Posted by
Andrews on Wednesday, January 30, 2008 10:28:35 AM
As I read article after article about how "polarized" the country has become and lamenting how we have become a nation of "blue and red states", I realize one thing: The very thing these commentators want is what created the world they lament.
How so?
Think about our last two presidents. Despite claims on either side, the last two presidents have been the most "centrist" in a long time. Between being saddled with a Republican congress, his "triangulation" strategy, and his problems with Monica, Clinton was forced, whatever his personal beliefs, into enacting a very right-leaning set of policies.
Likewise, with his dedication to "compassionate conservative" principles, his desire to build coalitions with the democrats, his need to compromise to get his various national defense measures passed, and his mysterious reluctance to veto anything at all, Bush has been responsible for more left leaning policies than any recent Republican.
Between the two, these presidents have moved the country to that ill defined "center" that the commentators lament has vanished. Yet, somehow, during 16 years of "centrist" rule, the country has become even more divided, people paint a very centrist Republican as "ultra-conservative" and a very centrist Democrat ex-president as "far left". While the country has been ruled from the center both parties have grown farther apart and become ever more hostile.
The reason, to anyone not a political commentator or rabid partisan, is obvious. Despite the claims of the commentators, we do not want to be ruled "from the center"; people want, to borrow a phrase, "a choice not an echo".
Oh, America loves the government as a whole to be centrist. In general the public may lean right or left at times, but they feel most comfortable when neither party completely dominates. But that DOES NOT mean they want "centrist" candidates.
What America wants, and the commentators seem to miss, is a mix of rabidly partisan politicians. We want a president strongly on one side, and a congress strongly on the other. Or maybe even a divided congress. We want to see candidates who represent our views, even if they are sometimes shouted down by those strongly representing the other side. We do not want a grey, bland assembly of centrists, we want a wild mix of extremists who average out to the middle, more or less. (Well, most of us admit we want the average a little toward our side of the center, just not too much.)
So, why has the country become so "polarized"?
Simple answer: it hasn't.
Longer answer: The country was always polarized. As I said above, we feel very strongly about a lot of issues, and want to see at least some politicians representing our views forcefully, even if they are a minority. What we don't want, what is even worse than being in the minority, is seeing members of our own party representing the OTHER SIDE.
So, when Democrats see Clinton acting like a Republican, or Republicans see Bush acting like a Democrat, they feel let down, betrayed. And as a result they push for ever more extreme representatives of their own views. When a party is saddled with 'representatives' who can't push their agenda, the party begins to feel that maybe it needs to adjust itself, move a bit farther toward the extremes, in order to get real representation.
So, oddly enough, the very centrists that the pundits laud are precisely the reason the nation appears to have become so polarized. By ruling from the center, Clinton and Bush have destroyed the center and pushed the country into the two camps we now see.