The latest scuffle was initiated by this TNR editorial in which writer Jonathan Chait argued that the Left's efforts to get rid of Joe Lieberman are counterproductive. The article fires a broadside against the liberal blogosphere:
[The Lieberman controversy represents] a test of strength for the new breed of left-wing activists who are flexing their muscles within the party. These are exactly the sorts of fanatics who tore the party apart in the late 1960s and early '70s. They think in simple slogans and refuse to tolerate any ideological dissent.
The article led to jeers from Kos (also known as Markos Moulitsas Zuniga), who called TNR the "Lieberman Weekly" and rattled off a list of Lieberman's shortcomings. It also prompted this marginally less intelligent critique from liberal blogger Atrios.
For my part, I couldn't care less about Joe Lieberman - it's not like he has any real influence at this point anyway. But the tiff got really interesting when Chait fired back with an even more withering fusillade, laying out his vision of why the netroots/liberal blogosphere/Kos are pernicious:
[O]ne of the chief rebuttals I've seen to my column is that the lefty blogs aren't actually all that lefty. This is true if you consider only their policy agenda in a vacuum. But it's not true if you take account of their political style, which is distinctly New Left. It's a paranoid, Manichean worldview brimming with humorless rage. The fact that the contemporary blog-based left, unlike the McGovernite New Left, lacks a well-formed radical program is some measure of comfort. However, I think there's lots of evidence to suggest that this style of thinking is suggestive of a tendency to move in more radical directions over time...
[T]he disposition of the left blogosphere toward TNR is suggestive of its paranoid mentality. They cannot see gradations...The lefty blogosphere is simply unable to process the fact that TNR has published lots of extremely sharp attacks on Bush, and lots of genuinely liberal commentary, from the very beginning. That stuff is 80 percent of the political commentary we publish. They disagree with the other 20 percent, and they should. The problem is that they have no mental category for an institution that agrees with them 80 percent of the time.
The would-be Grover Norquists of the left fashion themselves as shrewd political tacticians. In fact, the conservative activists have been able to move the political center toward them in large part because they understood the difference between someone who agrees with them 80 percent of the time and someone who agrees with them 0 percent of the time. To judge them solely on their issue platform misses this important point. This is what I meant when wrote that the new New Left is dangerous and fanatical.
Now, you may recall that I myself have had serious reservations about Kos and the netroots movement. I dislike a lot of what Kos personally, and many of his followers (let's face it, that's what they are) have to say. But I find myself disagreeing with a good deal of what Chait doesn't like about that movement.
I agree with the notion that the "liberal blogosphere" isn't very leftist. Reading blogs like Kos and Eschaton and TPMCafe, I haven't encountered any calls for overthrowing the capitalist order, or radical wealth redistribution, or any other typical hard-left fare (Kevin Drum, a shrewd political observer, agrees with me). Nor do I share Chait's conviction that the extreme anger of the netroots will drive them in a hard-left direction. That's certainly a possibility, but I haven't seen any sign of that happening yet, and the netroots have been around for years now.
In fact, I see the netroots' lack of ideology as part of the problem. Drum agrees with me, so I'll let him make the argument first:
Frankly, I wish lefty bloggers did care more about fighting over policy issues. Not only is it a healthy argument to have, but it would give us something to coalesce around if we win back Congress in November. As things stand now, though, I have a feeling that if we win in November the netroots won't really have a very good idea of what it wants to accomplish, and will therefore default immediately to the longtime favorite game of liberals everywhere: the circular firing squad.
I couldn't have said it better (otherwise I would have)! Liberals need strategic focus - ideological purpose - and the netroots are focusing too much on short-term tactics like fundraising and Republican-bashing and not enough on rebuilding the ideal of liberalism.
I see the netroots less as ideological crusaders, and more as a bunch of guys who are really just utterly fed up and pissed off against Republicans, to the point of permanent gushing rage. That rage, which is reflected in a more moderate form throughout all of liberal America, has proven extremely useful in raising funds and getting out the vote for the Democrats. But rage blinds reason, and the overweening focus of the netroots on crushing the Republicans has kept them from thinking hard about what we liberals could build on top of the Republican rubble.
Worse, the netroots' anger has caused them to lash out at many liberals who do spend their time thinking about longer-term strategy - like The New Republic. Chait hits home when he points out that Kos and the netroots really do have very little use for liberals who agree with Bush on 20% of the issues. I, for example, agree with probably less than 2% of what Bush does, but I fear I might earn the hate of the netroots (if they knew who I was) for supporting the India nuclear deal, or for believing "No Child Left Behind" to be a step in the right direction.
Frankly, the liberal blogosphere could stand to be a little more ideological. The netroots have incredible energy and resources, and these could be, should be used to resuscitate the drifting liberal cause. The danger of slipping into radicalism does exist, but radicalism can be tempered by pragmatism, while aggression without ideology is just pointless. Ideologues make allies, and Kos et. al. should realize that they could use The New Republic more as an ally than as an enemy. I'd much rather see "McGovernites with modems" than the circular firing squad.
0 comments:
Post a Comment