Ian Welsh, remarking on the moribund Left Blogosphere:
Unlike the Tea Party, most left wingers don’t really believe their own ideology. They put partisanship first, or they put the color of a candidate’s skin or the shape of their genitals over the candidate’s policy. Identity is more important to them than how many brown children that politician is killing.
So progressives have no power, because they have no principles: they cannot be expected to actually vote for the most progressive candidate, to successfully primary candidates, to care about policy first and identity second, to not take scraps from the table and sell out other progressive’s interests.
I think there’s a kernel of truth in that observation. When you support the party regardless of what the party does, you lose the power, maybe even the right, to change the party. You just go along and accept whatever the party doles out.
Additionally, it has been my impression, remarked on frequently here, that a very large proportion of the most important left-leaning bloggers routinely give the impression that they’re producing writing samples for a present or future Democratic administration. When what’s really important to you is the job, you won’t sacrifice that for a few pesky principles.
I can’t vouch or comment on the left blogosphere. But:
“The White House response on Monday to the expanding disclosures of American spying on foreign leaders, their governments and millions of their citizens was a pathetic mix of unsatisfying assurances about reviews under way, platitudes about the need for security in an insecure age, and the odd defense that the president didn’t know that American spies had tapped the German chancellor’s cellphone for 10 years.”
Crazed Tea Partyer? Red on a roll?? Nope. The New York Times. The Tea Party must be showering the east coast in right leaning microwaves from some distant outpost equipped only with water and dry goods…….and a gonzo transmitter. (After all, even CBS and NBC are sick of it and can avert their eyes no longer.) Its the only plausible explanation, just ask Valarie Jarrett. Or maybe the NYT’s saw a YouTube video and went berserk?
“Pathetic mix” also applies to ObamaCare promises, a certain embassy in the Middle East, Syria……. Have some mainstream media outlets finally concluded that they just can no longer go along with these absurdities because, well, it will render them as absurd as the Administration? I understand political posturing, but this is just…….weird, if not mentally unsound.
Which brings me to a thought. Is Jay Carney really the petulant, lying little brat he seems? They exist, you know. Or is he just some poor bastard doing his job? And if the latter, if you all were he, would you quit out of self respect, or continue to publicly humiliate yourself every time you hit the podium to defend some of the most bizarre explanations and contorted logic ever seen? I can answer in the affirmative.
Speaking of contorted. While Obama sits around saying “who knew?”… President Jarrett now informs us that ObamaCare isn’t the culprit for policy cancels; its the evil insurance companies. Of course it is. Profiles in courage.
What was it Dave said yesterday? The flanks are breaking down left and right…….attack!!! Bonzai!!!! might be more like it.
While I agree overall with your assessment, I think you’re misdiagnosing the problem: There aren’t ‘principled’ leftist blogs because a true left – as in, unabashedly socialist (possibly Marxist or anarchist) doesn’t exist in American politics.
So you are essentially comparing actual right-wing bloggers – for whom principles are very important – with bloggers whose politics lean, at the most extreme, to center/center-left. This means that the “left” bloggers are inherently trying more to come up with policy schemes that they think could score political points or help with governing, rather than principles.
There are actual left-wing blogs, but they have so little bearing on American politics that they’re not necessarily worth reading (whether they’re well-written enough to read is another point entirely).
I agreewith that assessment of the present situation although as a rightie I can honestly say that I have always felt that there are more principled leftists than righties, or that the left generally has had more individuals who are willing to publicly criticize Democrats when they are too centrist. The Tea Party phenomenon seems to have changed the dynamics on the right. Formerly, if conservative politicians were criticized for eschewing principle it was by libertarians, not self-identifying Republicans.
I think the likely explanation for the dilution of principle in the left blogosphere is the coaptation by traditional media, which has long been dominated by liberals. I’m not sure Ezra Klein and his ilk are looking for jobs in government as much as trying to keep their jobs with media corps that align with Democratic party politics. Or, perhaps less cynically, it’s also a matter or epistemic closure and echo chambers.
Politics is the art of convincing people that your position is better or not as bad as presumed, but it entails subverting principles to convince more people. A strictly principled position on all issues will alienate some people, and this group is usually a majority.
One must subvert some principles to attain power. Hence, political power is based upon internally inconsistent principles. Each faction has been convinced this is only an appearance used to convince others, and the “wink and nod” are assumed to confirm the assumption.
Political power is sustained by politics. Given the choice between power and principles, few will refuse power. Political power will begin to offend small groups of supporters, and as the number of these small groups grow, political power will weaken.
Political power is subject to bubble mechanics, and a political power bubble will follow a similar trajectory as other bubbles. “Pride goeth before a fall.” The hubris prevents the hubris from being detected.
When you support the party regardless of what the party does, you lose the power, maybe even the right, to change the party. You just go along and accept whatever the party doles out.
When I read that paragraph, my first thoughts go to the 97% African-American population who voted as a herd for Obama, and who have achieved no gains (only losses) in the 5 years of his presidency. This group, though, can be outrageously counted on by the democratic party to mindlessly vote for them, principles being an aside, while they come away empty-handed time after time.
My second thought is that there’s a reason why Indies are becoming the greater swatch of the voting community — as they are more inclined to vote for principles, workable ideas, free market directions than just numbing their minds to complacently vote the D/R party line. Consequently, they are the electorate wild cards, signaling nonpartisan disappointment to an administration going bad, turning-off to nonsense as their poll numbers rise in favor of the opposing party — like they are currently doing regarding all the Obama administration’s policy misses and overreaching hubris.
I think if there were monetary incentive for principled left wing policy blogging, there’d be more of it. In other words, the source of the problem isn’t the bloggers, it’s the people who read them.
If you want principles AND (moderate but gaining!) popularity AND people who aren’t whackjobs then reform conservatism seems to be where it’s at.