Wednesday, June 26, 2024

Principles of the middle ground

Eric Gregory

The Irish poet William Butler Yeats once wrote, “Things fall apart; the center cannot hold…”

We, both as Americans and Michiganians, are constantly assailed by extremist partisan rhetoric. This holds true for city council elections just as much as it holds true for national ones. Political polarization seems to be a fact of life.

Self-identified “liberals” comprise about 20 percent of the electorate, while “conservatives” make up about 30 percent. The remaining percentage of voters, who predominantly identify as either “moderate” or “independent,” are usually forced to choose between two extremes.

It seems our politics are more polarized than our people and that civil discourse has disappeared. A politician who tries to answer a complicated question with an equally complicated answer is seen as too cerebral or simply a “flip-flopper.” In the age of the sound byte, “swift-boating” and “cross-dressing” are more discussed topics than the most important policy issues of the day. It is my hope and belief, nevertheless, that the 2008 presidential election will be the triumph of the “radical center.”

Historically, the primary election system has allowed the political fringes of each party to exert more influence than their numbers would dictate. This year, on the other hand, the leading contenders from both parties — Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton — have already developed moderate profiles.

Giuliani has reached out to social moderates by favoring abortion rights and civil unions. He stresses free-market principles but understands that limited government market intervention can be necessary.

He has irked the Republican base by touting gun control’s effectiveness at reducing violent crime in New York. He also has used his mayoral tenure to prop up New York’s immigrant rights stance as an example of what he sees as a rational and moderate immigration policy.

Clinton appeals to both moderates and conservatives on social issues as well as fiscal ones. She favors legislation to make abortion “safe, legal and rare” and promotes the role of religious groups in their progressive charity work. For fiscal conservatives, she favors the same deficit-reducing, free-trade and pragmatic policies that her husband brought in the 1990s. On foreign policy, she also has practical internationalist diplomatic leanings, and she has been a strong supporter of military spending.

As a moderate Democrat, I will be supporting Clinton. I am confident Clinton will win the Democratic nomination and will stand up for her moderate principles. My fear, however, is that Republicans will cannibalize or convert their moderate candidate. We have seen this before. Mitt Romney ran for the Senate in Massachusetts in 1994 as a socially liberal Republican favoring abortion and gay rights. Suddenly, as governor of the state, Romney “saw the light” and converted into a standard bearer of the anti-abortion and anti-civil-union cause.

A one-time political maverick, John McCain spoke against the influence of the religious right. He once held that Roe v. Wade was not necessarily decided incorrectly in a 1999 speech. Then McCain lost the 2000 nomination to President George W. Bush — the more conservative candidate cannibalized him.

McCain is another convert. He makes speeches at Liberty University, an evangelical school founded by Jerry Falwell, hires staff with ties to the religious right, recently began touting abstinence-only education and has reversed his position on Roe v. Wade. Could we see the same with Giuliani? We have seen him open the door to a possible conversion with talk of his opposition to partial-birth abortion, his possible support for a constitutional amendment prohibiting gay marriage and his promise to appoint “strict constructionist” Supreme Court judges.

More likely than not, this is simply an indication that Giuliani is going to have a tough time denying the inherent rightist “tractor beam” of the Republican Party. Clinton, on the other hand, has proved nearly flawless in her rebuttal against her more liberal challengers.

The bottom line is that moderates need to be careful in choosing their candidate. We don’t need a convert. We need someone who can stand up to our principles — a candidate who can bring Americans together to unite under the principles of the vital middle ground.

Eric Gregory is a State News columnist and political theory and constitutional democracy senior. Reach him at gregoryf@msu.edu.

Support student media! Please consider donating to The State News and help fund the future of journalism.

Discussion

Share and discuss “Principles of the middle ground” on social media.