Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Luke Walker's avatar

You’re calling for a “normal” that no longer exists, or at least one that needs to be defined by outcomes rather than nostalgia or partisan branding. If one raises concerns about cost of living, housing affordability, and relentlessly rising health-insurance costs, it's not treated as ordinary politics, it's suddenly evidence of communism & extremism. Likewise, supporting reasonable gun policy such as meaningful mental-health safeguards while preserving lawful access to items like suppressors should not invite slander.

There is a workable middle ground, but it requires more than telling everyone to be less extreme. It requires a shared commitment to compromise, democratic rules, and good-faith negotiation.

That commitment is not evenly distributed. When one side treats compromise as governance (Democrats) and the other treats it as weakness to exploit (Republicans), “the center” stops being an equilibrium and becomes a ratchet: one side moves the baseline, and the other is expected to accommodate it.

So the answer is not a vague appeal to normality. It is to defend the institutions and rules that make pluralism possible, then judge politics by whether it materially improves people’s lives: affordable housing, manageable health care, public safety, civil rights, and a functioning democracy. Without enforceable rules and reciprocal restraint, calls for middle ground become a demand that only one side keep yielding.

Justin Patrick Moore's avatar

John Michael Greer says "the opposite of one bad idea is another bad idea" and we see that in the extremes you've noted here. The middle ground has been abandoned, but it needs to be reclaimed for sanity to return to this country.

6 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?