Rediscovering Moderation at the Beginning of the Twenty-First Century

ABSTRACT

This article argues that moderation is a difficult, complex, and elusive concept that challenges our political imagination. It has several faces—epistemological, moral, constitutional, political and religious—and forms a rich intellectual tradition that has yet to be explored in all its complexity. Moderation is “the silken string that runs through the pearl-chain of all virtues” (Joseph Hall). As such, it ought to be examined not only as a virtue but also as a social practice, an intellectual sensibility, a way of life, a particular ethos, and a set of concrete institutions. Finally, moderation is best understood in relation with its synonyms (prudence, civility, compromise) and antonyms (extremism, fanaticism, zealotry).

KEYWORDS:

• moderation
• faces of moderation
• extremism
• fanaticism
• Joseph Hall

Acknowledgement

A special note of thanks to the editors of The European Legacy, Edna Rosenthal and Wayne Cristaudo, who have supported our proposal to edit a Special Issue on moderation, helped us revise our initial call for papers, and provided valuable suggestions throughout the whole process. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers who took time to read earlier drafts of the articles included here and offered useful comments and suggestions for revisions. A final note of thanks is due to our contributors who share our interest in moderation.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Notes

^1. Finkielkraut, The Defeat of the Mind, 135.

^2. Brooks, “An Agenda for Moderates.”

^3. On the various faces of moderation, see Craiutu, A Virtue for Courageous Minds and Faces of Moderation; Cherniss, Liberalism in Dark Times.

^4. See Hall, Christian Moderation, 5–6.

^5. Ibid., all emphases added. On the centrality of moderation in the hierarchy of virtues, see ibid., 3–4.

^6. See Craiutu, A Virtue for Courageous Minds, 6–7; De Haan and Lok, “Introduction: The Politics of Moderation,” 16.

^7. On moderation in England, see Shagan, The Rule of Moderation. On moderate agendas and sensibilities in other European contexts, see Romani, Sensibilities of the Risorgimento, 1–145; Kuhfuß, “Modération: Die Ideologisierung eines politischen Begriffs im Französischen”; Benrekassa, “Modération, Modéré, Modérantisme.” Also useful are the essays published in The Politics of Moderation in Modern European History, edited by de Haan and Lok.

^8. See Romani, Sensibilities of the Risorgimento, 29ff.

^9. De Haan and Lok, “Introduction: The Politics of Moderation,” 18.

^10. See Lehner, The Catholic Enlightenment.

^11. Shagan, The Rule of Moderation, 45.

^12. De Graaf, “Taming the Evil Passions,” 90.

^13. On compromise, see Fumurescu, Compromise; on civility, see Bejan, Mere Civility. For a historical analysis of various types of fanaticism, see Goldsmith, Fanaticism. A philosophical analysis of the extremist mindset can be found in Cassam, Extremism.

^14. See Craiutu, Why Not Moderation? Letters to Young Radicals.

^15. Fukuyama, Liberalism and Its Discontents, 154.