Tuesday, July 11, 2006

Interesting Piece on the Kos Wars

Here (via Instapundit). While you're there, make sure to click through to this by Richard Silverstein. (The comments are also instructive.)

I don't think the Kos skeptics (TNR et. al.) have acquitted themselves terribly well in all this, but the Kossacs have generally been worse. As Silverstein and O'Connor point out, dKos can often seem rather cultish, and criticism of the orthodoxy and the leader are met with often nasty condemnation.

Take Jonathan Chait's post today. (You know it's promising since Atrios declares him "wanker of the day." Well, at least he's no WATB...) Chait's post is puzzling...lots of good reasons to be anti-Lieberman, followed by two short paragraphs to the effect that he's hesitant to be, though, since the Kossacs are so venemous in their anti-Liebermanism. No doubt about it, it's not his best work. And it's been widely ridiculed by some of the usual suspects. But it's not an irrational piece in any way. In fact, I find myself rather sympathetic to his position. I don't like Lieberman, but I'm worried about the Kossacks.

Now, the Kossacs are a diverse group, so one can't generalize too much. Most of them are smart and sane and good to have on our side. But it's obvious that there's a large dose of cultish, venemous irrationality there, of a kind that one might expect to find on Free Republic rather than on the flagship of the leftosphere. Groupthink and incestuous amplification are terrible and dangerous things, and liberals are in no way immune from them. It's fairly obvious to almost everybody that dKos has a problem. This doesn't mean that the Kossacs are irredeemably bad, or worse than the Freepers, or wrong about everything, or any such thing. But they do have a problem. We mercilessly ridicule such actions when they show up on the right--the least we can do when they show up on the left is to acknowledge them and try to correct them. These are problems that can be fixed, but they'd better be fixed sooner rather than later.

The first step to take, I think, is to encourage more civility and a more rational response to criticism. I've sometimes been ridiculed for pushing this point in the past, but this is one thing I'm definitely right about. There's a meme in the leftosphere to the effect that to advocate civility is somehow to play into the hands of the right. That's false, of course, and the very fact that that meme was not immediately stamped out should worry us all.

At any rate, the first step here might be to try to lower the temperature in the Kos wars. Kos and his liberal critics are basically on the same side, and, as it is, the only people benefitting from this are the Republicans.

5 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, I think I am in agreement here to a certain extent, but a large part of this is that TNR, and Chait in particular, seem so, well, pompous. They have been incredibly, abjectly (sorry) wrong about so much, yet they are "old media" and, whether intentionally or not, seem to think this requires some kind of deference.

You, Digby, and a host of others write better stuff in half an hour than their writers often do monthly. Not trying to kiss ass, mind you, as you and I have had our spats and often disagree. That said, TNR does have insightful and useful stuff quite frequently.

However...politics, that is, elections and "positioning" is not their cup of tea, and being lectured by them is annoying (as I am sure being lectured by me or anyone else is). Lieberman is interested in one thing...Lieberman. He stayed on the Senate ballor when he ran for VP, and now he pulls this "Independent Democrat" crap. He has one agenda, and it isn't that of the Democrats. He has poor judgment regarding big issues, but good judgment regarding survivability. This makes him odious in varying degrees to a lot of people.

Ned Lamont, in my opinion, would be a better Democratic Senator than Lieberman. A lot of Kossacks agree. A lot of others don't take the time to decide this question and instead just have a self-righteous fun time bashing Democrats who they are convinced would win or be effective etc. if they would only listen to the Kos groupthink. That, I will agree, is a problem.

TNR is a reasonable magazine, but so self-consciously contrarian that it is kind of silly, and yes, insulting, and times. In my opinion, Democrats are right about most things in the political sphere, both theoretically and practically. Dems balance budgets, protect individual rights, get other countries to enter into treaties, treat the world with some respect, and don't do stupid military things, or when they do, have a way to get out, or in the alternative (Somalia) realize that leaving is better than trying to "save face." Democrats treat workers better than the GOP (not well, but better). Dems sometimes go a bit nuts on stupid stuff, but eventually let it go (gun control). Dems do not continue to spend billiions on shit that doesn't work and will never work (missile defense). I suppose you could argue welfare, social programs, etc., but that's an ideological debate, not a nuts and bolts and funding debate.

In any event, I don't read Kos much. I have never explored the diaries, and check the main page once in a whille. I chill here, Digby, Firedoglake, TAPPED, Ezra, ets. I don't count my online community as being real, more of a source of entertainment, and sometimes info.


TNR, however, with its "blogofacist" rhetoric and crazy fear/hatred of the "netroots" (dumb term) is perpetually silly. TNR endorsed Lieberman for president. They endorsed the war. They have cast aspersion upon aspersion upon The Left, the only people who read them to begin with. TNR is snide, and TNR is wrong. And it is supposed to be the grown-up in this dispute. In short, I think you are right in your assessment, but the fact that a bunch of crazies at dKos is out of line doesn't do a whole lot to reduce the level of culpability on the part of TNR in terms of escalating the rhetoric (blogofascist?), and, again, being, in my opinion, wrong.

Lieberman should lose the Democratic primary because he is not the best Democrat in the race. All other considerations are important, but secondary.

Sorry so long, groove on.

12:50 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

UPDATE: I waded through the comments on your link. There sure are a lot of jerks out there. Then again, there are enough people trying to engage in dialogue that I was equally depressed and heartened. A draw these days is a win, in my opinion.

Mr. Silverstein earns a spot in my must-read list. Thanks for that.

Finally, for some odd reason I feel the need to define "contrarian." What I mean by that is "this would make sense if we thought about it in ways that smart people have already tried to do...but rejected because it was silly." In short, dissent is a bee-yoo-ti-full thing, and much appreciated even if I disagree. However, I am not a fan of engaging in intellectual silliness merely to show that it can be done in order to arrive at a conclusion that is, for lack of a better term, wrong.

TNR offers dissent on occassion, which is good, and a fair amount of contrarian rhetoric, which, although not objectively bad, is a waste of time in my opinon.

I'm somewhat intellectually clever on my good days, and I can argue persuasively for things that I don't think are actually right. Shoot, I'm a lawyer. But still, doing such things is not the highest and best use of one's time or energy, and being clever might get you laid, but it probably isn't the best thing for the country. Especially when I, like you (I think) am seriously worried about some of the fundamental foundations of our democracy and our nation.


Bad analogy, I'm tired. So tired I won't even try to fix it.

Take it easy.

2:34 AM  
Blogger Richard said...

Honored to be on Abject Funk's "must read" list & to have initiated the hornet's nest at DKos. Likewise honored to be mentioned here (though to link would be divine).

Couldn't agree more on the issue of civility & a little fellow-feeling being necessary at Dkos.

I don't think this will 'lower the temperature' but I've just published a post about Armando's potential conflict of interest issues regarding lawyering & political blogging. Haven't posted it yet at Dkos. But when/if I do it should raise up another hue & cry from the Defenders of the Faith.

3:49 AM  
Blogger Winston Smith said...

Nice to have you here, Richard--and keep up the good work.

Funkmeister--I think you're right. As I mentioned above, I don't think TNR has been doing very good work on this stuff...dunno what's up with them. They've been, as you note, contrarian for the sake of being contrarian, and that's usually bad.

Thanks, also, for the compliment.

10:38 AM  
Blogger Tom Van Dyke said...

the right (in the form of people like the NRO journalist who outed Armando) are out there gunning for us.

Welcome to my world, Richard.

4:54 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

<< Home