[RC] Part 2 : RADICAL CENTRST PHILOSOPHY in QUOTES

[Avesland at aol.com]

 PART 2
           Radical  Centrist Philosophy
                          in Quotes
                               By :  Billy Rojas
 
Radical Centrism and the  Future
 
Radical Centrism is a new political  philosophy; essentially it did not exist 
prior
to the year 2000. There were published  references to the phrase and something
like the concept before then, to be sure,  but the nucleus of a political 
movement
did not materialize until about 5 years  ago.
 
There is no fixed Radical Centrist  doctrine at this time. However, there are 
two
basic versions of this philosophy. For  convenience we can call these two 
schools of thought  the East Coast variant and the West Coast  variant. This
leaves open the possibility that there  might well be other versions of 
Radical
Centrist philosophy in the future. And, at  that, these designations are 
somewhat
misleading since people who identify with  the "West Coast" form of RC can be
found all over the map and are anything  but limited to California and Oregon.
And the "East Coast" school may have more  adherents in California at this
time than the West Coast school. But for  purposes of discussion this typology
has some usefulness.
 
What most distinguishes these two variants  of one philosophy is greater 
political
focus in the East Coast school and greater  philosophical focus in the West 
Coast
version of RC. As well, the East Coast  variant stresses "thinking outside 
the box"
as its signature approach to problem  solving, that is, seeking solutions to 
problems by using ingenuity to create new  ideas, only afterward dealing with
partisan implications. This is a  simplification, but to give you an idea.
 
The West Coast school, while it also makes  considerable use of thinking 
outside
the box, is noted for seeking to take  positions that combine sometimes 
disparate
strong stands of Right and Left.  This is possible because of a commitment to
hard research so that all positions taken  reflect scientific evidence, at 
least as far
as such evidence may be found and  analyzed.  Thus, to use two examples, 
Radical Centrism on the West Coast  combines a strong politically Right stand
in opposition to homosexuality with a  strong stand in favor of the scientific
view of evolution, rejecting "creationism"  as untenable. On the issue of 
homosex-
uality, while religious values surely may  play a part, the case rests on 
empirical
evidence that we are discussing a  pathology, a psychological disorder, and 
hence something that does not legitimately  fall in any Civil Rights category.
After all, no-one has a "right" to have a  mental illness.
 
In both schools of thought there are  dissenters about one or another issue 
and
there is no such thing as complete  unanimity.This simply provides an 
introduction
to the subject by observing what seems to  be most characteristic.
 
Both schools must put up with some common  problems. These days the mass
media has discovered the phrase "Radical  Centrism" and, accordingly, it now
has a certain degree of popularity. Hence  a variety of people who have 
little at
all to do with the movement have  appropriated the phrase for their own uses.
 
On the East Coast this may well be  co-optation on the part of the Left. On 
the
West Coast the opposite is the case, with  Neo-Conservatives stealing the 
phrase to cover for their ideology, not  exactly well liked on Pacific shores.
 
This division is also due to the fact that  on the East Coast one finds two 
major
RC institutions, one headquartered in  Washington DC and the other in Boston,
where the offices of  The  Atlantic Monthly are located. That journal under-
writes the New America Foundation, the  most well financed of any Radical
Centrist organization. The other important  group is Mark Satin's Radical
Middle society, which is privately funded  with donations and small grants. 
Anyway,
given the reputations of DC and Boston as  "liberal" bastions it is no 
surprise
that RC along the Atlantic seaboard has a  Democratic Party association.
 
As well, the charge has been made that the  East Coast version of RC is
"stealth liberalism." There is some truth  to this allegation. All the 
leaders of
the movement there clearly have political  sympathies that place them within
the "values orbit" of the Democratic  Party. Yet to call them secret Democrats
would be to do them a great disservice  since they also have little use for 
the
unimaginative approach to issues that is  so typical of the party at this 
time,
and because there is a wide variety of  matters on which East Coast RC and
the party disagree. And Radical Centrists  ARE operating outside the party
entirely and  are quite  independent. If you want a better comparison it 
would 
be to the Green movement  -with the  difference that RC is more interested in
working within the political system and  simply does not take its case into 
the
streets. They are outsiders who  nonetheless have one foot inside the door.
 
Things are not at all like this on the  West Coast. For example the West Coast
version of the movement is low budget and  is privately financed by 
participants.
Everything that is done is at individual  initiative. There is no 
institutional funding,
simply a disparate group of professionals  who are alienated  from the two 
major
political parties and who believe that  there is no reason why a new kind of 
politics
cannot emerge that takes the best ideas of  both parties, but blended in a 
rational
manner, to serve the best interests of all  of society. This may sometimes 
require
drastic re-thinking of core issues, like  economics, but more often than not 
the
goal is to create a superior mix of  positions. Note this does NOT mean 
triangulation,
half steps toward common ground. On the  contrary it means radical rethinking 
of
the basis of all major issues and arriving  at a combination of positions 
that reflect
the very best research conclusions  currently available. Thus Radical 
Centrism 
means development of a new center around a  set of issues and values that are
believed in whole  heartedly.
 
