Radical centrism, also called the radical center, the radical centre, and the radical middle, is a concept that arose in Western nations in the late 20th century. The radical in the term refers to a willingness on the part of most radical centrists to call for fundamental reform of institutions.[1] The centrism refers to a belief that genuine solutions require realism and pragmatism, not just idealism and emotion.[2]
One radical centrist text defines radical centrism as "idealism without illusions",[3] a phrase originally from John F. Kennedy.[4] Radical centrists borrow ideas from the political left and the political right, often melding them.[5] Most support market economy-based solutions to social problems, with strong governmental oversight in the public interest.[6] There is support for increased global engagement and the growth of an empowered middle class in developing countries.[7] In the United States, many radical centrists work within the major political parties; they also support independent or third-party initiatives and candidacies.[8]
One common criticism of radical centrism is that its policies are only marginally different from conventional centrist policies.[9] Some observers see radical centrism as primarily a process of catalyzing dialogue and fresh thinking among polarized people and groups.[10]
According to journalist William Safire, the phrase "radical middle" was coined by Renata Adler,[22] a staff writer for The New Yorker. In the introduction to her second collection of essays, Toward a Radical Middle (1969), she presented it as a healing radicalism.[23] Adler said it rejected the violent posturing and rhetoric of the 1960s in favor of such "corny" values as "reason, decency, prosperity, human dignity [and human] contact".[24] She called for the "reconciliation" of the white working class and African-Americans.[24]
In the 1970s, sociologist Donald I. Warren described the radical center as consisting of those "middle American radicals" who were suspicious of big government, the national media and academics, as well as rich people and predatory corporations. Although they might vote for Democrats or Republicans, or for populists like George Wallace, they felt politically homeless and were looking for leaders who would address their concerns.[25][nb 4]
Joe Klein, who wrote the Newsweek cover story "Stalking the Radical Middle"
In the 1980s and 1990s, several authors contributed their understandings to the concept of the radical center. For example, futurist Marilyn Ferguson added a holistic dimension to the concept when she said: "[The] Radical Center ... is not neutral, not middle-of-the-road, but a view of the whole road".[28][nb 5] Sociologist Alan Wolfe located the creative part of the political spectrum at the center: "The extremes of right and left know where they stand, while the center furnishes what is original and unexpected".[30] African-American theorist Stanley Crouch upset many political thinkers when he pronounced himself a "radical pragmatist".[31] Crouch explained: "I affirm whatever I think has the best chance of working, of being both inspirational and unsentimental, of reasoning across the categories of false division and beyond the decoy of race".[32]
In his influential[33] 1995 Newsweek cover story "Stalking the Radical Middle", journalist Joe Klein described radical centrists as angrier and more frustrated than conventional Democrats and Republicans. Klein said they share four broad goals: getting money out of politics, balancing the budget, restoring civility and figuring out how to run government better. He also said their concerns were fueling "what is becoming a significant intellectual movement, nothing less than an attempt to replace the traditional notions of liberalism and conservatism".[34][nb 6][nb 7]
Relations to the Third Way
In 1998, British sociologist Anthony Giddens claimed that the radical center is synonymous with the Third Way.[39] For Giddens, an advisor to former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and for many other European political actors, the Third Way is a reconstituted form of social democracy.[40][41]
Some radical centrist thinkers do not equate radical centrism with the Third Way. In Britain, many do not see themselves as social democrats. Most prominently, British radical-centrist politician Nick Clegg has made it clear he does not consider himself an heir to Tony Blair[16] and Richard Reeves, Clegg's longtime advisor, emphatically rejects social democracy.[42]
In the United States, the situation is different because the term Third Way was adopted by the Democratic Leadership Council and other moderate Democrats.[43] However, most U.S. radical centrists also avoid the term. Ted Halstead and Michael Lind's introduction to radical centrist politics fails to mention it[44] and Lind subsequently accused the organized moderate Democrats of siding with the "center-right" and Wall Street.[27] Radical centrists have expressed dismay with what they see as "split[ting] the difference",[34] "triangulation"[27][45] and other supposed practices of what some of them call the "mushy middle".[46][47][nb 8]
21st-century overviews
Michael Lind, co-author of The Radical Center: The Future of American Politics
The first years of the 21st century saw publication of four introductions to radical centrist politics: Ted Halstead and Michael Lind's The Radical Center (2001), Matthew Miller's The Two Percent Solution (2003), John Avlon's Independent Nation (2004) and Mark Satin's Radical Middle (2004).[48][49] These books attempted to take the concept of radical centrism beyond the stage of "cautious gestures"[50] and journalistic observation and define it as a political philosophy.[5][26]
The authors came to their task from diverse political backgrounds: Avlon had been a speechwriter for New York Republican Mayor Rudolph Giuliani;[51] Miller had been a business consultant before serving in President Bill Clinton's budget office;[52] Lind had been an exponent of Harry Truman-style "national liberalism";[53] Halstead had run a think tank called Redefining Progress;[54] and Satin had co-drafted the U.S. Green Party's foundational political statement, "Ten Key Values".[55] However, there is a generational bond: all these authors were between 31 and 41 years of age when their books were published (except for Satin, who was nearing 60).
While the four books do not speak with one voice, among them they express assumptions, analyses, policies and strategies that helped set the parameters for radical centrism as a 21st-century political philosophy:
Assumptions
Former Green activist Mark Satin (left) and former Republican activist John Avlon (right), two early 21st-century radical centrist authors
Our problems cannot be solved by twiddling the dials; substantial reforms are needed in many areas.[56][57]
Solving our problems will not require massive infusions of new money.[58][59]
However, solving our problems will require drawing on the best ideas from left and right and wherever else they may be found.[2][60]
Such thinking cannot be divorced from the world as it is, or from tempered understandings of human nature. A mixture of idealism and realism is needed.[64] "Idealism without realism is impotent", says John Avlon. "Realism without idealism is empty".[2]
Analysis
North America and Western Europe have entered an Information Ageeconomy, with new possibilities that are barely being tapped.[65][66]
In this new age, a plurality of people is neither liberal nor conservative, but independent[67] and looking to move in a more appropriate direction.[68]
Nevertheless, the major political parties are committed to ideas developed in, and for, a different era; and are unwilling or unable to realistically address the future.[69][70]
Most people in the Information Age want to maximize the amount of choice they have in their lives.[71][72]
In addition, people are insisting that they be given a fair opportunity to succeed in the new world they are entering.[72][73]
A commitment to market-based solutions in health care, energy, the environment, etc., so long as the solutions are carefully regulated by government to serve the public good.[80][81] The policy goal, says Matthew Miller, is to "harness market forces for public purposes".[6]
A commitment to provide jobs for everyone willing to work, whether by subsidizing jobs in the private sector[82] or by creating jobs in the public sector.[83]
A commitment to need-based rather than race-based affirmative action;[84][85] more generally, a commitment to race-neutral ideals.[86]
A new political majority can be built, whether it be seen to consist largely of Avlon's political independents,[88] Satin's "caring persons",[89] Miller's balanced and pragmatic individuals,[60] or Halstead and Lind's triad of disaffected voters, enlightened business leaders, and young people.[90]
National political leadership is important; local and nonprofit activism is not enough.[91][92]
Political process reform is also important – for example, implementing rank-order voting in elections and providing free media time to candidates.[93][94]
A radical centrist party should be created, assuming one of the major parties cannot simply be won over by radical centrist thinkers and activists.[70][nb 9]
Along with publication of the four overviews of radical centrist politics, the first part of the 21st century saw a rise in the creation and dissemination of radical centrist policy ideas.[5][26]
Think tanks and mass media
2015 panel discussion at the New America think tank in Washington, D.C.
