3 ms·

> Moderates generally lack any firm convictions or anchoring principles beyond maintaining equanimity That's one way to put it. Here's another to think about

> Moderates generally lack any firm convictions or anchoring principles beyond maintaining equanimity That's one way to put it. Here's another to think about: moderates lack rigid principles and avoid ideological convictions. People on the extremes of both sides have a tendency to "paint." They paint the opposing view as monsters, and they paint people with independent views as "lacking convictions." It is not accurate.

anigbrowl 4y ago
By no means am I arguing that those at the extremes are always right. I'm saying that if you have no other principles than 'compromise' then you will simply let yourself be pulled around by the most powerful force in a go-along-to-get-along fashion. Moderates are simply conflict averse and don't consider that there is anything worth fighting for, ever. Unscrupulous extremists rely on them as a strategic buffer, because they are easy to manipulate. Neville Chamberlain was a moderate.
- mancerayder 4y ago
  "conflict averse" and "easy to manipulate" are personality traits. Pretty subjective and not useful for (adult) discourse. There's a way to think of political "moderates" as a political science category. An example of a moderate position would be, supporting a free market economy but a wide social security system. An example of the other (economic) extremes are laissez-faire and socialism. You're successfully proving my point from the comment above: you're painting folks who don't share your views. This does you a disservice as you can't possibly understand the arguments. There are many, many ways in which a person can be a Moderate or a particular topic can have a moderate viewpoint. The cure for this affliction (of imagining your opponents and creating personifications in your head) is to diversify your conversational and reading sources.
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    "conflict averse" and "easy to manipulate" are personality traits. Pretty subjective and not useful for (adult) discourse. Nice attempt at well-poisoning. You'll excuse me if I don't engage with the sophistry that follows. Perhaps it's you who should broaden your reading sources, as people's behavior is much more amenable to objective analysis than you seem to be aware of. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451
    - mancerayder 4y ago
      You don't have to go very far for some links that echo what I said above: "Moderate is an ideological category which designates a rejection of radical or extreme views, especially in regard to politics and religion.[1][2] A moderate is considered someone occupying any mainstream position avoiding extreme views and major social change. In United States politics, a moderate is considered someone occupying a centre position on the left–right political spectrum." Very uncontroversial take by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_moderate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_moderate The pinning of subjective elements and personality traits to your political opponents is as dangerous as it is unscientific (and people both on the right and the left do this).

anigbrowl 4y ago

By no means am I arguing that those at the extremes are always right. I'm saying that if you have no other principles than 'compromise' then you will simply let yourself be pulled around by the most powerful force in a go-along-to-get-along fashion. Moderates are simply conflict averse and don't consider that there is anything worth fighting for, ever. Unscrupulous extremists rely on them as a strategic buffer, because they are easy to manipulate. Neville Chamberlain was a moderate.

mancerayder 4y ago
"conflict averse" and "easy to manipulate" are personality traits. Pretty subjective and not useful for (adult) discourse. There's a way to think of political "moderates" as a political science category. An example of a moderate position would be, supporting a free market economy but a wide social security system. An example of the other (economic) extremes are laissez-faire and socialism. You're successfully proving my point from the comment above: you're painting folks who don't share your views. This does you a disservice as you can't possibly understand the arguments. There are many, many ways in which a person can be a Moderate or a particular topic can have a moderate viewpoint. The cure for this affliction (of imagining your opponents and creating personifications in your head) is to diversify your conversational and reading sources.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  "conflict averse" and "easy to manipulate" are personality traits. Pretty subjective and not useful for (adult) discourse. Nice attempt at well-poisoning. You'll excuse me if I don't engage with the sophistry that follows. Perhaps it's you who should broaden your reading sources, as people's behavior is much more amenable to objective analysis than you seem to be aware of. https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.1600451
  - mancerayder 4y ago
    You don't have to go very far for some links that echo what I said above: "Moderate is an ideological category which designates a rejection of radical or extreme views, especially in regard to politics and religion.[1][2] A moderate is considered someone occupying any mainstream position avoiding extreme views and major social change. In United States politics, a moderate is considered someone occupying a centre position on the left–right political spectrum." Very uncontroversial take by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_moderate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_moderate The pinning of subjective elements and personality traits to your political opponents is as dangerous as it is unscientific (and people both on the right and the left do this).