Center or Radical Centrists.

1 Radical middle philosophy
2 Radical middle politics
3 History of the terms
4 Positioning
5 Radical centrist organizations
6 See also
- 6.1 External links

[edit] Radical middle philosophy

Various groups have adopted "radical middle" as a term to describe a third way philosophy which includes their belief that, in affirming the core principles involved on both sides of a dilemma, the dilemma or disagreement can be rendered moot. These groups argue that this reflects an emphasis on epistemic virtue, by resolving false dilemmas -- i.e., finding the excluded middle. Critics argue that this can easily result in the logical fallacy of false compromise.

The terms Radical Center and Radical Middle are often used interchangeably, although the former more often refers to a political movement or current and the latter to a political philosophy.

[edit] Radical middle politics

The political application of radical middle philosophy is represented by a cluster of loosely related terms and movements: radical middle, radical centrist, responsive communitarian, third-way, etc. As a relatively grass-roots movement, especially in the United States, there is no definitive statement of radical middle politics. A primary recurring theme, however, might be the idea of "sustainably improving choices." This is reflected in the goals of various radical middle groups, which they describe using language such as:

Maximize citizen choice, individual empowerment, and overall human potential
Facilitate greater involvement in the political process (e.g., through referenda)
Being of concrete help to those in the developing world
Emphasize epistemic virtue, so that politics are grounded in objective reality
Build character by promoting conscious moral choices
Expand community by people creating value for each other in reciprocal relationships
Possess a foundation of traditional values and Common sense
Enlibra, which presents itself as the productive middle approach to environmentalism

[edit] History of the terms

The term radical middle appears to have been spontaneously invented by several different communities around the turn of the millennium, apparently in response to frustration with the violence of extremism and tepidness of temperance. An early use appears to be from Gordon Fee's kingdom theology course at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in the 1970s, which helped inspire the Vineyard Movement. He used the term radical middle to contrast the evangelical focus on the future kingdom of God with the Pentecostal emphasis on the present kingdom of God.

In 1955, Geoffrey Crowther, then editor of the UK publication The Economist, declared, "It is to the Radicals that The Economist still likes to think of itself as belonging. The extreme centre is the paper's historical position."[1] But the first known use of the term "radical middle" was by Jules Feiffer in a comic strip that appears in Hold Me!, a collection published by Random House in 1962.

While the term radical center has been used in various ways since at least the 1970s, it first had a major influence in the 1990s due to the Reform Party and Ross Perot, who were frequently described as representing the radical middle due to their attempts to partisanize those portions of the American electorate. Despite a strong showing in the 1996 U.S. presidential election, the Reform Party is nowadays not generally perceived as a major player in national politics, though they have impacted state elections -- notably with their Jesse Ventura becoming governor of Minnesota.

Today, the term radical middle is most commonly associated with a movement that does not explicitly claim descent from the Reform Party or its ideas, but rather draws its inspiration from the book The Third Way by Anthony Giddens (1998) and Giddens's highly-regarded follow-up book The Third Way and Its Critics (2000). In the U.S. third way politics is most actively represented by the New America Foundation and its book by Ted Halstead and Michael Lind, The Radical Center (2001). Subsequent introductions to radical centrist politics include, most notably, Matthew Miller's book The Two Percent Solution (2003) and Mark Satin's book Radical Middle: The Politics We Need Now (2004). (Interestingly, Lind was once a promising young conservative, Miller was once an aide in President Clinton's White House, and Satin was a co-author of the U.S. Green Party's founding document from the 1980s, "Ten Key Values.") The definitive history of "Centrism" in America, and probably the best-selling radical centrist book to date, is John Avlon's Independent Nation (2004, pbk. 2005).

