Cross-posted on techPresident
I hate to agree with Jonah Goldberg on anything, but…
Okay, it’d be an exaggeration to say that I side with his recent LA Times op-ed about online politics, but I agree that the rise of the political Internet ought to inspire anything but complacency among progressives and liberals.
Ever since the explosion of progressive political blogs and the rise of the Dean (and later Kerry) fundraising machines, some on the Left have been patting themselves on the back. It’s the people versus the powerful! We’re crashing the gates! The populist Left has a natural advantage online! Josh Levy may call this argument a straw man, but I’ve been hearing variants of it from quite a few people over the last four or five years, and it’s always made me nervous. When you’re ahead, the other guy’s probably right at your back — and sharpening a knife.
Writing yesterday, Goldberg steps up and calls bullshit on the concept that liberals naturally own the web, citing Jose Antonio Vargas’s recent Post article as an example of this kind of thinking:
In May, the Washington Post suggested that conservatives are losing the battle for the Web because of the very “nature of the Republican Party and its traditional discipline,” which is “the antithesis of the often chaotic, bottom-up, user-generated atmosphere of the Internet.”
Jonah makes the excellent point that conservatives (and libertarians) dominated the ‘net in its earliest days, and I’ll back him up on that — when I was helping to assemble the list of websites for a targeted political search engine back in 1999, progressive/lib sites were grossly outnumbered, and there was no real lefty counterpart to the Free Republic (a then-vibrant online community) or to Drudge. Jonah contends that the Left’s current online dominance is a result of opposition to Bush and the Iraq war:
But enough with the metaphysical mumbo jumbo about how the Web and liberalism were made for each other. The real story is much simpler: Liberalism is having a nice moment. It’s because the Republican president and the Iraq war are very unpopular.
Well, that’s a little oversimplified, but he does have a point: over the last few years, a lot of people have become genuinely concerned and often angry about the direction of the country, and the web has given them a great platform for expression. A more complex analysis would take into account the desire for an alternative medium to conservative-dominated talk radio and people’s desire to bypass information filters that they perceive as buttressing the Establishment (righties aren’t the only ones pointing to media bias), plus the rise of the young and wired and anti-war among the ranks of the politically active.
Where I agree with Jonah is the notion that populist politics is NOT necessarily progressive/liberal — just think of the 1980s tax revolt, or a lot of the anti-civil rights activity in the South in the ’50s and ’60s. For a more recent example, look at the recent anti-immigration movement. Sure, right-wing talk radio (and Lou Dobbs) helped to stir things up, but millions of Americans were already genuinely concerned about what they saw as threats to their way of life. This particular populist revolt doesn’t seem to have much of an online component, but it’s also more of an issue for the older and less-wired (I’d argue that kids these days grow up in a much more multi-cultural social and media environment and are much less likely to oppose immigration as a result). Wait until Democrats gain enough of a majority to sidle up to real political power and smell its sweet perfume — and realize too late that it always masks corruption at its heart.
At the moment, liberals and Democrats are ahead online by most measures — they far outpace conservatives and Republicans in blog activity, political donations and social networking participation, for example. But down the road, the web is going to be intertwined into just about all forms of information exchange, and it’s only a matter of time before the Republican electorate is as wired as their Democratic rivals. Keep an eye on what the TechRepublican guys are doing to educate Republican political professionals, for sure, but also watch for action in the conservative grassroots. The next online revolt might just come from the Right.
– cpd
[…] Warner Todd Busts Out Teh Nye Quill By Gavin M. We’d never heard of this site before, but being curious fellows, we poked around a bit and found this post at Free Republic, which explains how Warner Todd found it. It’s nothing but a quoted news story from the Waco Tribune. … Sadly, No! – http://www.sadlyno.com Republican Resurgence and the Myth of the Progressive Web? By cpd ….. the list of websites for a targeted political search engine back in 1999, progressive/lib sites were grossly outnumbered, and there was no real lefty counterpart to the Free Republic (a then-vibrant online community) or to Drudge. … e.politics: online advocacy tools… – http://www.epolitics.com Gawker Wants The New Republic Dead By BHDC Staff “How is the nearly ad-free New Republic surviving?” Doree Shafrir, a media writer for Gawker, asked earlier this week. She then goes on to say that they have fewer new ads than ever (apparently, but still more than Wonkette has ever … Big Head DC – http://bigheaddc.com […]
I disagree. Anyone who peruses both right and left wing sites cannot fail to notice the differences in quality and style of both posts and responses. Major left wing blogs cite facts and figures to advance arguments and justify conclusions, complete with links. A simple assertion of fact is usually criticized in the comments. Many of the posters and commenters are obviously well educated and articulate. (Check dailykos, firedoglake, bonddad, thenexthurrah, hullaballoo). Sure, you will also find posts and comments which are editorial in nature, but the majority are fact-based expositions. Opinion is valid, as long as it is based on fact.
Right wing blogs, on the other hand, are editorial in nature and self referential in their citations of fact. For instance, redstate may cite a Heritage Foundation “study’ to butress an argument, without mentioning an EPI study which contradicts it. Some right wing sites simply assert facts which are not reality based. The rhetoric is simply slogans and assertions of opinion. And the commenters simply express approval. Posts which cite alternate facts or conclusions never make it onto the comment boards or are quickly deleted. Left wing blogs publish and discuss arguments, contradictions, etc.
Demographics also contradict you. The generation 18-29 is overwhelmingly liberal and Democratic. This generation is the first raised with computers and is amazingly tech savvy.
IMHO, conservatism is widely perceived as an intellectually vapid excuse for the destruction of the social and ethical conventions which made this country great. And the more you read conservative blogs, the more clearly you can see the logical fallacies, straw man arguments, and misrepresentations used to justify its deluded conclusions. That, in a nutshell, is why the net is the bane of conservatism. As long as reality based information is accessible on the net, conservatism is dead.
[…] (and Ron Paul’s supporters certainly did their part to lead the way). Something from a piece a year or two old now that still holds true: At the moment, liberals and Democrats are ahead online by most measures […]
[…] Washington Post Outlook section. Their basic point: that Dems have no monopoly on the internet, words that have appeared many times (and with much forboding) on the pages of […]