"Radical extremism" in US politics in 2020

Jay Bookman takes a look at Who is the true radical extremist in Georgia U.S. Senate race? Georgia Recorder 11/24/2020.

His answer is, the two Republican Senate candidates, Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue.

And he's right:

Who but radical extremists would attempt to overturn the clear results of a presidential election? Who but radical extremists would insist that millions of valid, legitimate votes – from Georgia, Michigan, Arizona, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin — be tossed aside as if they don’t exist, as if the American citizens who cast those votes don’t exist?

I do have a reservation about the conventional framing he uses, "Our system of government is built upon compromise and moderation."

That's true in terms of the normal functioning of government. But practical compromises and moderation (in the sense of civility) in routine dealings among politicians and government officials are procedural concepts. Which is not the same as political-ideological moderation, which is defined by situation rather than by some kinf of timeless content.

I often mention how democracy in the US has evolved since the Revolutionary War in the 18th century. Having a government without a king that is run by representatives elected by the votes of property-owning white men was a revolutionary-democratic idea in the 1770s. And was for quite a while afterward. The left-right convention in talking about political positions came into usage a bit later with the French National Assembly after the 1789 revolution there. But a democracy of property-owning white men was a radical left idea at the time.

In 2020, of course, the concept would be downright reactionary. Because a great deal of American history has been over the expansion of or restrictions on democracy and who deserved to be included in it. I think it's fair to say that as recently as 20 years ago, the idea of same-sex marriage was generally considered a distinctly left, or far left, or radical extremist idea. But public understanding of that issue has now moved so much that prohibiting same-sex marriage is more a radical right idea.

So, yes, let's not have Preston Brooks clubbing Charles Sumner within an inch of his life on the Senate floor. Let's do have equal rule of law that includes Presidents and members of his administration.

But whether a political idea is "extreme" at a given moment in a particular political configuration is not a measure of whether it's a good or bad idea. That's especially important to remember that a main defining characteristic of American politics for the last 30 or even 40 years has been asymmetric partisan polarization.

Conversely, bad political ideas are still bad ideas. No matter whether they are "moderate" or otherwise in the political spectrum. It's worth remembering that in the US in early 2003, the "moderate" position was to support the invasion of Iraq. God save us from that kind of "moderation".