Introduction
America is an independent nation. Born out of a
war for independence, we instinctively distrust individuals who surrender their
conscience and common sense to walk in lockstep with any ideological group or
political party.
In his farewell address, George Washington
warned future generations of Americans against "the baneful effects of the
Spirit of Party," which "render alien to each other those who ought to be bound
together by fraternal affection." But over the past several decades, the
Democratic and Republican parties have become increasingly identified with their
most fundamental wings—the "religious right" and the "lifestyle left"—a
relatively small number of extreme partisans who view their opponents as enemies
and seem obsessed with imposing their beliefs on the rest of the American
people.
At a time when political debate is too often
dominated by the far left and the far right, Centrists cut an independent path
between the extremes—putting patriotism before partisanship and the national
interest before special interests.
Centrism is the rising political tide in modern
American life: It wins elections, moves media cycles, and drives political
realignments. In response to perceived extremism by the two parties, voters are
increasingly rejecting rigid partisanship, embracing instead the political
principles of independence and moderation. In 1980, just 36 percent of American
voters defined themselves as moderates. By 2000, that number had risen to 50
percent — a moderate majority at a time when just 20 percent of voters describe
themselves as liberal and 29 percent call themselves conservative. In addition,
Independents now outnumber Republicans or Democrats nationwide, and 44 percent
of Americans under thirty identify themselves as Independent. Looking back on
the past thirty years in American culture, sociologist Alan Wolfe was correct to
say that "the right won the economic war, the left won the cultural war, and the
center won the political war." Now more than ever, the center of the political
spectrum is the center of political gravity in the United States.
Centrism frees voters from the false
dichotomies that dominate American politics by offering them a third choice
between the rigid extremes of left and right, a commonsense path that
acknowledges the inevitability of change while never straying far from
fundamental American values or founding principles.
The
American Heritage Dictionary defines Centrism as "the political
philosophy of avoiding the extremes of right and left by taking a moderate
position." But Centrism is far more than a collection of cautious gestures
toward the middle ground. It is a principled political philosophy with a
distinct set of political strategies and a distinguished history detailed
throughout Independent Nation.
Centrism is the most effective means for
achieving the classic mission of politics: the peaceful reconciliation of
competing interests. Extremists and ideological purists on either side of the
political aisle condemn compromise. But inflexibility either creates deadlock or
dooms a cause to irrelevance.
Idealism without realism is impotent. Realism
without idealism is empty. By effectively balancing idealism and realism,
Centrism offers both a principled vision of governing and a successful strategy
for winning elections.
Centrism is practical politics. With swing
voters residing in the center of the electorate, appealing to the moderate
majority of Americans is essential to winning an election. This underlying
political logic of appealing to voters outside a party's traditional base was
succinctly described by President Calvin Coolidge, who began his career as the
Republican mayor of the dependably liberal Northampton, Massachusetts: "If a
Democrat votes for me," Coolidge explained, "that's two votes, one less for my
opponent and one more for me."
Centrism can also provide a principled guide to
governing. Centrist leaders are uniquely free to create new coalitions that
bring overdue reforms into the mainstream, moving society forward instead of to
the left or the right.
For example, the phrase "Nixon in China" has
become shorthand for the strategic and substantive opportunities of Centrism.
Only a lifelong anticommunist like Richard Nixon could have opened up relations
with Communist China in the middle of the Cold War; if a liberal Democrat like
George McGovern had tried the same thing, conservatives in Congress would have
been screaming for his resignation. Likewise, only a Democrat like Bill Clinton
could have signed fundamental welfare reform; if his Republican predecessors
Ronald Reagan or George H. W. Bush had tried, there would have been widespread
protests and the threat of riots in the streets of the inner city.
While liberals and conservatives perpetuate
stereotypes by adopting shrill and predictable positions, Centrism undercuts
assumptions rather than reinforcing them. This independence causes voters to
reconsider their preconceptions, often resulting in broad popularity for
Centrist leaders because they are seen as rising above the special interests of
their own party, possessing the courage to act in the national interest.
Centrists represent the silent majority of the
electorate, divided between two parties, and generally less organized than
committed political activists. As a result, professional partisans have more
than their share of influence over the selection of their party's candidates and
platform. Consequently Centrist leaders have influential enemies within their
own party as well as in the opposition.
This is just one of the constant threats that a
Centrist leader must learn to navigate. Independent Nation offers
insights from history on how some have succeeded where others failed.
Advocates of extremism on both sides of the
American political aisle—the Al Sharptons and the David Dukes, the Henry
Wallaces and the George Wallaces, or the Ralph Naders and the Pat Buchanans of
any era—often argue that the rise of Centrism means the death of dissent.
That's missing the point. Centrism is
dissent from the outdated political orthodoxies of the past. Centrists are
constantly under attack from members of their own party for not predictably
toeing the party line. In a political climate where compromise is criticized and
rigid insistence on ideological purity is excused by some as a sign of
individual courage, Centrism places a premium on finding solutions and reaching
a common ground beyond partisan politics.
Centrists no longer have to feel politically
homeless; they have a history and a heritage. The Republicans have the elephant,
the Democrats have the donkey, but the symbol for Centrism is the American
eagle. Independent and patriotic, eagles don't fly in flocks; they soar over the
American landscape, possessing, above all, a sense of perspective.
*End notes have been omitted
Excerpted from Independent Nation by John P. Avlon
Copyright© 2004 by John P. Avlon. Excerpted by permission
of Harmony, a division of Random House, Inc. All rights
reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or
reprinted without permission in writing from the
publisher.
|
