Radicalism as a Democratic Social Indicator pt. II

A few more thoughts on the subject. Unpolished. Let me know what you think..

******************************************************************************

The more firmly entrenched persons in positions of power tend to be, the less likely they are to be willing to share power and access to power. In shoring up their positions, such persons tend to choose as their successors persons of like mind and intent. Maintenance of the status quo (i.e. classical conservativism) is a tool of those who would consolidate power. Such a process is inherently un-democratic and leads to ideological inbreeding.

Radicalism, understood in the socio-political sphere as agitation (e.g. demonstrations, proselytization) and pursuit of change that is inimical to centrist positions because its end is widespread social change (hopefully for the better). Understood in this light, the claim to be apolitical and/or not vote is, in fact, a vote in support of the status quo.

Political parties, no matter their stripe, that have massive infrastructure and resource needs that extend past an immediate election, campaign, or mission can fall prey to this underlying principle.