Why Centrism Fails

There is no virtue in centrism. It is one’s obligation, not only to himself, but to his community, to hold and defend his moral positions. This is everyone’s responsibility, and from it, a ‘center’ naturally emerges.

What stabilizes the political spectrum is the tension between beliefs, not the median position itself. If one cedes his true position to appease the opposition or to optimize for an outcome or process, he reduces the force required to pull the spectrum against him.

Centrism is merely the first step in the individual’s political awakening. It is sophisticated only in that it attempts to transcend the hyper-partisan political environment. But don’t confuse sophistication for wisdom, because this is exactly what is capitalized on. You eventually reach a point where centrism is revealed as a slower version of liberalism.

Fundamentally, centrism is a lack of belief, lack of strength, and a lack of moral conviction. Your beliefs are in your blood.

The compromise itself isn’t a belief, it’s an outcome. One cannot believe in an outcome, and it certainly isn’t a coherent political philosophy. The idea that one can believe in a process is perhaps the most pernicious leftover from Enlightenment philosophy.

Empty appeals to reason, logic, and fair discourse only broadcast your inability to recognize the state of play. Centrism cannot hold, because it’s constantly in motion.