| Revision as of 22:15, 2 February 2006 edit86.131.229.83 (talk) →Significance← Previous edit | Revision as of 23:29, 2 February 2006 edit undoNick Levine (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers15,424 editsm →Significance: apostrophe catastropheNext edit → | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
| Centrism is important because it applies to very large swaths of the populace. In many countries, most members of the public tend to identify themselves as independent rather than as left-wing, right-wing, or any other political wing. Politicians of many ] try to appeal to this so-called ], although many ]s find fault in this approach. For example, candidates using centrist politics to gain wider appeal risk losing support from the more idealistic members of their political parties. Also, centrist candidates may find themselves strongly agreeing with opponents in ]s, potentially confusing voters as to how they stack up. This may have contributed to the controversial outcome of the ] in the ] (admittedly aggravated by ] among voters, a fairly different phenomenon). | Centrism is important because it applies to very large swaths of the populace. In many countries, most members of the public tend to identify themselves as independent rather than as left-wing, right-wing, or any other political wing. Politicians of many ] try to appeal to this so-called ], although many ]s find fault in this approach. For example, candidates using centrist politics to gain wider appeal risk losing support from the more idealistic members of their political parties. Also, centrist candidates may find themselves strongly agreeing with opponents in ]s, potentially confusing voters as to how they stack up. This may have contributed to the controversial outcome of the ] in the ] (admittedly aggravated by ] among voters, a fairly different phenomenon). | ||
| It could certainly be argued that centrist politics do not infact exist, as there is no distinct definition of what it actually stands for. Traditionally, politics was based on ] - whereby a democratic ] is formed between two or more conflicting ideologies - eg. ], ], ] or ]. Once these ideologies come together, they automatically created a "centre ground" - the basic principle of ]. In recent years however there has been a distinctive shift away from ideologies, embracing free market ] over all else. This is viewed as a mature step forward by so-called centrists who would argue that bitter squabbles over economic systems and tax structures have diverted politics away from far more important issues. Others would argue that economics and tax structures are absolutely key with regard to social stability. The main arguement against centrism though, is the effect it has on the ] - since the ] reinvented itself in 1997 as "]", abandoning |
It could certainly be argued that centrist politics do not infact exist, as there is no distinct definition of what it actually stands for. Traditionally, politics was based on ] - whereby a democratic ] is formed between two or more conflicting ideologies - eg. ], ], ] or ]. Once these ideologies come together, they automatically created a "centre ground" - the basic principle of ]. In recent years however there has been a distinctive shift away from ideologies, embracing free market ] over all else. This is viewed as a mature step forward by so-called centrists who would argue that bitter squabbles over economic systems and tax structures have diverted politics away from far more important issues. Others would argue that economics and tax structures are absolutely key with regard to social stability. The main arguement against centrism though, is the effect it has on the ] - since the ] reinvented itself in 1997 as "]", abandoning its key ] beliefs and embracing the centre ground, it has won 3 successive ]s - but voter turnout has dropped from 71.29% to just 61.36% in 2005. Perhaps the UK electorate feels powerless as all the main parties rush to the "centre ground". | ||
| == Centrism in the Marxist movement == | == Centrism in the Marxist movement == | ||
Revision as of 23:29, 2 February 2006
In politics, centrism usually refers to the political ideal of promoting moderate policies which land in the middle ground between different political extremes. Most commonly, this is visualized as part of the one-dimensional political spectrum of Left-Right politics, with centrism landing in the middle between left-wing politics and right-wing politics. However, there is arguably more than one dimension to politics, so even the center has its own radicals as exemplified by radical centrist politics.
Definitions
There is anecdotal evidence that some people, particularly in Western two-party democracies, especially in the United States, consider themselves "centrists" and consider the word a compliment; thus, people are rarely attacked for being "centrists". This leads to a recursive definition where a centrist is merely defined by other centrists as "someone who agrees with me". In this case the number of centrists can not be determined except to say that there are far fewer centrists than people claiming to be centrists. See Russell's paradox.
An alternate definition is to assume that the two poles in question (e.g., Left/Right) are well-defined, and then (i) define as 'centrist' any position which the Left considers too far Right AND the Right considers too far Left, and (ii) define as a 'Centrist' any person who self-identifies more with those positions than either the Left or the Right. The weakness in this argument is that it is difficult to unambiguously and objectively define both poles at once, but that difficulty affects all political defintions, not just centrists.
In practice, the two poles can only be well-defined in a specific place at a specific time, since they differ from place to place and change over time. Thus, "centrism" itself means different things in different places (depending on the local political spectrum) and changes over time. For example, ideas that were considered extremist 200 years ago (such as democracy and universal suffrage) are considered centrist today - while other ideas that were considered centrist 200 years ago (such as slavery and racism) are considered extremist today.
Significance
Centrism is important because it applies to very large swaths of the populace. In many countries, most members of the public tend to identify themselves as independent rather than as left-wing, right-wing, or any other political wing. Politicians of many parties try to appeal to this so-called Vital Center, although many pundits find fault in this approach. For example, candidates using centrist politics to gain wider appeal risk losing support from the more idealistic members of their political parties. Also, centrist candidates may find themselves strongly agreeing with opponents in debates, potentially confusing voters as to how they stack up. This may have contributed to the controversial outcome of the 2000 U.S. presidential election in the United States (admittedly aggravated by political polarization among voters, a fairly different phenomenon).
It could certainly be argued that centrist politics do not infact exist, as there is no distinct definition of what it actually stands for. Traditionally, politics was based on ideology - whereby a democratic government is formed between two or more conflicting ideologies - eg. Communism, Socialism, Fascism or Capitalism. Once these ideologies come together, they automatically created a "centre ground" - the basic principle of democracy. In recent years however there has been a distinctive shift away from ideologies, embracing free market capitalism over all else. This is viewed as a mature step forward by so-called centrists who would argue that bitter squabbles over economic systems and tax structures have diverted politics away from far more important issues. Others would argue that economics and tax structures are absolutely key with regard to social stability. The main arguement against centrism though, is the effect it has on the electorate - since the British Labour Party reinvented itself in 1997 as "New Labour", abandoning its key Socialist beliefs and embracing the centre ground, it has won 3 successive general elections - but voter turnout has dropped from 71.29% to just 61.36% in 2005. Perhaps the UK electorate feels powerless as all the main parties rush to the "centre ground".
Centrism in the Marxist movement
"Centrism" has a specific meaning within the Marxist political movement. It usually reflects an ideologically held position between a revolutionary and reformist position. For instance, the Independent Labour Party was seen as revolutionarily centrist because they were a radical formation moving towards a revolutionary position and had the potential to become a full fledged revolutionary party or at least have a large number of their members move towards an openly revolutionary position. Marxist Centrism is often opportunistic, since it argues for a revolution at some point in the future but urges reformist practices in the mean time.
On a related note, the term "Centrism" also denotes positions held by some of the Bolsheviks during the 1920s. In this context, "Centrism" refers to a position between the Right Opposition (which supported the New Economic Policy and friendly relations with capitalist countries) and the Left Opposition (which supported a planned economy and world revolution). By the end of the 1920s, all three factions had been outmaneuvered by Joseph Stalin who, while casually aligning with each of them in turn, built his own power bloc and had the leaders of the three factions removed from their positions, imprisoned and eventually executed during the Great Purge. At the same time, he implemented policies that drew some ideas from each of the factions, combined with his own characteristic ruthlessness.
See: Two Articles on Centrism by Leon Trotsky
See also
- Populism
- Radical middle
- Compare: Syncretic Politics