Reply #95: of course it is, but it doesn't follow from that the people there are more open

[fishwax]

or less rigid.

That someone is generally in the center does not necessarily mean that they won't have views on certain issues that are outside the mainstream. But I think there are plenty of people in the center who are simply closed off to anything considered outside the mainstream, which is why the right spent so much energy in the last couple of decades repeatedly claiming that various liberal ideas/politicians were outside the mainstream. Many who consider themselves moderates/centrists/"everyday" Americans will be turned off by anything perceived as outside that mainstream--the merits of an idea hardly matter if you can get such people to believe that it's outside the mainstream. For some people the center is about practicality, sure. And some people on the center are genuinely open to ideas from all sides and spaces. But there is also a great mass that is governed by a fear of being outside the mainstream. That is why great energy is invested in defining those edges and why so much is at stake in those discussions.

Maybe the trick is to swing the center to the left, because the "leftwing" will never be in a position to dictate ideology.

I pretty much agree with that. In order for that to actually happen, we need both those on the left who don't shy away from complaining about movement towards the center as well as those who are able to work in and articulate the center. The former--while it runs the risk of dogmatism or the appearance of irrationality--is important because it provides an anchor along the spectrum. The latter--while it runs the risk of giving up too much or too soon--is important because it has the chance to effect practical change in the present. Without either group, the center is unlikely to swing to the left.