If you missed them, here are Part 1 and Part 2.
As we finish this article, those of us in Reno– and really anywhere in Nevada– can ask ourselves where our legislators fit in this “moderate” landscape… and, indeed, if we really want them to practice moderation, or “Middlin’.” For us lowly subjects, the middle of the road is merely dangerous in the abstract– but for the people we elect to represent and serve us, the middle of the road is where all the bad stuff actually happens that eventually devastates cities like Reno and Las Vegas. A sterling example is this nice bit of Middler magic. See where that got us?
This really brings us squarely back into the uninformed-versus-informed discussion. What my life journey has shown me, above all else, is that there really is a right and a wrong. Good surely does exist, and so does evil. The more I know about an issue, the more I am able to decide for myself where I stand on it. If I don’t know much about an issue, my inclination would not be to say “oh, both sides must have a point.” My inclination is always to say either “I need to learn about that and form an opinion,” or “I really don’t care about that issue and so I will stay completely out of it.”
The latter statement, of course, is a luxury reserved for us peons, and is not really an option for elected leaders who are supposed to know and care about issues. If I don’t want to take the time to learn the intricacies of a bill on medical record privacy concerns, then that is not really a problem. For the legislator who is to vote on it, though, it is vital to learn all he can of the issue, then hold it up to his personal principles compass (everyone does have one of those, don’t they?) to see how he should vote. To do otherwise is to be either a hack who sells his vote, or simply a fool- and both of these are dangerous.
So, where does this leave the highly respected moderate? Clearly, it leaves him out in the intellectual and moral cold. I see a moderate as someone lacking either the courage or the conviction– or both– to lead a principled life. I see in the moderate a person for whom “getting along” is preferable to doing what is right.
Most moderates are just normal people who think that being in the center is a noble and good thing. The reason they think that is because they are, by their very noncommittal nature, unable– or unwilling– to think deeply about things. They have been spoon fed multi-cultural pablum by the media for their whole life, and they eat it up because, frankly, it is easier than taking the time and effort to dissect issues and form positions. The product of this societal centrism is the social and fiscal wasteland that is now Reno, Las Vegas, and pretty much the entire State of Nevada– not to mention a good majority of the rest of the country, too.
Consider this: in the last Presidential election, there were main-stream left-leaning organizations that used terms like “ultra right-wing extremist John McCain.” Now, to me and most anyone on the right side of things, this is a patently absurd comment. To the socialists and the useful idiots, though, it is true. There are actually people– not joking here– who say that McCain lost because he is too Conservative. He should have been more moderate. He should have picked a more moderate VP candidate. He should have tried harder to appeal to moderates. Yes, they say this with a straight face. To make this even better, many of the people saying this claim to be Republicans. Yep… seriously.
There is a very (very) simple equation to consider here. It is an empirical truth that anytime a Democrat “runs to the center” in a national election, he wins; and anytime a Republican “runs to the center” in a national election, he loses. Let that soak in for a minute. It clearly says that for someone who is seen as “left” to move to the right is a good thing– and for someone who is seen as “right” to move to the left is a bad thing.
The reason for this is that, in spite of the media usurpation of our collective world-view, America (and certainly Reno) remains very much center-right. That is precisely because right and wrong do exist and that knowledge is built into our DNA. The equivocating position of not “forcing my beliefs on someone else” is purely a product of the left’s media sponsored all-out assault on societal virtue. People still hold their values strongly, for the most part, but they have been whipped relentlessly into thinking they are intolerant for having those values– and if they don’t want to be labeled as xenophobicly racist gender criminals, then they had better keep that value stuff to themselves, by God (oops… by gosh).
There. We’ve hit the truth of it. There is how a moderate is born. He is a person who has decided that the left is correct in saying that expressing belief in a principle is tantamount to intolerance. How great the irony that the most intolerant of all are those very voices crying “intolerance!”
Choosing a favorite Ayn Rand quote is virtually impossible for me, but one passage does stand out… and if forced, I might say it is my favorite. I shall close with it, since it is certainly germane to this discussion.
~~ “There are two sides to every issue: one side is right and the other is wrong, but the middle is always evil. The man who is wrong still retains some respect for truth, if only by accepting the responsibility of choice. But the man in the middle is the knave who blanks out the truth in order to pretend that no choice or values exist, who is willing to sit out the course of any battle, willing to cash in on the blood of the innocent or to crawl on his belly to the guilty, who dispenses justice by condemning both the robber and the robbed to jail, who solves conflicts by ordering the thinker and the fool to meet each other halfway. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.” –Ayn Rand (John Galt’sSpeech)~~