The Schultz Paradigm.
Take the case of the centrist in 2019. The sight of a wealth tax proposed by Warren witnessed as a socialistic aberration dense in utilitarian illusion and unprincipled proposal. The social antics of the president of the United States perceived as an imprudent stunt masked in amateurish and hastful reactivity to any event more sensitive than the surface of a metal brick beneath the plastic pen. No matter whom it is they vote for- it won’t be a vote as much at it is a shrugging approval of empowering their perception of the lesser of two disapprovals.
The only solution risk a paradoxical run that ends with a worse problem with no solution, or to defy the odds and solve it. It’s up to the profound case of Howard Schultz and the third party to earn the opportunity to see it’s light of day.
The week of January 27th arose a shockwave in the political world. The ex-CEO of Starbucks had announced that he was vastly going to consider a run for the 2020 presidency- and if he did, not as a Democrat or Republican. He would run as a third-party candidate. A historical leftist, a Schultz run would cowardize the Democratic party, fueled by anger arising from the idea that they were not going to be able to monopolize with an alternative candidate to the current president of the United States. Expectedly, Republicans were not as hostile reactive to the idea that their strongest opponent may just have been weakened.
In a premature raid of arguments thoroughly laced with emotional excitement, elitism, woe, and scaled stinginess, both parties ascended into a self-fulfilling prophecy that openly exposed the exact problem Schultz wanted to solve. But this childish gullibility to what seems like an unintentional trick gone bewilderingly well by a centrist stand makes an unusual claim.
Schultz’s third-party doesn’t need to win to solve the centrist enigma. But if it was going to win- now’s the time to do it.
We’ve seen the centrist case at work before. We saw it in Kasich, who’s boreish, unintuitive, and complexified take would cease to make a stand. We saw it in Perot, whose popularity was cut short in indecisibility. We may see it once again in Howard Schultz, who’s campaigning environment is more utilizable than any third party candidate in recent history.
We live in a time where party roots have been left tossed to the dogs- where it branches have become unidentifiable versions of the DNA that grew it. Cynicism, hostility, and intolerance have become the center of attention for both parties, with compromise as the lying, unspoken, scapegoat. Such scapegoating can hint intrest from conservatives, just as well as liberals for a centrist call to action.
But the third party run- in this case, gives us a new case for centrism.
It’s the gift of exposure that could mirror that of populism. In a state where populism is the normal- reason and moderation become the exception, thereby in succeeding in the tactic populism grasped its base.
It’s with that gift, a unique situation is capable of occurring. Both parties that ran a name in moderation are forced to finally see themselves broken from the bases that built them up-voicing a populous minority of extremism.
That realization of misrepresentation, overdramatic, and lack of articulation fosters a threat of a new, and unique opponent that has the environmental grounds to be a catalyst of ideological chaos between both parties. Either they’ll fight themselves to destructive- self-fulfilling exemplous fate, or be forced to adapt to the mission it’s opponent set the grounds for.
Such a strike is the mission that Schultz can utilize. It will either win or lose the presidency, but it’s actions built capacity for another, central purpose.
Although the latter of loss is the greater possibility, the echoes of it’s will can’t be ignored. Like Sanders had done in 2016, a voiceful movement can arise from those who want to take the classical turn.
All they need is a singular icon to make the first wave, and the fight won’t go to waste, unlike the efforts of centered party candidates in the past, centrism is the exception. And exceptions are powerful. It’s what got us into this situation in the first place.
The risk centrism takes is one it hasn’t faced before, but it’s solutions are more vast than third parties of the past. It’s the unique case of the Schultz Paradigm.
