Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Two Kinds of Moderate

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 382 posts

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#21

Post by CM30 »

> Whereas an accidental moderate's opinions will be scattered over a broad range, but will, like those of the intentional moderate, average to about 50.

I think this describes my own political opinion to a tee. I agree with some stuff on the left, some stuff on the right and the moderate/centrist opinion on some others, and it probably equals out as centrist.

Still, I'm not sure I'd say this is a rare thing by any means. Indeed, I suspect a large percentage (maybe even majority) of the population has beliefs from all sides/corners of the political spectrum.

It's just that the current voting system in places like the US and UK encourages everyone to band with 'one side or the other', and groups a bunch of people/groups that likely disagree in many cases together as one party.

Plus given most people's mixtures of said beliefs are different to others, your average politician/party ends up having to appeal to a certain 'tribe' in order to get elected, since the percentage of people who 100% agree with a certain mix of beliefs is too small to get anyone a majority.

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#22

Post by SethMurphy »

In our current political system the accidental moderate seems left out. How do they choose the right candidate when the campaign system is wholly based on ideology? Sure, accidental moderates may have great opinions, but how does one put those in action in the current political climate within a political framework. They would seem to be best living outside the system, with no label defining the political affiliation or ideology, while the moderate is free to be wooed by the right or left choice of any given election.

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#23

Post by war1025 »

msla wrote: post #6
urs wrote: post #3

I like this part: “The defining quality of an ideologue, whether on the left or the right, is to acquire one's opinions in bulk.” I think another way to slice this is, if you think of the Overton window shifting along the axis of time, the “accidental moderate” does not shift their opinion by the same factor as the ends of the window shift. The “accidental moderate”, in fact, shifts their opinion independent of the s…

> I think another way to slice this is, if you think of the Overton window shifting along the axis of time, the “accidental moderate” does not shift their opinion by the same factor as the ends of the window shift. You can see this with the Republicans who turned into Democrats once the Republicans shifted far enough right that there were no more Rockefeller Republicans and Bill Clinton ran as a Democrat. If you're a…

> You can see this with the Republicans who turned into Democrats once the Republicans shifted far enough right that there were no more Rockefeller Republicans and Bill Clinton ran as a Democrat. If you're an accidental moderate, you run the risk of involuntarily changing party affiliation.

I think this is interesting because it's been exactly the opposite for me and many of the people I know. At some point over the past ten or fifteen years, the Democrats switched their focus to the point that we've unintentionally found ourselves being Republican now. I.e. the midwest Trump vote.

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#24

Post by arh68 »

I'm not convinced there are any intentional moderates. Isn't this just one big straw man? Noticeable lack of specifics, not even historical figures. Honestly it comes off like "I met a guy, didn't like him, I think this is why".

I think there's definitely something to the idea, but I wouldn't carve up the world into These People and Those People. If anything, we're more like calico cats and we all exhibit both behaviors simultaneously. Yes, I think the Overton windows "centers" some of our views, but I can't consciously tell you which ones without thinking about it first.

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#25

Post by coldtea »

arh68 wrote: post #24

I'm not convinced there are any intentional moderates. Isn't this just one big straw man? Noticeable lack of specifics, not even historical figures. Honestly it comes off like "I met a guy, didn't like him, I think this is why". I think there's definitely something to the idea, but I wouldn't carve up the world into These People and Those People. If anything, we're more like calico cats and we all exhibit both behavi…

>I'm not convinced there are any intentional moderates.

Well, I know tons of those. People in journalism, and other high profile public related posts, are often such. They don't want to offend any side, and reap the benefits of both. Some politicians are also like that. I know people in media personally who have more extreme positions in private talks, but their public opinions are carefully calculated to advance their career.

>Noticeable lack of specifics, not even historical figures. Honestly it comes off like "I met a guy, didn't like him, I think this is why"

Why do people on HN think everything is a big science paper? The post is observations about society, from someone who has lived in one for 5+ decades and paid some attention. It's not some sociology paper or nation-wide poll results. It's like people can't think without polls and figures, or have relegated their opinions to the "experts" and their stats...