With the rise to prominence of the  "governator" in Sacramento, however, and 
with
no-one in the media knowing what to call  Schwarzenegger's political 
philosophy,
the phrase "Radical Centrism" was handy  for the purpose. Hence a spate of new
blogs hosted by people who now use RC as  self identification. While this is 
not
at all certain it seems as if most of  these people are either "Ventura-ists" 
or a new
version of  Neo-Conservative. 
 
The philosophy of Jesse Ventura, which Gov  Schwarzenegger has sometimes used
as a frame of reference to describe his  own approach to government, is 
decidedly
NOT Radical Centrism -of any school. What  Ventura did was to devise a 
"system"
that combined  -virtually out of  whole cloth-  social liberalism with fiscal
conservatism. In actual Radical Centrism  social positions are some mixture
of both liberal and conservative,  and this is also true for economic policy. 
While RC
on the East Coast may "lean" to the left  in both areas there is no way to 
describe
the finished product in simplistic  Ventura-ist terms.And the situation on 
the West
Coast is even more difficult to describe  in such terms. There is little or 
no "lean"
to either side of the spectrum. The  finished product is eclectic and 
original.
 
Ted Halstead and Mark Satin are the most  well known RC figures on the East
Coast. The West Coast school is the  product of the leadership of Dr. Earnest
Prabhakar of California. As you may have  discerned. the author is clearly
a West Coast loyalist and is associated  with  Pabhakar's RadicalCentrism,org
group. 
 
None of this should give the impression  that RCers on the two coasts or 
elsewhere
are at loggerheads. The opposite is the  case. Both wish the other the best 
of luck 
as each advances the Radical Centrist  cause in their own ways.We both have a 
stake in re-inventing American politics  and in rejuvenating the political 
process.
We both are dissatisfied with "politics as  usual" and see no reason why the 
major
parties cannot reform themselves.Both  leave open the possibility of a third 
party
option, but no-one that I know of  takes this prospect seriously , certainly 
not for
he foreseeable future. Both are also  sensitive to corruption in the ranks of 
each
major party, but for the time being the  practical problems of doing much 
about
this unpleasant fact of life are so  overwhelming that the subject is seldom 
discussed.
The major parties control the mass media.  That is a Mt. Everest to climb.
 
Finally, until such time as a large scale  paradigm shift occurs in the 
electorate the
best part of wisdom consists of working as  researchers, writing, and communi-
cating ideas over the Internet. Still, we  all have made contacts of many 
kinds,
and everyone involved must be counted as  opportunistic. As soon as the tide
turns in a direction favorable to Radical  Centrist interests you can be sure 
that
the movement will act decisively  to try and reach new objectives.
 
__________________________________________________________
 
Radical Centrism and  American Culture
 
The quotations provided in the first part  of this paper reflect the West 
Coast
outlook far more than that of the East  Coast. But there are still more 
concerns
which can be treated in quote form to good  effect. At the top of the list is 
the
matter of sex and gender. This does not  seem to be a major issue in DC or
Boston, where interest is strongly  centered on practical politics.But on the 
West Coast the subject has philosophical  meaning that cannot be overlooked 
in discussions of Radical Centrism. We  have boldly asked the question:
"Where are all the Radical Centrist chicks  ?'
 
Actually, this is my way of playfully  phrasing the question. Ernie and the 
others
would prefer something along the lines of  : "Why hasn't the movement 
attracted
women participants ?" As the bachelor of  the group I get to say things 
somewhat
differently than the married  men.........
 
The fact is that Radical Centrism is meant  as much for women as it is for 
men.
There is no intention to make this a stag  club. And we all realize that 
women's
perspective is needed. We do the best we  are able to do, but the outlook
we bring to the topic is  masculine.
 
Along the way there has been speculation  about the situation.No consensus
has emerged but there is suspicion that  women will eventually become part of
the cause as soon as some women perceive  self interest in doing so.
 