Several think tanks are developing radical centrist ideas. By the early 2000s, these included Demos in Britain; the Cape York Institute for Policy and Leadership in Australia; and New America (formerly the New America Foundation) in the United States. New America was started by authors Ted Halstead and Michael Lind, as well as two others, to bring radical centrist ideas to Washington, D.C. journalists and policy researchers.[54][nb 10]
In the 2010s, new think tanks began promoting radical centrist ideas. "Radix: Think Tank for the Radical Centre" was established in London in 2016; its initial board of trustees included former Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg.[98] Writing in The Guardian, Radix policy director David Boyle called for "big, radical ideas" that could break with both trickle-down conservatism and backward-looking socialism.[99] In 2018, a policy document released by the then four-year-old Niskanen Center of Washington, D.C. was characterized as a "manifesto for radical centrism" by Big Think writer Paul Ratner.[100] According to Ratner, the document – signed by some of Niskanen's executives and policy analysts – is an attempt to "incorporate rival ideological positions into a way forward" for America.[100]
In Britain, the news magazine The Economist positions itself as radical centrist. An editorial ("leader") in 2012 declared in bolded type: "A new form of radical centrist politics is needed to tackle inequality without hurting economic growth".[109] An essay on The Economist's website the following year, introduced by the editor, argues that the magazine had always "com[e] ... from what we like to call the radical centre".[110]
Books on specific topics
Parag Khanna speaks on his book How to Run the World: Charting a Course to the Next Renaissance
Many books offer radical centrist perspectives and policy proposals on topics including foreign policy, environmentalism, food and agriculture, underachievement among minorities, women and men, bureaucracy and overregulation, economics, international relations, political dialogue, political organization and what one person can do.
In Ethical Realism (2006), British liberal Anatol Lieven and U.S. conservative John Hulsman advocate a foreign policy based on modesty, principle and seeing ourselves as others see us.[112]
In Food from the Radical Center (2018), ecologist Gary Paul Nabhan proposes agricultural policies intended to unite left and right as well as improve the food supply.[114]
In Winning the Race (2005), linguist John McWhorter says that many African Americans are negatively affected by a cultural phenomenon he calls "therapeutic alienation".[115]
In Unfinished Business (2016), Anne-Marie Slaughter of New America rethinks feminist assumptions and presents new visions of how women and men can flourish.[116]
In Try Common Sense (2019), attorney Philip K. Howard urges the national government to set broad goals and standards, and leave interpretation to those closest to the ground.[117][nb 12]
In The Origin of Wealth (2006), Eric Beinhocker of the Institute for New Economic Thinking portrays the economy as a dynamic but imperfectly self-regulating evolutionary system and suggests policies that could support benign socio-economic evolution.[119]
In How to Run the World (2011), scholar Parag Khanna argues that the emerging world order should not be run from the top down, but by a galaxy of nonprofit, nation-state, corporate and individual actors cooperating for their mutual benefit.[111]
In The Righteous Mind (2012), social psychologist Jonathan Haidt says we can conduct useful political dialogue only after acknowledging the strengths in our opponents' ways of thinking.[120]
In Voice of the People (2008), conservative activist Lawrence Chickering and liberal attorney James Turner attempt to lay the groundwork for a grassroots "transpartisan" movement across the U.S.[121]
In his memoir Radical Middle: Confessions of an Accidental Revolutionary (2010), South African journalist Denis Beckett tries to show that one person can make a difference in a situation many might regard as hopeless.[122]
Political action
Australia's Noel Pearson[123] (right) and Brazil's Marina Silva[124] (left), who have been identified as two radical centrist actors in the 2010s
Radical centrists have been and continue to be engaged in a variety of political activities.
In Australia, Aboriginal lawyer Noel Pearson is building an explicitly radical centrist movement among Aboriginal people.[127] The movement is seeking more assistance from the Australian state, but is also seeking to convince individual Aboriginal people to take more responsibility for their lives.[128][129] To political philosopher Katherine Curchin, writing in the Australian Journal of Political Science, Pearson is attempting something unusual and worthwhile: casting public debate on indigenous issues in terms of a search for a radical centre.[123] She says Pearson's methods have much in common with those of deliberative democracy.[123] The Indigenous Voice to Parliament (which failed in a referendum in 2023) was developed as a radical centrist solution to the problem of Indigenous constitutional recognition. It attempted to synthesise progressive concerns that constitutional recognition must involve structural reform and not "mere symbolism" with conservative concerns that any change must not limit parliamentary sovereignty and "minimise legal uncertainty".[130][131]
While not using the term formally, the political party Science Party is founded on principles that are typical of the radical centre.[132]
Brazil
In the late 2010s, Brazil's Marina Silva was identified by The Economist as an emerging radical-centrist leader. Formerly a member of the left-wing Workers' Party, by 2017 she had organized a new party whose watchwords included environmentalism, liberalism, and "clean politics".[124] She had already served six years as Minister of the Environment, and in 2010 she was the Green Party candidate for President of Brazil, finishing third with 20% of the vote.[133]
In the late 1970s, Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau claimed that his Liberal Party adhered to the "radical centre".[135][136] One thing this means, Trudeau said, is that "sometimes we have to fight against the state".[135]Paul Hellyer, who served in Trudeau's first cabinet and spent over half a century in Canadian political life,[137][nb 13] said in 2010, "I have been branded as everything from far left to far right. I put myself in the radical centre – one who seeks solutions to problems based on first principles without regard to ideology. I believe that it is the kind of solution the world desperately needs at a time when niggling change or fine tuning is not good enough".[138]
Chile
In 2017, The Economist described Chile's Andrés Velasco as a rising radical-centrist politician.[124] A former finance minister in Michelle Bachelet's first government, he later unsuccessfully ran against her for the presidential nomination and then helped establish a new political party.[124] According to The Economist, Velasco and his colleagues say they support a political philosophy that is both liberal and egalitarian.[124] Like Amartya Sen, they see freedom not just as freedom-from, but as the absence of domination and the opportunity to fulfill one's potential.[124] Like John Rawls, they reject the far left's emphasis on state redistribution in favor of an emphasis on equal treatment for all with special vigilance against class- and race-based discrimination.[124]
Finland
