This blog is closed
The Hot Club of Cowtown, with an appropriate theme song for this post
Dear Progressive Blogosphere;
I quit.
This decision, like the decision Brittney Gilbert made yesterday to quit her job after becoming the target of the latest “progressive” mob torch parade, has been coming for a long time. What she said in her resignation holds here: recent events didn’t cause this, but they did precipitate it.
I’ll still be writing, here and anywhere else I’m allowed. My politics haven’t changed except in the incremental, nuance-building way they would have anyway, generally sliding me further left, which some may not have thought possible. I’ll certainly still be writing about those politics when I’m moved to do so. And more importantly, I’ll continue to exercise those politics in what we once quaintly referred to as the “real world.”
But though I may be a person with “progressive” politics who writes, among other venues, on blogs, I wish to inform you that I am no longer a “Progressive Blogger,” and thus my continued membership in the Progressive Blogosphere is inappropriate.
So I quit.
I admit that part of the problem has been my own naïvete. I’m an old fart, and I’m obviously stuck in a sort of 1970s time warp in which ¡Villa Alegre! is still on PBS, the bourgeoisie wears Qiana shirts, and progressives have made a commitment to self-criticism, connection of different political issues, and front-building among diverse people and cultures. These days I see “progressives” who, given a time machine and a bad haircut, would have felt more at home inside the International Amphitheatre in Chicago in 1968 than they would have with the people outside.
That’s not a perfect metaphor. For one thing, the male 1960s radical leadership had an even longer way to go on feminist-related issues than your run of the mill 2007 moderate conservative male does, to say nothing of GLBT issues. But I still think it apt. I’ve written before to compare the “progressive” response to radicals in the electoral process with the Republican response to their own radicals: for those disinclined to click a link for that all-important context, here’s a summary:
1992: A third-party candidate arguably costs the GOP the presidential race. GOP response: find out what the disaffected wanted that the GOP failed to offer, and offer it.
2000: A third-party candidate arguably costs the Democrats the presidential race. Democratic response: demonize the disaffected.
We see that second one repeated every time the Progressive Marshmallow Consensus gets poked at from any perspective that could be interpreted as to the PMC’s left: accusations of the Perfect Targeting the Good, accusations of Destroying the Coalition, accusations of Not Subjugating Our Petty Issues to the Greater Cause. We play along, if under protest. It is crucial, after all, that the current gang of genocidal kleptocrats be tossed out of power ASAP.
And then what? Again, 1992 is an instructive year. Liberals rejoiced when Clinton defeated Bush. And then they went to sleep for eight years. This despite Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, the Forest Summit sellout, the betrayal of Lani Guinier, the abandonment of paltry CAFE standards, the ascendancy of the Right in the 104th Congress, and the list goes on.
Assume the most conservative Democrat in the field of Presidential candidates wins the general election. Tell me — with a straight face, I mean — that at least 70 percent of Progressive Bloggers won’t suddenly go eerily quiet about her policies, even if they’re substantially similar to Bush 43’s. Say a date is set 18 months in the future for withdrawal of troops from Iraq, with an option to postpone at the President’s discretion. You tell me there’ll be a chorus of outrage across the Progressive Blogosphere. If there is, it’ll be a departure from past performance.
It’s always been about winning. Those of us for whom the issues are paramount are political — and sometimes not just political — cannon fodder. Which is why the PMC reacts so poorly to observations of its innate sexism, or racism, or otherphobia. While such criticisms are helpful to people who truly want to make change in the world in the long term, they’re distractions, or even obstacles, to those who want to win in the short-term. The left, the Greens, feminists, anti-racists, Rainbow Nationalists, any of us in the diverse range of concerns that make up the lower-case p progressive movement? We’re exactly as useful and important as our contribution to the electoral win of the New Face Of Progressivism!
Yes, the PMC treats the radicals as consumables and discardables. But this wouldn’t be a real “GBCW” post if I didn’t say something about the radicals as well, now, would it?
I have this to say about the radicals: I love you. But you don’t have to look to hard to find examples, among us, of some of the same things being rightly criticized in the Brittney Gilbert blogswarm referenced above. An example: It’s a fine thing to slam someone for writing something you find offensive. It’s another thing to slam someone for not writing something they way you would have, or for writing about a subject other than the one you think they ought to have picked. It’s a fine thing to criticize someone moderating comments on their blog in a way you don’t agree with, but it’s another to slam someone for not moderating comments on their blog 24/7. It’s a fine thing to decide that your blog has a specific mission. It’s another to decide that your blog’s mission is the only mission any blog should have.