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#26

Post by peisistratos »

toyg wrote: post #15

This is a very American perspective, occasionally a bit flippant (dismissing 100+ years of Marx-influenced intellectuals in politics and economics as “not smart” is definitely not smart, particularly after 2008) and overall mediocre. There is a lot of stereotyping, and it doesn’t account for the interest axis, i.e. the fact that a lot of very smart people simply do not care for organised politics in any way, shape, o…

> OP: In the 20th century, a lot of very smart people were Marxists — just no one who was smart about the subjects Marxism involves.

In 40 years, the USSR, whose economy was about the size of Brazil's in 1917, and who waged a civil war and repelled two waves of invasions (the first of which included an invasion by the USA after WWI) - this country under Stalin had enormous economic growth, to where it could repel an invasion by continental Europe, then launch the first satellite, man on space, moon probe and whatnot. For a country that Lenin considered to be in a holding action waiting for revolution in the west. I find that impressive.

The western anti-Marxists went through an array of nonsense in the 20th century - "The End of History", the idea that Keynesian or monetarist or whatever remedies would smooth out the business cycle.

Marx predicted worsening economic crises like in 2000 or 2008, with accompanying unemployment, overproduction and a falling of profits. Lenin predicted an unquenchable and self-destructive drive for imperialism.

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#27

Post by tomlockwood »

gms wrote: post #13
CPLX wrote: post #9

Good thing this article has been posted. We’ve been short of billionaires willing to share their opinions about why we should consider the incredible increase in concentrated wealth and the resurgence of monopoly business practices as “moderate” while the idea that maybe we should, you know, consider doing something to stop that, as “extreme” and “far left”. There’s a couple tells in the article. But here’s a pretty…

Curious: why not take the words at face value rather than redefining them in a way that annoys you?

Isn't it possible that by posing a question that supposes the post you're questioning redefines something, you've created a case of the negative type of redefinition you're implying is happening?

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#28

Post by CPLX »

toyg wrote: post #15

This is a very American perspective, occasionally a bit flippant (dismissing 100+ years of Marx-influenced intellectuals in politics and economics as “not smart” is definitely not smart, particularly after 2008) and overall mediocre. There is a lot of stereotyping, and it doesn’t account for the interest axis, i.e. the fact that a lot of very smart people simply do not care for organised politics in any way, shape, o…

Here’s an alternate take on your paragraph:

So uhm, this piece could have been written by a 16-year-old trying to move his brain for the first time. That it comes from a [billionaire founder of a private equity firm with a large platform], somebody who holds a number of smart positions on other topics, to me is a signal that such person [is engaged in an intentional effort to influence public opinion].

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#29

Post by zozbot234 »

peisistratos wrote: post #26
toyg wrote: post #15

This is a very American perspective, occasionally a bit flippant (dismissing 100+ years of Marx-influenced intellectuals in politics and economics as “not smart” is definitely not smart, particularly after 2008) and overall mediocre. There is a lot of stereotyping, and it doesn’t account for the interest axis, i.e. the fact that a lot of very smart people simply do not care for organised politics in any way, shape, o…

> OP: In the 20th century, a lot of very smart people were Marxists — just no one who was smart about the subjects Marxism involves. In 40 years, the USSR, whose economy was about the size of Brazil's in 1917, and who waged a civil war and repelled two waves of invasions (the first of which included an invasion by the USA after WWI) - this country under Stalin had enormous economic growth, to where it could repel an…

The best argument for Marxism isn't the USSR - it's China. They've actually managed to turn into a modern, mostly-developed country, though the process is most likely far from complete. The USSR was a dismal failure by comparison.

BTW, they're even launching their own space satelites, men in space, moon probes and whatnot lately.

Re: The Two Kinds of Moderate

#30

Post by revscat »

CPLX wrote: post #9

Good thing this article has been posted. We’ve been short of billionaires willing to share their opinions about why we should consider the incredible increase in concentrated wealth and the resurgence of monopoly business practices as “moderate” while the idea that maybe we should, you know, consider doing something to stop that, as “extreme” and “far left”. There’s a couple tells in the article. But here’s a pretty…

[dead]
Post reply on HN