Of course, we are an anomaly for the West  Coast. Just as we have rejected 
political conventionality, we also have  little use for Political Correctness 
values.
In analyzing the problem we do not resort to feminist theory, we use cold  
logic
and existential truth tests. And we have concluded that the sexes are  
different.
This being the case we can benefit from thinking about available wisdom on 
the subject. For example :
 
When women are depressed, they eat or go shopping. Men invade another 
country. Its a whole different way of thinking.
Elayne Brosler
 
If  a man is standing in the middle of a forest speaking and there is  no 
woman
is he still wrong ?
(attributed)
George Carlin
 
If a woman has to choose between catching a fly ball and saving an  infant's 
life,
she will choose to save the infant without even considering if there  are
men on base.
Dave Berry
 
There is one woman who might have been quoted in Part 1 but who was not, 
for the reason that many of her other statements can be  questioned.
 
Not incidentally, inclusion of a quotation in this paper does not imply  any
endorsement of people who are quoted. The point made is that many  people
of many different backgrounds have arrived at ideas that are congruent  with
the views of Radical Centrists. Yet for the most part, certainly, every  
effort
was made to feature people who might, or might have in the past, fit into  a
Radical Centrist circle. To be sure, I do not know the biographies of the  
great
majority of people quoted. For all anyone can say, a few of these people 
might not share some key RC values. Even so, the quotes show that  the .
Radical Centrist outlook can make considerable good sense to many  different
types of people.
 
In the case of Oprah, two considerations were important. First is why  her
words appear here. She obviously has done much good in society.She
promotes literacy and education. Her show, while it is not my cup of  tea,
nonetheless, is civil, decent.and seeks to achieve worthwhile goals.
 
The other consideration is that most of what Oprah is quoted as  saying
in sources  of quotations- is so similar in spirit to Norman Vincent  Peale 
and his "power of positive thinking" that it was difficult to read. And  there
was such a quantity of sentimentality that it made me wonder.
 
But in the midst of all of that were several comments that can be  edited
and presented as a statement of philosophy that no Radical Centrist  would
dream of disagreeing with :
 
I think of myself as somebody who, from an early age knew I was  responsible
for myself, and I had to make good.   ...My philosophy is that  not only are 
you
responsible for your life, but doing the best at this moment puts you in  the 
 best
place for the next moment. ...Become the change you want to see   -those are
words I live by.
Oprah Winfrey
 
This outlook has limitations. Sometimes. no matter how hard you try,  no
matter how much preparation you carry out, there still won't be  anything
like success. Luck does play a part in the fortunes of life; there is no  way
to pretend otherwise. And the actions of others may work to our  serious
disadvantage.  But all of this said, you multiply your chances many  times
over if your attitude is similar to that of Oprah. This is the value of  her
outlook on life. And , when all is said, Radical Centrism is not a  panacea.
RC principles my work extremely well for some people . For others the
ideas may make little practical difference in their day-to-day lives. Yet  the
objective is not only to develop a political philosophy that can some  day
change the face of American politics, but also provide at least the nucleus 
for a philosophy of life that can, indeed, make a major difference in the  
personal
lives of the people who become part of the movement.
 
That is , Radical Centrism is as much a cultural cause as it is a  political
movement, certainly thinking about the West Coast school. Our  objectives
cannot be politics and only politics. For what counts the most in  determining
what kind of politics a society has is its culture.
 
So, we are just as concerned about the arts and religion as we are about  
politics,
again, to speak primarily about the West Coast school.Thus, while there is  
no 
RC aesthetics at this time, there are beginnings toward a Radical Centrist 
theology. This is also true outside of Prabhakar's group. The phrase  "Radical
Centrism" is also used to describe a movement within some Evangelical 
churches that seek to reconcile the charismatic and doctrinal "wings" of  this
movement. However, something similar is entirely possible vis-a-vis different
schools of Buddhism, of education, or still other  things. In some  respects
Radical Centrism is a problem solving methodology.
 
_________________________________________________________
 
Radical Centrist Politics
 
This is the appropriate place to quote myself. If this paper has had  meaning
for you, you deserve to know the author's interpretation of Radical  Centrist
philosophy. Here are 5 statements derived from some of my previous  writings :
 
(1) There is no mystery about the fundamental principle of Radical  Centrist
politics. It is simply this -You not only have freedom to pick and choose  
from
among the ideas and positions of today's political parties, it is a virtue  to
do so. In fact it is a necessity.
 
(2) Radical Centrism takes it as axiomatic that no political view has  the
least value unless it is researched. In other words, uninformed opinion, 
even  when such opinion favors your "side" in a debate, maybe  especially
when this is the case, is worthless. It may well be counterproductive  since
in any real test uninformed opinion cannot weather any storms at all.  You
need to know what you are talking about, and simply following the  pack
guarantees nothing except an investment in ignorance, no matter how
this is disguised as enlightened thinking or anything else.
 
