Thread: What is a "Moderate"?

Originally Posted by FilmFestGuy

How would you define someone who is for low taxes and a pro-business environment, but is pro-choice and pro-gay marriage?

Genrally, libertarian. How about pro-people (or anti-govt-authority)? I say liberal economically and socially; however, I'm anti-abortion (I think person begins at conception) and militant (in polite terms, a hawk), so I don't run with the libertarian crowd.


A moderate is someone who, on all (nearly all?) of the issues, is near center. Not radical in any aspect of their political ideology, be it left, right or any combination thereof.

Originally Posted by Ahlevah

Wasn't it "the fringe" that supported the American Revolution? Or were these treasonists moderates? How can you support (necessary) radical change and still be a moderate (or civil)? If Stephen Colbert had been alive at the time of Cornwallis' defeat at Yorktown, I can envision him fleeing to Canada.

Fringe to whom?
Fringe to the British Crown, indeed.
But were they considered 'fringe' in the eyes of a colonist? Are they 'fringe' in the minds of today's people?

Moderate is fickle *because* it changes often and depends on *what* is considered 'far right' and *what* is considered 'far left'

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

But were they considered 'fringe' in the eyes of a colonist?

A Loyalist, of whom there were many? Probably.

Originally Posted by Ahlevah

We just had the Jon Stewart/Stephen Colbert "Million Moderate March" in Washington. Can someone please tell me, what is a "moderate"? For example, do moderates believe that Americans have a fundamental, individual right to own a gun? Do moderates deny that Americans are overtaxed? Do moderates favor keeping "Obamacare"? Do moderates believe in traditional marriage, or do they think that marriage should be sex blind? Also, what makes a "moderate" position any less political than a "conservative" or "liberal" position? I mean, some things are black and white, like the view that Americans do or do not have an individual right to own a gun, or that marriage should or should not be defined as between a man and a woman. Reasonable people could argue that any effort to legally redefine marriage is, in fact, a "radical" position.

Moderates generally believe in a mixed approach between far left and far right.

Another good way to look at a Moderate is the idea of Centrism which is basically a synonym for Moderate, they're essentially interchangeable terms.

Realpolitik is another good thing to take a look at
Realpolitik - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Moderate is often added on to other title qualifiers. IE: A Moderate Liberal is someone who looks to Centrist solutions but tends to lean somewhat to the left, a Moderate Conservative is someone who favors Centrist solutions but still leans somewhat to the right (No one is perfectly Centrist).

It also usually means a disregard for ideological sources, a Moderate cares less where an idea came from and more that it's a good idea.

I personally am a Moderate Socialist, on most things I strive for the middle ground but overall I lean towards the Socialistic spectrum.

Originally Posted by Hoplite

I personally am a Moderate Socialist, on most things I strive for the middle ground but overall I lean towards the Socialistic spectrum.

That's like saying you're a moderate anarchist or communist. I just can't picture it.

Originally Posted by Ahlevah

That's like saying you're a moderate anarchist or communist. I just can't picture it.

Communism is extreme left.
Socialism is partial-left. . . and not as 'horrible' as people make it out to be. . . many of our government programs are socialist-based on theory. Someone who support an overall socialist government merely believes that we should have more of said programs.

Out government, actually, is Moderate Socialist if you're really wanting to put values on to a line - and peg us as something.

We try to be 'center' in an effort to preserve rights and equality - and that means in some ways we are on the 'right' of the line - and in other ways we are 'left' of the line . . . and we're becoming a little more 'left' than 'right' - *in* certain government areas: taxation (and to what it's applied to) and so forth.

Originally Posted by Aunt Spiker

Socialism is partial-left. . . and not as 'horrible' as people make it out to be. . . many of our government programs are socialist-based on theory. Someone who support an overall socialist government merely believes that we should have more of said programs.

Yeah, I realize many of our government programs are socialist based, and I think that's part of the problem. Government assumes a greater and greater role in people's lives, and with each new program or regulation they surrender a little more of their freedom. Like this 1099 thing under the "Obamacare" bill. It's a complete, um, "obomination."

Originally Posted by Ahlevah

Yeah, I realize many of our government programs are socialist based, and I think that's part of the problem. Government assumes a greater and greater role in people's lives, and with each new program or regulation they surrender a little more of their freedom. Like this 1099 thing under the "Obamacare" bill. It's a complete, um, "obomination."

Yeah - I agree that government's *too* big and overreaching.
But I also believe that there are some basics that government should help provide - as solid governments have always done throughout history.

These said socialist programs become a problem when they're unevenly distributed or when they dictate too much of our lives or dominate the government budget (or deficit, really).

The effort for out government to build the highway system - usually touted as a socialist-example.
*everyone* benefits - *everyone* uses the roads thus *everyone* had a hand in paying or creating the system.
No one really complains about that.

The problems with these programs, then, is that many of them *only benefit* a group of people - it's not *helping everyone* out - it's propping some up by taking away from others. In the end - only a portion of the people benefit and only a portion of the people put into it.

Oddly - that's more akin to communism (in theories) than to socialism (again, in theories).

Originally Posted by Ahlevah

That's like saying you're a moderate anarchist or communist. I just can't picture it.

Such things do exist. There are even Libertarian Socialists