> Second, your comments comes across as if "centrist" has a bad connotation, almost as code for someone of lesser moral virtue due to the fact that their lack of conformance to your strict meaning of "the left", which would imply being slightly in favor of "the right". A "desire", as you called it, perhaps arising from uncivilized impulse rather than purposeful choice.
Centrism and compromise are the enemies of extremists.
Centrism is also the ultimate defense of the status-quo, meaning you have a bias towards the status-quo.
The fallacy here is that the status-quo is reasonable therefore being a centrist is reasonable and being a not-centrist is unreasonable.
Just because the status-quo is the status-quo and is in the "middle" does not make it reasonable. For example, the status-quo in Israel right now is performing a genocide. The centrists in Israeli politics are pro-genocide. The "extremists", as you say, are anti-genocide.
The current political landscape of the US is far-right. Where does that leave centrists? This is up to you to dissect.
The current political landscape of the US is not far-right. The current government may be, but everything in life is cyclical.
Democrats in 2024 lost more votes relative to 2020 than Republicans gained between the two elections. Which is why some people say Kamala "lost to the couch"--which is a comforting but myopic take because losing to the couch means your arguments are less convincing than those of the other party
Centrism and compromise are the enemies of extremists.