(3) Radical Centrism is "contrarian"in outlook. This  means  willingness, each
step of the way, to take the opposite view from what majorities may be  saying
about any given issue. This does not say that one should always  take an 
opposite stand, sometimes this would be very ill advised,  but the  point is
that if you are at all uncertain about majority views you may well have  good
reason for skepticism even if you cannot articulate it at the moment. With  a
contrarian attitude at your service whenever needed you can feel  free to do
whatever study is necessary to become informed without worry about  the
uninformed opinions of others   -because you VALUE the truth  above
any and all uninformed opinions. But this is not a shortcut to anything.You 
have the responsibility to analyze our own ideas to test them for  truth.
 
(4) Radical Centrism also means a commitment to honesty. There is  almost
nothing worse than virulent, ideological objections to truth. Such  
objections,
coming from either Left or Right, or from anywhere else, discredit those 
political philosophies.
 
(5) Radical Centrism rejects False Absolutes. What is a False  Absolute,
sometimes called a Provisional Absolute ? Any principle that is usually  true
but not, when you really think about something, true in every case. Take  the
virtue of tolerance. Usually this is an example of a High Virtue.  But some 
things should never be tolerated, such as anything that causes us harm  as
persons.Such as anything that is seriously criminal in nature, or that  
compromises
our integrity. What we  tolerate is what we accept and we should make  choices
about what we bring into our lives based on cases, not abstract  principles
that sometimes can be wrong. Yes brotherhood is always good and there 
should be no prejudice against the opposite sex, but about a number of  other
matters toleration may or may not serve us well. It is False  Absolute.
 
A final quote for this essay :
 
The secret of politics ? Make a good treaty with Russia.
Otto Von Bismarck
 
Just what is most important to you ? For a German chancellor in the  19th
century reaching agreement with Russia was crucial. For an American
politician in the early 21st century some other issue may loom so large  that
ignoring it or even not making it a number 1 priority could have 'lethal' 
consequences.
 
For the Radical Centrist movement what should be taken as more important 
than other pressing issues is the case of Alvin Toffler, author of  Future 
Shock
and several additional books.
 
Mr Toffler happens to be involved in the East Coast school of Radical  
Centrism.
He has done some research and now knows that RC has significant  political
potential. He associates with various leaders of the East Coast RC  cause
and is sometimes featured in their publications.
 
This might be all for the good, but only if Toffler did not have  something
incriminating to hide.As things are in real life, however, he does have a  
skeleton
in his closet that he tries to keep  the public from knowing, no  matter how 
much
of an open secret this is in professional circles.
 
But it so happens that Toffler was dishonorably discharged from the US  Army
during the Korean War for pro-Communist political activities that  were
subversive in nature. He has repeatedly lied about his Communist past, at 
one time gong so far as to claim that all he ever did in his "youth" was to  
read
some Marx,   years  ago, when, instead, he was active in the  Communist
Party at a time when Gus Hall was its leader and Stalin was still in power  
in the
old Soviet Union, dictating CP policy to the American branch of the party  and
dictating the values of its members.
 
There is no serious question that the East Coast RC people know about  
Toffler's
Communist past, if not in detail, in outline. Yet they do nothing about  this 
dirty 
secret because, when all is said, Toffler's support means added influence  in 
places
like Washington DC and New York City, not to  mention Los Angeles,  where
the Tofflers have lived for several years.All of which also translates into  
influence
with the media, even if the most television exposure Ted Halstead, for  
example,
has received so far are a few appearances on public networks. Anyone can  see
that bigger and better things are on the way. Why spoil a good thing by 
calling Toffler's bluff ?
 
I know about Toffler because I once was his Research Assistant and sought  to 
blow the whistle on him. For my troubles I was smeared in extremis. So, the
Radical Centrist movement has some issues to resolve.
 
Ironically the only way these issues can be resolved is through  free and 
open 
non-partisan debate. Both Democrats and Republicans have colluded to  aid
Toffler in a cover up of his questionable past.On the Left are such  
luminaries
as Toffler's friend of many years, Dan Rather. On the Right are such people  
as
one-time "progressive Republican," Newt Gingrich.  Newt certainly was  a
progressive in the years when I know him well and we took the first  steps
toward creating a new political party  -something documented in  sources that
can be supplied upon request. My friendship with Newt came to an end when 
he bought the line that Toffler sold him to discredit me and keep me out  of
professional futures research through black-listing.
 
In other words, Radical Centrism  has its personalities, its  conflicts, and 
its 
open secrets. It is a human and fallible movement. But  we can say of  it
something similar to what Churchill once said about democracy, in words  to
the effect : "It may be inefficient, it may sometimes be contradictory,  and
sometimes it is a mess, but it is better than all other options."
 
_____________________________________________________
 
B. Rojas
Eugene, Oregon
August 2005
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 .
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/centroids_radicalcentrism.com/attachments/20050815/dd59d145/attachment-0001.html