Copyrighted initially in 2008, the intention behind the document is to provide a definition for a deliberately moderate position.  The methodology suggests:  

  • Define extremes for an issue.  'Left' and 'Right' seem familiar & useful.
  • Determine a point approximating the middle between those extremes.
  • This point would approximate the starting place for a moderate position.

Once the extremes and moderate position have been identified, it is interesting to note where various candidates and political parties stand on various issues.   What I find remarkable is that sometimes the 'typical' right & left positions on an issue are relatively close, and other times farther apart.  Just as interesting is that the 'typical' right & left positions on an issue vary in relation to a truely 'moderate' position.  Finally, in the US I note that the 'typical' positions tend to be to the 'right', and I postulate that this can be explained by something like Maslow's 'Hierarchy of Needs'. 

The intention of this site is to leverage this methodology to define/refine the moderate position.  This is useful when comparing the moderate position to other positions to the left or right.  This site does not assume that the 'moderate' position is the 'best' position, but for those who truely aspire to be moderate this provides a very useful benchmark to help articulate differences between the extremes.