Is the idea of being a moderate in this highly politicized time an absurd notion?  Doc Zero, writing at Hot Air, appears to answer “yes” to this question.  His rationale is that there is no time to be a moderate, given the big-state policies we see being implemented today:

As I like to point out whenever someone like David Frum gushes over “moderates,” there is no meaningful way to be moderate when a carnivorous super-State is chowing down on huge portions of the private sector, while dismissing bedrock Constitutional rights with an irritated wave of its hand.  You either resist the onslaught of the State with all your might, or bear passive witness to its expansion.

While I am sympathetic to and share Doc’s concerns, I think he gets it wrong with his suggestion that moderates are somehow not pulling their weight.

As a matter of context, Doc Zero was discussing the recent scandal that resulted in the Washington Post’s Dave Weigel resigning from his position.  For the uninitiated, Weigel posted several comments to the liberal listserv JournoList that disparaged conservatives, all the while being the Post’s point man on the conservative movement.

Doc seems to suggest that most journalists have become an actors in a society where political participation is not just vital but required.  Furthermore, most journalists are beholden to a big state, lest it crumble and they have nothing to report on.  In such a scenario, any small state positions become construed as radical, and will be attacked as such by these journalists:

If you think you should be allowed to keep your own medical insurance, and see your own doctor, you’re taking an extreme partisan stance.  If you don’t think the government should be able to revoke the First Amendment or due process rights of private corporations at its convenience, you are a declared enemy of the State.

[..]

In the immense political struggle now under way, there is no room on the sidelines.

The fallacy here is that moderates are somehow outside the political debate between big government and small government, as if they were uninterested observers.  I think the term Doc is looking for here is not “moderates” by “apathists.”  Moderates are not apathists.  They do hold political positions, and they do tend to take some action in politics, even if it’s as small as voting.  I’ve also known moderates who come out swinging on a regular basis.  Being a moderate does not mean you don’t hold a set of positions.  What it means is that the positions may not be as ideologically pure as those on further to the left or to the right (or the analogs on the two-axis system).

For example, I consider myself to be a “moderate libertarian.”  I champion a mostly limited government, while accepting that it does have some role in helping out people who are going through rough patches.  You know, you can be against restrictions on free speech, while at the same time supporting increased assistance with health care, as I do.  Sure, it not ideologically pure, and it is very inconsistent, but being a purist is boring, and I’ve never really had a problem with political inconsistency, so long as those who are own up to it.

At the same time, I would hardly consider myself to be on the “sidelines.”  If that were true, I wouldn’t be writing here, for one.  I have no desire to see tyranny come to bear in this country, and will work to make sure that it doesn’t, using the outlets that I consider to be my strongest, such as this one.  Just by writing here at RATA, I am more active in politics than a lot of people can claim.

As someone who subscribes to one flavor of “moderate,” I reject the notion that I am not doing enough to combat the excesses of the Democrats in Congress.  Nor is my fight limited to their desire for power, as we hardly need a reminder of the overreaches legislated by Republicans when they controlled Washington.  Where I find proposed laws and practices that offend my mostly libertarian worldview, I speak out.  At the same time, I can not buy into this idea that I have to fully join up with one side or the other, for my worldview also makes room for a government presence that the more ideologically pure don’t accept.