A collection of 13 posts
Because of my experiences, and the newly fashionable denial of reality being promoted by progressives, I find myself sitting with the politically homeless.
It is always tempting to portray one’s political opponents as consumed by some inveterate flaw or social contaminant that marks them as fallen creatures.
Another reason that many liberals have increasingly rejected incrementalism is that racial disparities appear to be unchanged.
I'm still not immune to violent political fantasies, especially when I become angry at scenes of Left-wing protests in Portland, Seattle, and other cities.
This was a room full of people passionately engaged in the world of ideas. Yet in their panelist remarks and Q&A comments, few of the speakers and audience members invoked the name of any actual party, politician or even broad political movement.
Centrists routinely accuse their political rivals of undermining democracy.
At once defiant and confessional, Shepherd declared that she had grown to distrust the motives and aspirations of left-wing “social justice warriors.”
Was that supposed to make them see the error of their ways? Of course not. That’s how you get people to hunker down and reject social change altogether.
Gathering by the campfire in our ideological tribes, we bask in the warm glow of unchallenged beliefs.
Hillary Clinton was evidently a centrist all along, prizing vague pragmatism, hawkish foreign policy and entrenched norms instead of a unique political vision.
All too often legitimate conversations about policy preference devolve into accusations of moral transgression.
Ideologies are like organisms, and tracing their origins back to common ancestors starts with a system of classification based on careful observation and comparison.
These common complaints might contain more than a kernel of truth, but centrism doesn’t need to be dull or incoherent.