Finland's Centre Party has been generally viewed as a radical centrist party, with wide-ranging views from the left and right-wing political spectrums, such as supporting lower taxes for businesses and lowering the capital gains tax, while also encompassing strong welfare and environmental policies and legislation. The Centre Party's former chairmen and Finland's former Prime Ministers, Juha Sipilä and Matti Vanhanen as well as former President Urho Kekkonen have been viewed as radical centrists.[139]
Several observers have identified Emmanuel Macron, elected President of France in 2017, as a radical centrist.[140]Anne Applebaum of The Washington Post says Macron "represents the brand-new radical center", as does his political movement, En Marche!, which Applebaum translates as "forward".[141] She notes a number of politically bridging ideas Macron holds – for example, "He embraces markets, but says he believes in 'collective solidarity'".[141] A professor of history, Robert Zaretsky, writing in Foreign Policy, argues that Macron's radical centrism is "the embodiment of a particularly French kind of center – the extreme center".[142] He points to Macron's declaration that he is "neither left nor right", and to his support for policies, such as public-sector austerity and major environmental investments [citation needed], that traditional political parties might find contradictory.[142]
U.S. politician Dave Anderson, writing in The Hill newspaper, says that Macron's election victory points the way for those "who wish to transcend their polarized politics of [the present] in the name of a new center, not a moderate center associated with United States and United Kingdom 'Third Way' politics but what has been described as Macron's 'radical center' point of view. … [It] transcends left and right but takes important elements of both sides".[143]
Germany
Writing at The Dahrendorf Forum, a joint project of the Hertie School of Governance (Berlin) and the London School of Economics, Forum fellow Alexandru Filip put the German Green party of 2018 in the same camp as Emmanuel Macron's French party (see above) and Albert Rivera's Spanish one (see below). His article "On New and Radical Centrism" argued that the Greens did relatively well in the 2017 German federal election not only because of their stance against the "system" but also as a result of "a more centrist, socio-liberal, pro-European constituency that felt alienated by the power-sharing cartel" of the larger parties.[144]
Israel
Yair Lapid addressing supporters on election night in 2013
In an article for Israel Hayom in 2012, conservative Knesset member Tzipi Hotovely named Israeli politician Yair Lapid and his Yesh Atid (There Is a Future) party as examples of "the radical center" in Israel, which she warned her readers against.[145] In 2013, Yossi Klein Halevi – author of books addressing Israelis and Palestinians alike[146][147] – explained why he voted for Lapid, saying, in part:
He emerged as the voice of middle class disaffection, yet included in his [party] list two Ethiopians, representatives of one of the country's poorest constituencies. ... Yair has sought dialogue. ... Some see Yair's Israeli eclecticism as an expression of ideological immaturity, of indecisiveness. In fact it reflects his ability – alone among today's leaders – to define the Israeli center. ... These voters agree with the left about the dangers of occupation and with the right about the dangers of a delusional peace.[148]
In 2017, Lapid and his party were surging in the polls.[149] In May 2020, following three elections, Lapid was named leader of the opposition in Israel.[150][151] A month prior, Lapid had written an essay in which he described his version of centrism as "the politics of the broad consensus that empowers us all. Together, we are creating something new".[152]
Italy
According to journalist Angelo Persichilli, Italian Christian Democratic Party leader Aldo Moro's call for a "parallel convergence" prefigured today's calls for radical centrism.[153] Until being killed by the Red Brigades in the late 1970s, Moro had been promoting a political alliance between Christian Democracy and the Italian Communist Party.[153] Moro acknowledged that the two parties were so different that they ran on parallel tracks and he did not want them to lose their identities, but he emphasized that in the end their interests were convergent – hence the phrase "parallel convergence", which he popularized.[153]
In the 2010s, Spanish radical centrist Albert Rivera reportedly cited Italian politician Matteo Renzi as a soulmate.[154]
Netherlands
According to the Dutch opinion magazine HP/De Tijd, the Dutch political party D66 can be seen as radical centrist.[155] Radical centrism is a possibility in another Dutch party as well. In a report presented in 2012 to the Christian Democratic Appeal (CDA) party, CDA member and former minister of social affairs Aart Jan de Geus recommends that the CDA develop itself into a radical centrist ("radicale midden") party.[156] The D66 has been seen as the more progressive and individualistic of the two parties, and the CDA as the more conservative and personalistic / communitarian.[155]
In South Korea, the term Jungdogaehyeok (Korean:중도개혁;Hanja:中道改革;lit.centrist reformism) bears resemblance to the term radical centrism. The Peace Democratic Party, founded in 1987, officially put forward a jungdogaehyeok.[160] But from then until 2016, the term was rarely used in South Korean politics.
In Spain, Albert Rivera and his Ciudadanos (Citizens) party have been described as radical centrist by Politico,[170] as well as by Spanish-language commentators and news outlets.[171] Rivera himself has described his movement as radical centrist, saying, "We're the radical center. We can't beat them when it comes to populism. What Ciudadanos aspires to is radical, courageous changes backed by numbers, data, proposals, economists, technicians and capable people".[170] Rivera has called for politics to transcend the old labels, saying, "We have to move away from the old left-right axis".[154]The Economist has likened Rivera and his party to Emmanuel Macron and his party En Marche! in France.[154] Rivera's party has taken on the established parties of the left and right and has had some success, most notably in the 2017 Catalan regional election.[172] In the subsequent years, though, Ciudadanos became almost irrelevant in Spanish politics, leading to Rivera's resignation as party leader.
United Kingdom
This article needs to be updated. Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.(June 2021)
Following the 2010 election, Nick Clegg, then leader of the Liberal Democrats (Britain's third-largest party at the time), had his party enter into a Conservative–Liberal Democrat coalition agreement to form a majority government.[173] In a speech to party members in the spring of 2011, Clegg declared that he considers himself and his party to be radical centrist:
For the left, an obsession with the state. For the right, a worship of the market. But as liberals, we place our faith in people. People with power and opportunity in their hands. Our opponents try to divide us with their outdated labels of left and right. But we are not on the left and we are not on the right. We have our own label: Liberal. We are liberals and we own the freehold to the centre ground of British politics. Our politics is the politics of the radical centre.[174]
In the autumn of 2012, Clegg's longtime policy advisor elaborated on the differences between Clegg's identity as a "radical liberal" and traditional social democracy. He stated that Clegg's conception of liberalism rejected "statism, paternalism, insularity and narrow egalitarianism".[42]
United States
Ross Perot was an early proponent of radical centrism.Political independent Jesse Ventura was elected Governor of Minnesota in 1998.