In short, it’s one thing for you to be disappointed in or angered by bloggers with whom you share some political viewpoints. It’s another to assume they owe you anything other than basic human respect because you’ve done them the favor of reading their work.
The notion that individual people are best thought of as metaphorical cannon fodder isn’t restricted to the PCM. We do it too. There are people whose Ideal Left consists of lots of outwardly diverse people all saying the same thing at the same time, an online Worker’s World march with all the banner slogans written in the same hand, and those people fancy themselves the ones best suited to determine what those banners say. But I like my diversity more than skin-deep. I want a world with both subtlety and slapstick. Anger and reflection. Deep importance and trivia.
And I want a world where people are willing to try to remember that one person can indulge in all of the above.
You know one of the things I like least about my blog? The fact that I felt compelled to add “satire” to my list of categories. I thought it a necessary evil: for every person who gets a joke, there’ll be twelve who think I think professors are all Maoists. It’s tempting to just sit back and snicker at people who don’t get the joke. Still, I’ve always been suspicious of in-groups without an open admission policy, and making a sense of humor a prerequisite sets a bar too damned high for some people to jump.
But one of the common assertions made by the mob of torch-wielders demanding Brittney Gilbert’s head was that their failure to comprehend her intent was a mortal sin on her part. Sure, part of writing well is making one’s intent clear when appropriate. I’d probably have made my disgust for that link a little clearer, especially as I’ve been burned by people’s incomprehension more than once. But as in everything else in life, balance between competing interests is important. Explaining that jokes are jokes will help the pathologically humorless avoid embarrassment, but it ruins the jokes for everyone else. Saying that every time one discusses a bad thing, one is obliged to point out that it is a bad thing, and that bad things are bad, and that failure to point this out every single time is an offense punishable by witch hunt, firing, ostracism and the like? Fuck that noise.
I recognize that some of the very Progressive Bloggers who most need to read those last two sentences will likely have missed them because their eyes have glazed over in the absence of blink tags to denote the important points of this essay, so let me repeat them in bold type for the clue impaired:
Saying that every time one discusses a bad thing, one is obliged to point out that it is a bad thing, and that bad things are bad, and that failure to point this out every single time is an offense punishable by witch hunt, firing, ostracism and the like? Fuck that noise.
Given a choice between — on the one hand — retaining membership in good standing in the Progressive Blogosphere by writing to the lowest common denominator or — on the other hand — not insulting the intelligence of the kind of reader for whom I prefer to write, I pick that second thing there.
So let this function as a courtesy notice. If your reading this blog, or linking to it, or liking it, is based on what I actually write, you’ll notice no change. But if it’s predicated on my loyal membership in the Progressive Blogosphere, you may want to update your blogroll to include me out [underlined text added post-publication for that all-important clarity]. Have a nice day. I mean that sincerely. And that. Etc.
Posted by: Chris Clarke
Note: A database glitch in 2008 ate a bunch of archived comments. Don't be offended if yours isn't here, or confused if the conversation seems disjointed. Thanks!
Still, I’ve always been suspicious of in-groups without an open admission policy
Amen to that.
I like the General’s blog. I read his follow up post. I don’t think he accomplished the task of explaining himself, however. In particular, I don’t understand why he wrote to Brittney instead of to smantix.
By: By Charles on 2007 06 07
1994 + 8 != 2000
By: By David on 2007 06 07
I’m an idiot, David. Will fix. Thanks.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2007 06 07
Yep. What you said.
And FWIW, I’m going to start billing people who yelp about how unfair it is that someone calls them racist or sexist, and demands! DEMANDS! an apology.
By: By Sheelzebub on 2007 06 07
Not the main point of the post, I realize, but I just have to say:
1994: A third-party candidate arguably costs the GOP the presidential race. GOP response: find out what the disaffected wanted that the GOP failed to offer, and offer it.
2000: A third-party candidate arguably costs the Democrats the presidential race. Democratic response: demonize the disaffected.
Hammer. Nail. WHAM!
By: By JeffL on 2007 06 07
Sensational, Chris! Unfortunately, they won’t listen, and if they do, they won’t understand, and if they do, they won’t care, and if they do, they won’t have the conviction to act. Which leaves us back at not listening.
This is the sad truth of politics in general, but it’s a disconcerting trait of progressive politics that I find abhorrent. Something about kissing your baby while stealing their lollipop comes to mind…
By: By jason on 2007 06 07
I know it was “genocidal kleptocrats” that put it over the top, right? That was some of my Best Work Evah.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2007 06 07
*standing ovation*
I’m unaware of the immediate events precipitating this post (though i can imagine), as a result of being holed up this week here at Wildbranch with a bunch of genuinely thoughtful small-p progressives, but… wow.