[edit] Positioning

Radical centrists are related to what is sometimes called the Vital Center in American politics, and similarly claim to be drawing on the best of both sides. However, they differ significantly from traditional centrism, which prides itself on moderation and seeking political consensus amongst the parties; radical centrists, for example, are quite radical and populist in their stated policies. Radical centrists also can be divisive, as opposed to the non-partisan approach of traditional centrism. This leads to many moderates questioning whether radical centrism deserves to be called centrist at all (perhaps analogous to how the Left and Right often distance themselves from their respective radical wings). For their part, radical centrists are quick to dissociate themselves from traditional moderates, whom they often contrast as the "sensible center", or deride as the "squishy center."

Radical centrists can be found in both left-wing and right-wing political parties, but (like other centrists and independents) are usually penalized for being out of step with that party's dominant ideology. This leads to tension between what might be called separatist factions, who want to shed an unhelpful party label in order to run as independents, and puritans who want to reform (or take over) the party from within. This tension is particularly acute in countries with strong two-party traditions, since it is difficult for third-party candidates to win office or create governable coalitions absent significant electoral reform.

Radical centrists see themselves as building majority consensus for radical reforms by sidestepping (or confronting) what they consider the obsolete, polarized and non-productive ideologies of (social Conservatism/economic Liberalism) and (social Liberalism/economic Conservatism). Radical centrists assert that their principles represent the fusion of the best aspects of Conservatism and Liberalism, and thus interpolate at the level of philosophy rather than policy. They claim these ideological moorings (the 'root' behind their sociological use of the term 'radical') provide the basis for their critique of society, government and other political movements.

Michael Lind, in his 1996 publication Up From Conservatism, writes that, though American radical centrism is today a minority political philosophy, it was, in fact, the dominant political philosophy within the United States from the time of FDR through Lyndon Johnson—a philosophy that was shared both by the presidents of that era (FDR, Truman, Eisenhower, JFK, LBJ) and the majority of the American people. Therefore, Lind argues, the American "radical" centrism of today is simply the adamant pursuit for a return to the once-mainstream political principle of New Deal economic liberalism coupled with a very moderate cultural conservatism. This modest cultural conservatism would be exemplified on the political stage simply by the "radical centrist" politician's refusal to politicize or advocate socially-liberal issues like abortion or gay rights. However, the radical centrist politician would likewise spurn any influence or pressure coming from the Religious Right and other socially-conservative special interest groups (i.e. anti-abortion advocates, prayer-in-school advocates, etc.)

[edit] Radical centrist organizations

Reform Party USA, founded by Ross Perot, was said to have appealed to the radical center, because it found that both the Democrats and Republicans were unable to address real issues because of both left-right partisanship and corruption. The platform compromised on traditional issues of both parties, ignores social issues, pushes an agenda of government reform, and calls for some referendums. Some people feel this centrist position had been compromised since Pat Buchanan entered the party for his 2000 presidential bid, and a harder stance on immigration has been added
The Independence Party of Minnesota, the Radical Centrist third party in Minnesota.
The Centrist Party, The Centrist Party of the United States of America
Centrerion: Canadian Politics, a centrist group blog discussing Canadian federal politics, foreign affairs, and economics
Centrist Coalition, an active online group with a blog and forum
Centrists.org, public policy think tank
Independent Nation, home base for John Avlon, author of the book Independent Nation: How the Vital Center Is Changing American Politics (2004)
New America Foundation, think tank founded by Ted Halstead and Michael Lind, authors of the book The Radical Center (2001)
Politics of Trust Network, founded by John Vasconcellos
Radical Center American Party, not quite a political party, for now it is just a website with some political thoughts and some links to other Radical Center sites and thought. It even has its own Wiki for you to contribute to American Radical Center thought and political-party evolution
Radical Middle Newsletter, online periodical edited by Mark Satin
RadicalCentrism.org, founded by Ernest Prabhakar
Search for Common Ground, works to help parties achieve "societal conflict transformation" in hotspots all over the world
The Radical Middle Way, young British Muslims trying to consolidate a mainstream response to extremism

[edit] See also

This entry is related to, but not included in the Political ideologies series or one of its sub-series. Other related articles can be found at the Politics Portal.