Some commentators identify Ross Perot's 1992 U.S. presidential campaign as the first radical centrist national campaign.[34][175] However, many radical centrist authors were not enthusiastic about Perot. Matthew Miller acknowledges that Perot had enough principle to support a gasoline tax hike,[176] Halstead and Lind note that he popularized the idea of balancing the budget[177] and John Avlon says he crystallized popular distrust of partisan extremes.[178] However, none of those authors examines Perot's ideas or campaigns in depth and Mark Satin does not mention Perot at all. Joe Klein mocked one of Perot's campaign gaffes and said he was not a sufficiently substantial figure.[34] Miller characterizes Perot as a rich, self-financed lone wolf.[179] By contrast, what most radical centrists say they want in political action terms is the building of a grounded political movement.[180][181]
The phrase "militant moderates" was used by national media during Perot's 1992 groundbreaking presidential campaign. One of Perot's most intriguing contributions to American politics is his challenge to the entire paradigm of "left-center-right." He claimed at a meeting of the national Reform Party in 1995 that the paradigm was no longer operative and that left-center-right was being replaced. The replacement was a "top versus the rest of us" paradigm, and that the very wealthy like himself, could choose to be with the people at the "bottom, like most of the American people." This brand of "militant moderation"—a form of populism—is what endeared Perot to his ardent followers and was not traditional "centrism."
Also in the 1990s, political independents Jesse Ventura, Angus King and Lowell Weicker became governors of American states. According to John Avlon, they pioneered the combination of fiscal prudence and social tolerance that has served as a model for radical centrist governance ever since.[58] They also developed a characteristic style, a combination of "common sense and maverick appeal".[182][nb 14]
In the decade of the 2000s, a number of governors and mayors – most prominently, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg – were celebrated by Time magazine as "action heroes" who looked beyond partisanship to get things done.[184] A similar article that decade in Politico placed "self-styled 'radical centrist'" governor Mark Warner of Virginia in that camp.[185]
In the 2010s, the radical centrist movement in the U.S. played out in the national media. In 2010, for example, The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman called for "a Tea Party of the radical center", an organized national pressure group.[186] Friedman later co-wrote a book with scholar Michael Mandelbaum discussing key issues in American society and calling for an explicitly radical centrist politics and program to deal with them.[187] At The Washington Post, columnist Matthew Miller was explaining "Why we need a third party of (radical) centrists".[188][nb 15]
In 2011, Friedman championed Americans Elect, an insurgent group of radical centrist Democrats, Republicans and independents who were hoping to run an independent presidential candidate in 2012.[106] Meanwhile, Miller offered "[t]he third-party stump speech we need".[192] In his book The Price of Civilization (2011), Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs called for the creation of a third U.S. party, an "Alliance for the Radical Center".[193]
While no independent radical-centrist presidential candidate emerged in 2012, John Avlon emphasized the fact that independent voters remain the fastest-growing portion of the electorate.[105]
In late 2015, the No Labels organization, co-founded by Avlon,[194] called a national "Problem Solver" convention to discuss how to best reduce political polarization and promote political solutions that could bridge the left-right divide.[195] A lengthy article in The Atlantic about the convention conveys the views of leaders of a new generation of beyond-left-and-right (or both-left-and-right) organizations, including Joan Blades of Living Room Conversations, David Blankenhorn of Better Angels, Carolyn Lukensmeyer of the National Institute for Civil Discourse and Steve McIntosh of the Institute for Cultural Evolution.[195] Following the 2016 presidential election, prominent U.S. commentator David Brooks praised No Labels and other such groups and offered them advice, including this: "[D]eepen a positive national vision that is not merely a positioning between left and right".[196]
By the mid-2010s, several exponents of radical centrism had run, albeit unsuccessfully, for seats in the United States Congress, including Matthew Miller in California[197] and Dave Anderson in Maryland.[143]
According to a January 2018 article in The Washington Post, West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin greeted newly elected Alabama Senator Doug Jones with the phrase, "Welcome to the radical middle".[198] Both senators have been regarded as moderate and bipartisan.[199] In March 2018, the political newspaper The Hill ran an article by attorney Michael D. Fricklas entitled "The Time for Radical Centrism Has Come".[200] It asserted that the omnibus spending bill for 2018 jettisoned spending proposals favored by both political "extremes" to obtain votes of "principled moderates", and that its passage therefore represented a victory for what Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine) calls "radical centrism".[200]
The Forward Party, a political action committee created by former presidential candidate Andrew Yang in October 2021, was critically described as a radical centrist movement by the American socialist magazine, Jacobin.[202] Two days after the creation of the Forward Party, Yang tweeted, "You're giving radical centrists like me a home."[203]
Criticism
Even before the 21st century, some observers were criticizing what they saw as radical centrism. In the 1960s, liberal political cartoonist Jules Feiffer employed the term "radical middle" to mock what he saw as the timid and pretentious outlook of the American political class.[204][205][nb 16] During the Ross Perot presidential campaign of 1992, conservative journalist William Safire suggested that a more appropriate term for the radical center might be the "snarling center".[22] In a 1998 article entitled "The Radical Centre: A Politics Without Adversary", Belgian political theorist Chantal Mouffe argued that passionate and often bitter conflict between left and right is a necessary feature of any democracy.[206][nb 17]
Objections to policies, assumptions and attitudes
Liberal journalist Robert Kuttner, a notable critic of radical centrism
Some 21st-century commentators argue that radical centrist policies are not substantially different from conventional centrist ideas.[9][209] For example, US liberal journalist Robert Kuttner says there already is a radical centrist party –"It's called the Democrats".[208] He faults Matthew Miller's version of radical centrism for offering "feeble" policy solutions and indulging in wishful thinking about the motives of the political right.[210] Progressive social theorist Richard Kahlenberg says that Ted Halstead and Michael Lind's book The Radical Center is too skeptical about the virtues of labor unions and too ardent about the virtues of the market.[211]
Others contend that radical centrist policies lack clarity. For example, in 2001 journalist Eric Alterman said that the New America Foundation think tank was neither liberal nor progressive and did not know what it was.[54]
Politico reports that some think Spain's radical centrist Ciudadanos (Citizens) party is "encouraged by the Spanish establishment" to undercut the radical left and preserve the status quo.[170]
Thomas Friedman's columns supporting radical centrism are a favorite target for bloggers
By contrast, some observers claim that radical centrist ideas are too different from mainstream policies to be viable. Sam Tanenhaus, the editor of The New York Times Book Review, called the proposals in Halstead and Lind's book "utopian".[26] According to Ed Kilgore, the policy director of the Democratic Leadership Council, Mark Satin's Radical Middle book "ultimately places him in the sturdy tradition of 'idealistic' American reformers who think smart and principled people unencumbered by political constraints can change everything".[209]
Some have suggested that radical centrists may be making false assumptions about their effectiveness or appeal. In the United States, for example, political analyst James Joyner found that states adopting non-partisanredistricting commissions, a favorite radical-centrist proposal, have been no more fiscally responsible than states without such commissions.[212] In 2017, The Economist wondered whether Latin Americans really wanted to hear the "hard truths" about their societies that some radical centrists were offering them.[124]
