What is a 'moderate' anyway?

"The only difference between medicine and poison is dosage."

Since the days of Aristotle we have understood that there is such a phenomenon as "too much of a good thing," that virtue can become vice. For instance, it's good to care for others but what about compassion fatigue? It's good to eat protein but what happens when your diet consists entirely of steak? (Don't ask Jordan Peterson that question though).

I think most people agree that all things in moderation is key for "the good life". But in politics there often isn't anything more distasteful than a "fence sitter" or a "people pleaser" that only says what he or she thinks will get them elected. It's disingenuous. 

So why would I be running for MLA in Lethbridge-West as a self proclaimed moderate?

Well first we need to look at this concept in political terms. The way I see it there are two kinds of moderates. The first is moderate when it comes to policy. A common theme might be that they support social programs and social issues that tend to be championed by the left while supporting businesses and modest government spending which conservatives value (supposedly). The Alberta Party positions itself this way which is a totally rational spot on the political spectrum. You shouldn't have to choose between balanced budgets and GSAs in schools.

That being said, a lot of people struggle with this approach. It appears to the public that moderate policies as I have defined them here, lack character... or ... guts.. or even principles. This has a lot to do with our political division and what psychologists call signal theory. We are constantly looking to signal certain personality traits to our perspective teams, and supporting some "liberal" ideas AND some "conservative" ideas robs us of our ability to signal loyalty to any side. So they become ineffective signals. We gain nothing from it. Not many people get excited about balance. It's not sexy. You gain more social credit with your tribe by publicly waving your flag about divisive "wedge" issues. This helps us sort people out mentally and figure out if they're the good guys or the bad guys (guys being gender neutral in this case).

So even if it appears to some people as rational to support moderation when it comes to policies, it's not an exciting or popular approach in the eye of the masses. But it should be. When you look at public intellectual figures in the so-called "Intellectual Dark Web" and the movement towards rational thinking over tribal allegiances, there seems to be a new tribe in the middle of what some call "radical centrists". Rock'n'roll has always been about standing up against powerful, tyrannical social norms. Maybe we're seeing a time when the most rock'n'roll, renegade thing you can do is find value and fault in arguments from all sides. It seems that supporting moderation has become the way to signal critical thinking skills and trait openness.

Ideologues from both sides will attack and spin what it means to be moderate but maybe that just further illustrates the utility in having a balanced open approach to policy?

The second type of moderate is where I see myself, or at least how I aspire to be. This type of moderate is a person who may have strong principles that lean left or right, libertarian or socialist, a little bit country, a little bit rock'n'roll, but the key is that they are open to having civil, productive conversations with people with whom they disagree. In this case, you don't have to be a 'moderate' policy wise, maybe you're more conservative or liberal, but you are committed to being open to discussions and ideas in good faith.

When I advocate for more moderation in our government, I'm especially impassioned about the second definition. I worry about our future if we turn every single idea into a wedge issue that signals our virtue and allegiance to our team but sends a completely different signal to everybody else. We have to be able to meet together and find common ground. There are both left and right reasons to consider universal basic income or carbon taxes or choice in education just to name a few.

We need to make the entire Alberta legislature one team and let it be a battle of ideas instead of ideologies.