The Problem with Radicalism

It is never easy to talk about radicalism without everyone wanting to say what it is, but let's start with a dictionary definition:

 Radicalism: The state or character of being radical; the holding or carrying out of extreme principles on any subject; specifically, extreme political liberalism; the doctrine or principle of uncompromising reform in government; the system or methods advocated by the political Radicals of a country.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

Why is radicalism a problem? It depends who you ask, but since I am writing this, it is a problem for me because radicalism and its ideas take time to become mainstream ideas, for instance, the abolition of slavery (at the time a radical idea) took a civil war to become the law and 100+ years to successfully implement civil rights for all. Radicalism operates with the mindset that we don't have time to wait to act on the things we believe are wrong. Sadly, since we can't all share that belief, at the same time already we are in conflict. Secondly, because we are living in a representative democracy within a republic, it requires enough votes for change. Since elections are on two, four, and six-year cycles, fast change is almost impossible to legislate and enact.

And, that is perhaps the strength and weakness of our governance that has intentional checks and balances, nothing moves at the speed of those who are in the need of fairness, justice, or equity. Nonetheless, firebrands are always storming the castle with ideas that we must enact asap. Even when a hurricane devastated a community, we are not able to fix everything good-as-new immediately. Change takes time and persistence. 

This does not minimize the need for those who embrace radicalism. I will argue that radicals are as necessary to good governance as rain is to a field of wheat. Without rain, no wheat. Without radicals, no change. It is fair to say that helpful radical ideas do get absorbed into the mainstream, presuming they are credible ideas in the first place. 

Now the weird part of radicalism. Radicalism is not just a bunch of people screaming in the streets about an issue, radicalism may come from any sphere and dress in a business suit. When it comes in dress clothes, we have a different view of it, like it is somehow more reasonable than when it comes in bare feet. The difference, as you've likely surmised is the packaging and presenters. In the old TV westerns, when TV was in black and white, it was important to distinguish the good guys from the bad ones. How it was done was with black and white hats. We picked sides that way and we do where radicalism is concerned.

Some radicals use flag-waving jargon to make their case. "Texas should secede" scream secessionists, while corporate radicals want to drown the government in a bathtub for freedom from taxes, and leftie radicals want Medicare for all as a basic human right. So there is another problem with radicalism, it takes the shape of its ideologues. But the devil of it is that we don't recognize some things as radicalism. For instance pride in our country is seen as an honorable/good thing and, therefore, nationalism is not universally seen as radical, just a logical extension of democracy. In the same way, we don't label capitalism as radical, because it is our primary economic model. But surely even if you love capitalism, you have to agree it was a radical idea that some people would benefit from it much more than others and often at the other's expense.

So, this brings us to the last problem of radicalism, by necessity it leads to anarchy. Without having an anchor on a boat, the boat will drift. Radicalism wants to burn the mother down for change to happen and so does anarchy forming a vacuum of leadership. Most people are ill-prepared for the sudden change that comes from radicalism, let alone the void of governance.

Radicalism is a problem and governance is a clumsy way to codify a way for things to change and this clunkiness means that nothing happens as fast as those who need it to change need (enter human suffering). Is radicalism a big problem as compared to other disrupting forces at play? I don't think it is, but it is the most visible form of dissension and because, at its core, it is intent on aiding the public good, it is hard to be mad at those who advocate for radical change (unless you are the mother that has been burned down). And radicals are right! We need things to change ASAP. But they won't, at least not without creating a deeper mess that history has shown us time and again can be disastrous (e.g., life in Haiti, the madcap adventures of the former Soviet Union). 

I say that we embrace our radical tendencies, but moderate our expectations in terms of deliverables. The one thing the radical right has shown us is if you have an agenda and you are relentless with it, you'll get things done.