What makes a person go moderate?
Watching last night’s Democratic Debate was an unpleasant experience. The majority of the evening was spent detailing the now familiar and unconvincing reasons better things are impossible.
Whether voicing concerns over cost or proposing bizarre alternative solutions, none of the moderates on stage seemed particularly convinced of their own arguments. Enthusiasm for the plans they’ve dutifully churned out was low, and I could only help but wonder what makes candidate push for policy even they don’t believe in?
Being a big time dumbass myself, I decided it was best to turn to an expert in psychology to try and gain an insight into what makes a person go moderate.
My first instinct was to reach out to someone in my life who knows a thing or two about pathology, but my therapist seemed more concerned about what compelled me to call and ask him about politicians at 2 AM on a Thursday. So, instead I turned to the only other place I’ve found capable analysts: Twitter.
Most of the professionals I reached out to were hesitant to diagnose or pathologize people who they’d never met on the basis of a debate appearance alone. I was tempted to give up, until I remembered a gentleman who’d once described me as a “deranged idiot”, a remarkably insightful description gleaned from the briefest interaction.
An hour later, he’d agreed to review both the debate, and a selection of the drawings I’d produced during it, and provide his analysis.
I’ve withheld his name by request, to protect his professional reputation. A graduate of the most prestigious continental schools, and certifications from world renowned European institutions give me little doubt he is indeed qualified for the task. This in addition to his bizarre and vaguely German accent only serves to lend weight to the profound insights offered into the mind of the moderates.
Fascinating stuff.
At this point our brave doctor had seen enough. He flatly refused to analyze any further, saying the mental anguish of contemplating our presidential candidates for any extended period of time was an unhealthy act.
Before logging off, though, he made a dire prediction. With each passing cycle our election seasons have grown ever longer. That the American obsession with Presidential elections was a pathological fixation itself, and were it to continue without intervention the population as a whole would likely suffer an irreparable psychological break.
I thanked him for his time, and quietly chuckled at his optimism.
Jean Krill is is the co-editor and co-founder of Zero Balance. His writing navigates the many disparate visions of a radically better future.