Radical centrist attitudes have also been criticized. For example, many bloggers have characterized Thomas Friedman's columns on radical centrism as elitist and glib.[9] In Australia, some think that Australian attorney Noel Pearson – long an advocate of radical centrism – is in fact a "polarizing partisan".[213] In 2012, conservative Knesset member Tzipi Hotovely criticized Israel's radical center for lacking such attributes as courage, decisiveness, and realistic thinking.[145]
Objections to strategies
Conservative journalist Ramesh Ponnuru, who has criticized radical centrist strategy
Some observers question the wisdom of seeking consensus, post-partisanship or reconciliation in political life.[9] Political scientist Jonathan Bernstein argues that American democratic theory from the time of James Madison's Federalist No. 10 (1787) has been based on the acknowledgement of faction and the airing of debate, and he sees no reason to change now.[9]
Other observers feel radical centrists are misreading the political situation. For example, conservative journalist Ramesh Ponnuru says liberals and conservatives are not ideologically opposed to such radical centrist measures as limiting entitlements and raising taxes to cover national expenditures. Instead, voters are opposed to them and things will change when voters can be convinced otherwise.[214]
The third-party strategy favored by many U.S. radical centrists has been criticized as impractical and diversionary. According to these critics, what is needed instead is (a) reform of the legislative process; and (b) candidates in existing political parties who will support radical centrist ideas.[9] The specific third-party vehicle favored by many U.S. radical centrists in 2012 – Americans Elect[215] – was criticized as an "elite-driven party"[9] supported by a "dubious group of Wall Street multi-millionaires".[208]
After spending time with a variety of radical centrists, Alec MacGillis of The New Republic concluded that their perspectives are so disparate that they could never come together to build a viable political organization.[216]
Internal concerns
Some radical centrists are less than sanguine about their future. One concern is co-optation. For example, Michael Lind worries that the enthusiasm for the term radical center, on the part of "arbiters of the conventional wisdom", may signal a weakening of the radical vision implied by the term.[27]
Another concern is passion. John Avlon fears that some centrists cannot resist the lure of passionate partisans, whom he calls "wingnuts".[217] By contrast, Mark Satin worries that radical centrism, while "thoroughly sensible", lacks an "animating passion" – and claims there has never been a successful political movement without one.[218]
Some radical centrists, such as theorist Tom Atlee,[63]mediator Mark Gerzon,[219] and activist Joseph F. McCormick,[63] see radical centrism as primarily a commitment to process.[63][220] Their approach is to facilitate processes of structured dialogue among polarized people and groups, from the neighborhood level on up.[63][221] A major goal is to enable dialogue participants to come up with new perspectives and solutions that can address every party's core interests.[63][222]Onward Christian Athletes author Tom Krattenmaker speaks of the radical center as that (metaphoric) space where such dialogue and innovation can occur.[10] Similarly, The Lipstick Proviso: Women, Sex, and Power in the Real World author Karen Lehrman Bloch speaks of the radical middle as a "common ground" where left and right can "nurture a saner society".[223]
Organizations seeking to catalyze dialogue and innovation among diverse people and groups have included AmericaSpeaks,[224]C1 World Dialogue,[225] Everyday Democracy,[226] Listening Project (North Carolina),[227] Living Room Conversations,[195][228] Public Conversations Project,[63][229]Search for Common Ground,[230] and Village Square.[195] Organizations specifically for university students include BridgeUSA[231][232] and Sustained Dialogue.[231] The city of Portland, Oregon has been characterized as "radical middle" in USA Today newspaper because many formerly antagonistic groups there are said to be talking to, learning from and working with one another.[10]
In 2005, The Atlantic portrayed Egyptian Islamic cleric Ali Gomaa as the voice of an emergent form of radical Islam – "traditionalism without the extremism".[233] In 2012, in an article entitled "The Radical Middle: Building Bridges Between the Muslim and Western Worlds,[225] Gomaa shared his approach to the dialogic process:
The purpose of dialogue should not be to convert others, but rather to share with them one's principles. Sincere dialogue should strengthen one's faith while breaking down barriers. ... Dialogue is a process of exploration and coming to know the other, as much as it is an example of clarifying one's own positions. Therefore, when one dialogues with others, what is desired is to explore their ways of thinking, so as to correct misconceptions in our own minds and arrive at common ground.[234]
↑ For an extended discussion of neoclassical American pragmatism and its possible political implications, see Louis Menand's book The Metaphysical Club.[12]
↑ An international evangelical movement, the Association of Vineyard Churches, describes itself as "radical middle" because it believes that spiritual truth is found by holding supposedly contradictory concepts in tension. Examples include head vs. heart, planning vs. being Spirit-led, and standing for truth vs. standing for Unity.[14]
↑ In the 1980s, Satin's own Washington, D.C.-based political newsletter, New Options, described itself as "post-liberal".[19] Culture critic Annie Gottlieb says it urged the New Left and New Age to "evolve into a 'New Center'".[20]
↑ Warren's book influenced Michael Lind and other 21st century radical centrists.[26][27]
↑ Two years later, another prominent futurist, John Naisbitt, wrote in bolded type, "The political left and right are dead; all the action is being generated by a radical center".[29]
↑ Subsequent to Klein's article, some political writers posited the existence of two radical centers, one neopopulist and bitter and the other moderate and comfortable.[35][36] According to historian Sam Tanenhaus, one of the strengths of Ted Halstead and Michael Lind's book The Radical Center (2001) is it attempts to weld the two supposed radical-centrist factions together.[26]
↑ A 1991 story in Time magazine with a similar title, "Looking for The Radical Middle", revealed the existence of a "New Paradigm Society" in Washington, D.C., a group of high-level liberal and conservative activists seeking ways to bridge the ideological divide.[37] The article discusses what it describes as the group's virtual manifesto, E. J. Dionne's book Why Americans Hate Politics.[38]
↑ In 2010, radical centrist Michael Lind stated that "to date, President Obama has been the soft-spoken tribune of the mushy middle".[27]
↑ Matthew Miller added an "Afterword" to the paperback edition of his book favoring formation of a "transformational third party" by the year 2010, if the two major parties remained stuck in their ways.[95]
↑ Peters used the term "neoliberal" to distinguish his ideas from those of neoconservatives and conventional liberals. His version of neoliberalism is separate from what came to be known internationally as neoliberalism.[102][103]
↑ Howard summarized Try Common Sense in an article entitled "A Radical Centrist Platform for 2020."[118]
↑ By the end of the 20th century, some mainstream politicians were cloaking themselves in the language of the radical center. For example, in 1996 former U.S. Defense Secretary Elliot Richardson stated: "I am a moderate – a radical moderate. I believe profoundly in the ultimate value of human dignity and equality".[183] At a conference in Berlin, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chrétien declared, "I am the radical center".[40]
↑ In 2009, on The Huffington Post website, the president of The Future 500[189] – following up on his earlier endorsement of the "radical middle"[190] – made the case for a "transpartisan" alliance between left and right.[191]
↑ According to journalist John Judis, sociologist Seymour Martin Lipset used the term "radical centrism" in his book Political Man (1960) to help explain European fascism.[35]
↑ Mouffe also criticized radical centrism for its "New Age rhetorical flourish".[207]
Related Research Articles
Right-wing politics is the range of political ideologies that view certain social orders and hierarchies as inevitable, natural, normal, or desirable, typically supporting this position based on natural law, economics, authority, property, religion, biology, or tradition. Hierarchy and inequality may be seen as natural results of traditional social differences or competition in market economies.
