In Defense of Compromise and the In-Group Moderate
Where would we be without compromise? It seems as though Americans have forgotten this once crucial skill in our American political system. Clapham Principal Mark Rodgers reflects on this ‘lost art’ and makes a case for its necessity in our society.
Stranger Things’ Steve Harrington and Dustin
"Turns out I'm a pretty damn good babysitter."
– Steve Harrington from Stranger Things
In season one of Stranger Things, Steve Harrington was the coolest kid in the cool tribe; the Alpha jock, and at times a bully to the class geek outcasts. Over the course of the first season he begins a transformation that in season two is complete as he defends the geeks against the new tough kid, Billy, and becomes their “babysitter,” friend and an outcast himself.
Steve Harrington was an In-Group Moderate.
I learned from friends at One America, an organization that focuses on polarization, that in tribal dynamics an In-Group Moderate is a leader who shares his tribe’s worldview and convictions, but is temperamentally “moderate” and willing to work with a competing tribe to seek peace. In power dynamics, his willingness to “work with the enemy” is challenged by a tribal competitor who calls him a traitor, and a struggle ensues. In-Group Moderates are often killed by a rival in their own tribe.
Nellie Bowles writes about this dynamic discussing “canceling” in her recently released book Morning After the Revolution: “You went after someone who agrees with you on almost everything except some tiny differences? Some small infraction? It seems bizarre. But that’s the point. The bad among us are more dangerous to the group. Mormons don’t excommunicate a random drag performer. They excommunicate a bad Mormon … A cancellation isn’t about finding a conservative and yelling at them. It’s about finding the betrayer in your midst. They look and talk like you. They blend in perfectly. But they’re not like you.
In a polarized, tribalized society in which the most extreme voices get the most likes, In-Group Moderates commit the greatest sin possible: they are willing to compromise to find common ground.
Ask Speaker Mike Johnson.
Johnson has been challenged by Alphas in his Conference who feel his willingness to move legislation in a bipartisan manner crosses their redline. The problem is, our founders built a system in which compromise is the grease that makes government run smoothly. The Congress’ bicameral structure, the Senate’s 60-vote cloture vote and the Presidential veto are just a few of the devices put in place that require compromise to “seek the welfare of the city.” (Jeremiah 29:7)
The ‘Great Compromise’ 1787
Last week my wife, Leanne, and I went to rural Pennsylvania for my first visit to the Sight & Sound Theatre in Lancaster to see their musical, Daniel. The show is based on the Biblical book and character Daniel, who was exiled as a young man from Israel into Babylon (modern Iraq) by King Nebuchadnezzar II. Daniel was forced to integrate into Babylon’s elite society in their attempt to assimilate the captured Israeli people into Babylonian society. If you know the story at all, you will remember the account of “Daniel in the Lion’s Den”, when he was set up by competing “wise men” for not stopping his prayers to God. What you may not remember is that Daniel ended up working as the right-hand man to Nebuchadnezzar, who had not only cruelly defeated and deported the Israelites, and eventually destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem while Daniel was still his top deputy!
Talk about an In-Group Moderate.
I am allergic to mediocre (or worse) Christian creative content, but was encouraged by people I trust that the production value at Sight & Sound is world class. They were right. But more important than the production value was how the play explored the relationship between Daniel and his three friends as they navigated living in a foreign land. One wanted to burn down Babylon, another wanted to “eat the meat sacrificed to idols,” but it was Daniel who showed the way to pursue the letter written to them by the prophet Jeremiah who was still in Jerusalem:
“Thus says the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel, to all the exiles whom I have sent into exile from Jerusalem to Babylon: 5 Build houses and live in them; plant gardens and eat their produce. 6 Take wives and have sons and daughters; take wives for your sons, and give your daughters in marriage, that they may bear sons and daughters; multiply there, and do not decrease. 7 But seek the welfare of the city where I have sent you into exile, and pray to the Lord on its behalf, for in its welfare you will find your welfare.”
Daniel did not compromise his religious convictions (the Law prohibited Jews from eating food sacrificed to idols, which was one of the early points of tension in their story) but he did “work with the enemy” to seek the welfare of the city to which they had been exiled. Daniel and his friends took on Babylonian names, and became students of Babylonian culture. They even oversaw the “wise men” of Babylon who were magicians and sorcerers (and who later would betray him).
Daniel “compromised” with the system to seek the common good. He was willing to die for his faith, but he wasn’t going to die on every hill over which some of his Jewish colleagues might have disagreed.
Official poster, Daniel Live on Stage
Most Americans want to see our leaders find common ground, and see compromise as a good. In our own work with pro-family policy, we have seen this area as one where compromise and bipartisan action is desired. For example, a poll conducted in 2023 by the Terrance Group and Lake Research Partners found that “two-thirds of Americans – Republicans, Democrats, and independents – agree that their elected officials should prioritize compromise in their work on behalf of the American people.” Specifically, 67 percent of Republicans, 75 percent of Democrats, and 75 percent of independents said it was “very important” for our elected officials to make compromises with the other party in order to get something done (related to the problems working families face). See our op-ed in The Hill to read more.
Ironically, I heard a radio preacher last week say “compromise is a sin.” I know what he meant, and in the context of the Biblical story he was exegeting, he was technically correct. But my concern is that when our society is entrenched in an “us vs. them” narrative, blanket condemnation of “compromise” without context can ring a death knell for functional democracy.
Rather than shaming as sellouts and traitors In-Group Moderates who are willing to compromise for the greater good, we need to uphold them as heroes in our society who are willing to take friendly fire to fight for common ground. If we are going to save the American Experiment from insurmountable division, we need to defend In-Group Moderates from their tribal rivals who are motivated by their own advantage rather than the “welfare of the city” in which we all reside.
Mark Rodgers is the founder and principal of The Clapham Group, a social impact agency based in Washington DC that works in the intersection of faith, public policy and culture. He served on Capitol Hill as a senior staffer for 16 years, and works with foundations, NGOs and media projects to advance the common good.