Given the political tensions in the United States, perhaps it might be useful to revisit the dilemmas of the 1850s.

During that period, “moderates” labored mightily to avoid slavery. Usually, “compromise” meant acceding to anything favored by the South. One of the casualties of such maneuverings was the party system.

The Whigs particularly come to mind with their leaders, most notably Henry Clay and Daniel Webster, trying to forge faux unity. Webster, more than Clay, attempted to avoid the “impending crisis”. His support of the fugitive slave law, part of the Compromise of 1850, infuriated anti-slavery Whigs.

The divisions were so deep that the party declined, and by decade’s end, it was virtually extinct.

In many ways, it resembles the Democratic Party in that it contains several elements that fail to capture the spirit of the times. The slogan of “when in doubt, murmur” still entrances these so-called middle-of-the-roaders. Just make nice and all will be right with the world.

They are in decline but manage to obscure the party’s message. They come late, but they come surprisingly convinced that indoor manners can tame playground ferocity.

Some Democrats talk about threats to “democracy” but never seem to know what that means. Donald Trump, they think, will be subdued by “rule of law and niceties”. Why should he be so impressed by such a crew? Trump thoroughly conquered his own party; why should a few Democrats bother him? He appears to know what he wants, but these moderates have not a clue.

A reflection from eight Websterite Democrats on the government shutdown bears resemblance to the Compromise of 1850.

Later, Democrats, led by Stephen Douglas’s followers, attempted to appease the South with the Kansas-Nebraska Act. After that fiasco in 1854, the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, decided to resolve the crisis by granting the South all it wanted with the Dred Scott decision in 1857. That only divided Democrats more when Douglas pushed “popular sovereignty” which said voters should decide whether they wanted slavery, which started a civil dispute in Kansas.

Ultimately, the Republican Party replaced the Whigs and opposed the Kansas-Nebraska Act and the Dred Scott decision. Nothing the moderates said proved true.

It was a moment of clarity. As Barry Goldwater intoned in 1964, “Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice, moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.” Perhaps Gavin Newsom and Zohran Mamdani correctly ascertain the way the political winds are blowing; at least MAGA has no such restrictions. They have only the banal Susan Collins and others to deal with. These “irrelevants” have stuck their head into the Lion’s mouth without noticing it is a Lion.