The Nolan Chart is a political spectrum diagram created by American libertarian activist David Nolan in 1969, charting political views along two axes, representing economic freedom and personal freedom. It expands political view analysis beyond the traditional one-dimensional left–right/progressive-conservative divide, positioning libertarianism outside the traditional spectrum.
The Union for French Democracy was a centre-right political party in France. The UDF was founded in 1978 as an electoral alliance to support President Valéry Giscard d'Estaing in order to counterbalance the Gaullist preponderance over the political right in France. This name was chosen due to the title of Giscard d'Estaing's 1976 book, Démocratie française.
The left–right political spectrum is a system of classifying political positions, ideologies and parties, with emphasis placed upon issues of social equality and social hierarchy. In addition to positions on the left and on the right, there are centrist and moderate positions, which are not strongly aligned with either end of the spectrum. It originated during the French Revolution based on the seating in the French National Assembly.
The Rockefeller Republicans were members of the United States Republican Party (GOP) in the 1930s–1970s who held moderate-to-liberal views on domestic issues, similar to those of Nelson Rockefeller, Governor of New York (1959–1973) and Vice President of the U.S. (1974–1977). Rockefeller Republicans were most common in the Northeast and the industrial Midwestern states, while they were rare in the South and the West.
Mark Ivor Satin is an American political theorist, writer, and newsletter publisher. He is best known for contributing to the development and dissemination of three political perspectives – neopacifism in the 1960s, New Age politics in the 1970s and 1980s, and radical centrism in the 1990s and 2000s. Satin's work is sometimes seen as building toward a new political ideology, and then it is often labeled "transformational", "post-liberal", or "post-Marxist". One historian calls Satin's writing "post-hip".
Moderate is an ideological category which designates a rejection of radical or extreme views, especially in regard to politics and religion. A moderate is considered someone occupying any mainstream position avoiding extreme views.
Democracy is Freedom – The Daisy, commonly known simply as The Daisy, was a centrist political party in Italy. The party was formed from the merger of three parties within the centre-left coalition: the Italian People's Party, The Democrats and Italian Renewal. The party president and leader was Francesco Rutelli, former mayor of Rome and prime ministerial candidate during the 2001 general election for The Olive Tree coalition, within which The Daisy electoral list won 14.5% of the national vote.
This article gives information on liberalism worldwide. It is an overview of parties that adhere to some form of liberalism and is therefore a list of liberal parties around the world.
This article gives an overview of liberalism and centrism in Estonia. It is limited to liberal and centrist parties with substantial support, mainly proved by having had a representation in parliament. The sign ⇒ denotes another party in that scheme. For inclusion in this scheme it is not necessary that the party has labeled itself as a liberal party.
A big tent party, or catch-all party, is a term used in reference to a political party having members covering a broad spectrum of beliefs. This is in contrast to other kinds of parties, which defend a determined ideology, seek voters who adhere to that ideology, and attempt to convince people towards it.
Michael Lind is an American writer and academic. He has explained and defended the tradition of American democratic nationalism in a number of books, beginning with The Next American Nation: The New Nationalism and the Fourth American Revolution (1995). He is currently a professor at the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.
Ted Halstead was an American author, policy entrepreneur, and public speaker who founded four non-profit think tanks and advocacy organizations: the Climate Leadership Council, Americans for Carbon Dividends, New America, and Redefining Progress. His areas of expertise included climate policy, economic policy, environmental policy, healthcare, and political reform.
Radicalism was a political movement representing the leftward flank of liberalism between the late 18th and early 20th century. Certain aspects of the movement were precursors to modern-day movements such as social liberalism, social democracy, civil libertarianism, and modern progressivism. This ideology is commonly referred to as "radicalism" but is sometimes referred to as radical liberalism, or classical radicalism, to distinguish it from radical politics. Its earliest beginnings are to be found during the English Civil War with the Levellers and later the Radical Whigs.
In politics, triangulation is a strategy associated with U.S. President Bill Clinton in the 1990s. The politician presents a position as being above or between the left and right sides or wings of a democratic political spectrum. It involves adopting for oneself some of the ideas of one's political opponent. The logic behind it is that it both takes credit for the opponent's ideas, and insulates the triangulator from attacks on that particular issue.
Matthew Miller is an American journalist, senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, a monthly columnist for Fortune, regular contributor to The New York Times Magazine and The Atlantic Monthly, and author of The Two Percent Solution. He also appears regularly on CNN.
Centrism is the range of political ideologies that exist between left-wing politics and right-wing politics on the left–right political spectrum. It is associated with moderate politics, including people who strongly support moderate policies and people who are not strongly aligned with left-wing or right-wing policies. Centrism is commonly associated with liberalism, radical centrism, and agrarianism. Those who identify as centrist support gradual political change, often through a welfare state with moderate redistributive policies. Though its placement is widely accepted in political science, radical groups that oppose centrist ideologies may sometimes describe them as leftist or rightist.
The New World Alliance was an American political organization that sought to articulate and implement what it called "transformational" political ideas. It was organized in the late 1970s and dissolved in 1983. It has been described as the first U.S. national political organization of its type and as the first entity to articulate a comprehensive transformational political program.
Centrism in France has played a major role in French politics over many decades. This page presents the parties, political movements and personalities linked to Centrism in France according to their political traditions or their background. The different families of centrism are presented in the different sections.
Centrism is a political ideology associated with moderate politics placed between left-wing politics and right-wing politics on the left–right political spectrum. Various centrist movements have developed in different countries, based on the specific country's political environment.
