I read this book as a pre-release e-book obtained through NetGalley, provided by the publisher.

In today’s divided, hyper-politicized world, it is refreshing to see a voice of moderation! Indeed, when you cannot describe your favorite color or favorite brand of coffee without it seemingly devolve into a discussion about partisan politics, moderates and moderates are even more important. Although polls show that the majority of Americans take a moderate stance, to be distinguished from a centrist stance, political moderation is rarely seen. When it is, it’s often ridiculed as “both sider-ism” by those who see every political debate as an existential crisis. Without a strong focus, distilled into slogans that fit on bumper stickers, the divide gets stronger, the words get stronger, and we risk our peaceful society. The truth is that people are not so different. This exhausted middle, refusing to take either “team red” or “team blue”, is without a political home or platform.

Moderation is an old, recognized virtue with a rich history. It is not merely indecisiveness, lukewarm, timid, or holding a kind of moral relativism. Moderates are not “the opposing position” in disguise. Recognition of the dangers of factionalism too has a long history. Until we learn to compromise we will remain in a state of permanent chaos. That is, until too many get too exhausted from the chaos, and just turn everything over to an authoritarian leader. Indeed, what we have to lose here is our democratic institutions and constitutional freedoms.

In some parts, I found some different descriptions or definitions of things in different parts of the book, which made things a bit confusing and some of it seemed somewhat disjointed. The style of using letters, and a conversation with two putative students with opposing partisan viewpoints was sometimes hard to follow. Although I have a large vocabulary, I had to look words up. This book is written for those who have a very large vocabulary.

I agree with the author for the most part. However, there are times when history is on your side. Free speech has its limits. It’s fine to voice your opinion. It’s not fine to make terroristic threats. It’s not fine to lie under oath.

An excellent and imaginative treatment of a highly relevant topic. Anyone concerned with impulses among the activists in their life and world, whether on the left or the right, would do well to read this book.

"Why Not Moderation?" was a book where I went in with certain expectations and left feeling quite differently from my original standpoint. Firstly, I was anticipating a more generic kind of book: a book that makes political commentary in a way that is educational but not exactly creative. I believe that Craiutu's technique of formatting his opposition to radical opinions and his calls for political moderation as a way of balance, not avoidance, was extremely unique. The style of the "letters" made the read feel more casual; instead of the book feeling like author to reader, it felt like intellectual professor to student, and at times, colleague to colleague. I was intrigued by the way that the author approached the subject, with a synthesis of past and present examples of moderation in daily lives as a means of creating a coherent thesis about why moderation should be a goal and not a "balance". Craiutu's words developed the understanding that being moderate and approaching the political spectrum with moderation in mind was not because of lack of gut, but was because of willingness to compromise combined with ability to see both sides. However (which I was extremely happy about), Craiutu also touched on the fact that being moderate does not mean one has to sacrifice their morals in order to have a happy balance in the world of politics. Quite the opposite; a moral code is essential to being a fair moderate, and knowing when to draw the line on compromising.

The reason why my rating is not five stars is simply because I feel there were some side tangents and confusion in plotline that mixed me up a bit. At the beginning, it appeared that the author was directly addressing his two students, but then the book shifted into his words alone. I also would have liked to hear some different, and more realistic, counterattacks to his words. Since he is the one writing the words of the students that he embodied, I believe that he may have been able to skew some of their questions to make his response look more intelligent, and mindful. I would have enjoyed more of a "debate", with relevant arguments pulled from online leftist and right wing forums, internet discussion, etc.

Other than that, I have no complaints about the book. The thesis was addressed thoroughly, and I can absolutely say that my opinion on political moderation has differed. Instead of simply seeing it as being "in the middle", I can say without a doubt that I have can see it now as an action within itself, a willingness to compromise, and to hear all sides of the equation.

"Why Not Moderation? Letters to Young Radicals" is my second book in a row from an Indiana-based author. In this case, Aurelian Craiutu is a political scientist and Professor of Political Science at Indiana University in Bloomington, Indiana. His publications include Liberalism under Siege (2003), A Virtue for Courageous Minds (2012), and Faces of Moderation (2017). Professor Craiutu has also written book reviews and essays for non-academic publications such as Los Angeles Review of Books, Aeon, and the Daily Beast.

"Why Not Moderation?" is an upcoming Cambridge University Press release that creates a dialogue of sorts about what it means to be a "moderate." From its title alone, it should be abundantly clear that Craiutu is intent on challenging the conventional image of moderation and presents it as a complex virtue with a rich tradition and unexplored radical sides.

"Why Not Moderation?" starts off with an awareness that in current society being a moderate is often presented as a simple, even wishy-washy, virtue for lukewarm and indecisive minds looking to find that middle-ground between the passionate extremes. In the current political scene, being seen as a "moderate" is often an undesirable and we've come to shun those who reach across the aisle.

Using the approach of a series of imaginary letters between a passionate moderate and two young radicals, a liberal and a conservative, Craiutu outlines the distinctive political vision undergirding moderation and makes a case, a strong case, for why there is a need for this virtue today in America.

As someone who largely identifies as a moderate, I found myself immersed enthusiastically in "Why Not Moderation?" even if I never completely surrendered myself to the "letter" approach of the book that felt like more of a gimmick to me (and one that seems a little too prevalent these days). Despite my basic structural concerns, Craiutu's clearly written dialogues are compelling, incredibly well resourced, richly human, and universal in their themes. It's difficult to imagine anyone reading "Why Not Moderation?" and not identifying with its themes. We are, quite literally, surrounded by the themes in "Why Not Moderation?"

With "Why Not Moderation?," Craiutu presents us with an opportunity to rethink and rediscover moderation and to engage in the important public debate on the kind of society in which we want to live and participate. "Why Not Moderation?" offers that we cannot afford to bargain away the liberal civilization and open society inherited from our forefathers. The book offers both extensive research and historical perspectives needed to connect the dots on this discussion. This dialogue is both undeniably academic in nature, those seeking a touchy-feely dialogue will be disappointed, and an accessible one with language that is for the most part easily understood by those with lesser academic backgrounds.

"Why Not Moderation?" was a relatively slow read for me as there was so much to absorb and I didn't want to breeze through it. "Why Not Moderation?," in fact, affirmed very much why I embrace my own journey as a moderate and why I shy away from radically liberal or radically conservative positions. In engaging in an academic discourse, "Why Not Moderation?" helped me gain a more personal and social understanding of myself, my journey, my beliefs, and my actions in daily life. I'd dare say I became a bit more peaceful toward who I am and how I choose to express myself in society.

An invaluable resource that is desperately needed in current America, "Why Not Moderation?" creates a passionate, well-researched discussion on moderation and the better world it can help to create.