1 2 Miller, Matthew (2003). The Two Percent Solution: Fixing America's Problems in Ways Liberals and Conservatives Can Love. New York City: Public Affairs/Perseus Books Group. p.71. ISBN978-1-58648-158-2.
1 2 Halstead, Ted, ed. (2004). The Real State of the Union: From the Best Minds in America, Bold Solutions to the Problems Politicians Dare Not Address. New York City: Basic Books. pp.13–19. ISBN978-0-465-05052-9.
↑ Solomon, Robert C. (2003). A Better Way to Think About Business: How Personal Integrity Leads to Corporate Success. Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0-19-538315-7.
↑ Menand, Louis (2001). The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America. Farrar, Straus & Giroux, Part Five. ISBN978-0-374-19963-0.
↑ Solomon, Robert C.; Higgins, Kathleen M. (1996). A Short History of Philosophy. Oxfordshire, England: Oxford University Press. pp.93, 66, 161, 179, 222, 240, and 298. ISBN978-0-19-510-196-6.
↑ Jackson, Bill (1999). The Quest for the Radical Middle: A History of the Vineyard. Vineyard International Publishing, pp. 18–21. ISBN978-0-620-24319-3.
1 2 Safire, William (14 June 1992). "On Language: Perotspeak". The New York Times Magazine, p.193, page 006012 in The New York Times Archives. Retrieved 5 October 2018.
↑ Adler, Renata (1969). Toward a Radical Middle: Fourteen Pieces of Reporting and Criticism. Random House, pp. xiii–xxiv. ISBN978-0-394-44916-6.
↑ Warren, Donald I. (1976). The Radical Center: Middle Americans and the Politics of Alienation. University of Notre Dame Press, Chap. 1. ISBN978-0-268-01594-7.
↑ Ferguson, Marilyn (1980). The Aquarian Conspiracy: Personal and Social Transformation in the 1980s. J. P. Tarcher Inc./Houghton Mifflin, pp. 228–29. ISBN978-0-87477-191-6.
↑ Naisbitt, John (1982). Megatrends: Ten New Directions Transforming Our Lives. Warner Books/Warner Communications Company, p. 178. ISBN978-0-446-35681-7.
↑ Wolfe, Alan (1996). Marginalized in the Middle. University of Chicago Press, p. 16. ISBN978-0-226-90516-7.
↑ Author unidentified (30 January 1995). "The 100 Smartest New Yorkers". New York Magazine, vol. 28, no. 5, p. 41.
↑ Crouch, Stanley (1995). The All-American Skin Game; or, The Decoy of Race. Pantheon Books, p.1 of "Introduction". ISBN978-0-679-44202-8.
1 2 3 4 Klein, Joe (24 September 1995). "Stalking the Radical Middle". Newsweek, vol. 126, no. 13, pp. 32–36. Web version identifies the author as "Newsweek Staff". Retrieved 18 January 2016.
1 2 Judis, John (16 October 1995). "TRB from Washington: Off Center". The New Republic, vol. 213, no. 16, pp. 4 and 56.
↑ Burns, James MacGregor; Sorenson, Georgia J. (1999). Dead Center: Clinton-Gore Leadership and the Perils of Moderation. Scribner, p. 221. ISBN978-0-684-83778-9.
↑ Ray, Paul H.; Anderson, Sherry Ruth (2000). The Cultural Creatives: How 50 Million People Are Changing the World. Harmony Books/Random House, pp. xiv and 336. ISBN978-0-609-60467-0.
↑ Satin (2004), p. 10 (citing "big-picture introductions" by Halstead-Lind and Miller).
↑ Wall, Wendy L. (2008). Inventing the 'American Way': The Politics of Consensus from the New Deal to the Civil Rights Movement. Oxford University Press, pp. 297–98 n. 25 (citing Avlon, Halstead-Lind, and Satin as contemporary calls to the creative center). ISBN978-0-19-532910-0.
↑ Miller, Matthew (2003a). The Two Percent Solution: Fixing America's Problems in Ways Liberals and Conservatives Can Love. Public Affairs / Perseus Books Group. Paperback edition, pp. 263–88. ISBN978-1-58648-289-3.
↑ Satin (2004), pp. 22–23 ("Franklin to Peters to You").
1 2 Carlson, Peter (30 April 2001). "Charlie Peters: The Genuine Article". The Washington Post, p. C01. Reprinted at the Peace Corps Online website. Retrieved 3 February 2013.
↑ Peters, Charles (May 1983). "A Neoliberal's Manifesto". The Washington Monthly, pp. 8–18. Reproduced on The Washington Post website with a differently spelled title. Retrieved 31 December 2016.
↑ "Articles" page. New America website. Retrieved 31 December 2016.
1 2 Khanna, Parag (2011). How to Run the World: Charting a Course to the Next Renaissance. Random House. ISBN978-0-6796-0428-0.
↑ Lieven, Anatol; Hulsman, John (2006). Ethical Realism: A Vision for America's Role in the World. Pantheon Books / Random House, Introduction. ISBN978-0-375-42445-8.
↑ Nordhaus, Ted; Shellenberger, Michael (2007). Break Through: From the Death of Environmentalism to the Politics of Possibility. Houghton Mifflin, Introduction. ISBN978-0-618-65825-1.
↑ Nabhan, Gary Paul (2018). Food from the Radical Center: Healing Our Land and Communities. Washington, DC: Island Press. ISBN978-1-61091-919-7.
↑ McWhorter, John (2005). Winning the Race: Beyond the Crisis in Black America. Gotham Books / Penguin Group, Chap. 5. ISBN978-1-59240-188-8.
↑ Howard, Philip K. (2019). Try Common Sense: Replacing the Failed Ideologies of Right and Left. W. W. Norton & Company, Introduction. ISBN978-1-324-00176-8.
↑ Beinhocker, Eric D. (2006). The Origin of Wealth: Evolution, Complexity, and the Radical Remaking of Economics. Harvard Business School Press, pp. 11–13 and Chap. 18 ("Politics and Policy: The End of Left versus Right"). ISBN978-1-57851-777-0.
↑ Haidt, Jonathan (2012). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion. Pantheon Books, Chap. 12 ("Can't We All Disagree More Constructively?"). ISBN978-0-307-37790-6.
↑ Chickering, A. Lawrence; Turner, James S. (2008). Voice of the People: The Transpartisan Imperative in American Life. DaVinci Press, Part V. ISBN978-0-615-21526-6.
↑ Beckett, Denis (2010). Radical Middle: Confessions of an Accidental Revolutionary. Tafelberg. ISBN978-0-624-04912-8.
↑ Halevi, Yossi Klein (2001). At the Entrance to the Garden of Eden: A Jew's Search for God with Christians and Muslims in the Holy Land. William Morrow. ISBN978-0-688-16908-4.
↑ Sifry, Micah L. (2003). Spoiling for a Fight: Third-Party Politics in America. Routledge, Section II ("Organizing the Angry Middle"). ISBN978-0-415-93142-7.
↑ Friedman, Thomas L. (24 March 2010). "A Tea Party Without Nuts". The New York Times, p.A27. Retrieved 5 February 2013.
↑ Friedman, Thomas L.; Mandelbaum, Michael (2011). That Used To Be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, pp.353–368. ISBN978-0-374-28890-7.
↑ Kahlenberg, Richard (19 December 2001). "Radical in the Center". American Prospect, vol. 12, no. 21, p.41. Print version d. 3 December 2001. Retrieved 6 February 2013.
↑ Curchin, Katherine (December 2015). "Noel Pearson's Role in the Northern Territory Intervention: Radical Centrist or Polarising Partisan?" Australian Journal of Politics and History, vol. 61, no. 4, pp.576–590.
↑ MacGillis, Alec (26 October 2011). "Third Wheel". The New Republic, vol. 242, no. 17, p.8. Print version d. 17 November 2011. Retrieved 7 February 2013.
↑ Avlon, John (2010). Wingnuts: How the Lunatic Fringe Is Hijacking America. Beast Books / Perseus Books Group, pp. 1–3 and 238–39. ISBN978-0-9842951-1-1.
↑ Satin, Mark (fall 2002). "Where's the Juice?". The Responsive Community, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 74–75. Retrieved 5 February 2013.
↑ Gerzon, Mark (2006). Leading Through Conflict: How Successful Leaders Transform Differences into Opportunity. Harvard Business School Press, pp. 4–8. ISBN978-1-59139-919-3.
↑ Bloch, Karen Lehrman (5 October 2017). "Toward a Radical Middle". Jewish Journal, hard-copy issue dated 6 October 2017, p.9. Retrieved 5 March 2018.
↑ Gerzon, Mark (2016). The Reunited States of America: How We Can Bridge the Partisan Divide. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, pp.109–110. ISBN978-1-62656-658-3.
↑ Satin, Mark (1991). New Options for America: The Second American Experiment Has Begun. The Press at California State University, Fresno, pp.209–212. ISBN978-0-8093-1794-3.
↑ Jandhyala, Pranav (27 April 2017). "Why I Invited Ann Coulter to Speak at Berkeley". Berkeley News, digital outlet of the Office of Communications and Public Affairs, UC Berkeley. The author identifies himself as founder of the UC Berkeley chapter of BridgeUSA. Retrieved 8 February 2019.
Chickering, A. Lawrence (1993). Beyond Left and Right: Breaking the Political Stalemate. Institute for Contemporary Studies Press. ISBN978-1-55815-209-0.
Coyle, Diane (1997). The Weightless World: Strategies for Managing the Digital Economy. Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press. ISBN978-0-262-03259-9.
Esty, Daniel C.; Chertow, Marian, eds. (1997). Thinking Ecologically: The Next Generation of Ecological Policy. Yale University Press. ISBN978-0-300-07303-4.
Howard, Philip K. (1995). The Death of Common Sense: How Law Is Suffocating America. Random House. ISBN978-0-679-42994-4.
Penny, Tim; Garrett, Major (1998). The 15 Biggest Lies in Politics. St. Martin's Press. ISBN978-0-312-18294-6.
Sider, Ronald J. (1999). Just Generosity: A New Vision for Overcoming Poverty in America. Baker Books. ISBN978-0-8010-6613-9.
Wolfe, Alan (1998). One Nation, After All: What Middle-Class Americans Really Think. Viking. ISBN978-0-670-87677-8.
Books from the 2000s
Anderson, Walter Truett (2001). All Connected Now: Life in the First Global Civilization. Westview Press. ISBN978-0-8133-3937-5.
Florida, Richard (2002). The Rise of the Creative Class: And How It's Transforming Work, Leisure, Community and Everyday Life. Basic Books. ISBN978-0-465-02476-6.
Friedman, Thomas (2005). The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century. Farrar, Straus, and Giroux. ISBN0-374-29288-4
Lukes, Steven (2009). The Curious Enlightenment of Professor Caritat: A Novel of Ideas. Verso Books, 2nd ed. ISBN978-1-84467-369-8.
Miller, Matt (2009). The Tyranny of Dead Ideas: Letting Go of the Old Ways of Thinking to Unleash a New Prosperity. Henry Holt and Company. ISBN978-0-8050-9150-2.
Penner, Rudolph; Sawhill, Isabel; Taylor, Timothy (2000). Updating America's Social Contract: Economic Growth and Opportunity in the New Century. W. W. Norton and Co., Chap. 1 ("An Agenda for the Radical Middle"). ISBN978-0-393-97579-6.
Ury, William (2000). The Third Side: Why We Fight and How We Can Stop. Penguin Books. ISBN978-0-14-029634-1.
Ventura, Jesse (2000). I Ain't Got Time to Bleed: Reworking the Body Politic from the Bottom Up. New York: Signet. ISBN0451200861.
Wexler, David B.; Winick, Bruce, eds. (2003). Judging in a Therapeutic Key: Therapeutic Justice and the Courts. Carolina Academic Press. ISBN978-0-89089-408-8.
Whitman, Christine Todd (2005). It's My Party, Too: The Battle for the Heart of the GOP and the Future of America. The Penguin Press, Chap. 7 ("A Time for Radical Moderates"). ISBN978-1-59420-040-3.
Books from the 2010s
Brock, H. Woody (2012). American Gridlock: Why the Right and Left Are Both Wrong. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN978-0-470-63892-7.
Clegg, Nick (2017). Politics: Between the Extremes, international edition. Vintage. ISBN978-1-78470-416-2.
Edwards, Mickey (2012). The Parties Versus the People: How to Turn Republicans and Democrats Into Americans. Yale University Press. ISBN978-0-300-18456-3.
Friedman, Thomas; Mandelbaum, Michael (2011). That Used to be Us: How America Fell Behind in the World It Invented and How We Can Come Back. Picador. ISBN978-0374288907.
Huntsman Jr., John, editor (2014). No Labels: A Shared Vision for a Stronger America. Diversion Books. ISBN978-1-62681-237-6.
Orman, Greg (2016). A Declaration of Independents: How we Can Break the Two-Party Stranglehold and Restore the American Dream. Greenleaf Book Group Press. ISBN978-1-62634-332-0.
Pearson, Noel (2011). Up From the Mission: Selected Writings. Black Inc. 2nd ed. Part Four ("The Quest for a Radical Centre"). ISBN978-1-86395-520-1.
Salit, Jacqueline S. (2012). Independents Rising: Outsider Movements, Third Parties, and the Struggle for a Post-Partisan America. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN978-0-230-33912-5.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply. Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.
Politicsportal 