WOW. Thank you. Thank you.
By: By Rachel Shaw on 2007 06 07
I’m unaware of the immediate events precipitating this post
It will probably shock you utterly to find that neither side is blameless, then.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2007 06 07
Does this mean we can’t use the moonbat anymore?
Alas.
I fondly remember those halcyon days when it was not a crime.
Oh, by the way… you shall be roundly condemned by every right-thinking individual for implying that not all perfessers are not not Maoists. You are clearly some kind of revisionist rhetorician. Consider the dogs loosed, sir.
By: By de Selby on 2007 06 08
*swoon*
I realize I’ve never actually commented here, even though I have the hugest blogcrush on you.
But this is brilliant. Absolutely brilliant. And so very true.
By: By Magniloquence on 2007 06 08
I recall the lefty 70s being pretty much exactly like the times we’re in now. Lots of finger wagging, snickering, clubbiness, arrogance, elitism, rulez, superficiality, infighting, moral lecturing, etc.
Couldn’t stand it then, have little time for it now.
The planet’s rapidly tanking thanks to humanity. Maybe it’s time we got over ourselves…just a little?
Maybe if we just all could SHUT UP for five minutes.
By: By Lesley on 2007 06 08
¡Villa Alegre!
Oh. My. God.
By: By Gandalf Mantooth on 2007 06 08
Maybe if we just all could SHUT UP for five minutes.
You’ll get your wish this weekend, at least from this end: I’m out backpacking starting tomorrow.
By: By Chris Clarke on 2007 06 08
It will probably shock you utterly to find that neither side is blameless, then.
Long as I live, I will never get why so many people find that concept so very hard to grasp.
Enjoy the backpacking.
By: By Charles on 2007 06 08
it wasn’t all that long ago that i discovered blogs—year and a half, maybe?—and it is kind of fabulous that there are so many voices writing about so many things. that it is possible to have rousing discussions with people one might never meet in real life. that little communities form.
the shocking part of the blogging phenomenon is how uncivil some people are. it stuns me that people will barge in with little idea what is being said and why, and issue harsh judgments, instructions on what they want the blogger to say, threats of various sorts, wanton insults, etc. and yet this seems to happen on a great many blogs.
any one of us might miss a joke, or misunderstand a post, or disagree with something that is posted, just as in real life. but in real life, if a neighbor said something that struck us as wrong, we wouldn’t barge into their living room shouting threats and spraypainting the walls. political posts in particular seem to attract hoards of people who behave thuggishly.
the idea that everyone who isn’t a fundamentalist should have a standard set of beliefs and support the message at all costs is just silly. having a robust discourse and respecting that individuals have different perspectives, priorities, and experiences ought to be one thing that progressives can agree on—most of us resent being told that “trust me” is good enough, or efforts to impose one set of values on everyone.
By: By kathy a on 2007 06 08
Echoing Charles’ wish:
Enjoy the backpacking!
By: By Yubi on 2007 06 08
Between you, Berube, and Billmon, I’m starting to think something very, very bad is happening or has happened to the lefty blogosphere. All three of you are thoughtful folks, and all three have either disappeared or reduced posting.
If this is what the evolution of the blogosphere brings, I don’t think I want any part of it.
By: By Dennis on 2007 06 08
Great post
By: By Tom on 2007 06 08
...Adding that I’ve yet to find “replacements,” as it were.
If Dave Neiwert gives it up, I become a follower of John Zerzan.
By: By Dennis on 2007 06 08
p.s.—old fart! huh. have a great time on your trip.
By: By kathy a on 2007 06 08
*Applause*
Progressive Marshmallow Consensus did it for me.
“even though I have the hugest blogcrush on you.”
Step off, Magniloquence. He’s mine!
By: By kevin Andre Elliott on 2007 06 08
Even some folks on the other side were non-plussed.
The herd mentality seems unavoidable, no matter which end of the savannah you graze on.
By: By Rob G on 2007 06 08
It will probably shock you utterly to find that neither side is blameless, then.
Heh.
Now don’t you be harshin’ my mellow, man…
*wry twist of mouth*
By: By Rachel Shaw on 2007 06 09
Now I have those kids singing in my head. La-lalala-lala-la-la-la-lala-lala, Villa Allegre!
I still, very occasionally, find myself defending Ralph Nader from people who say this is all his fault. Like nobody has the right to run, or to speak out, unless they’re a candidate from one of the two ONLY parties. And I still hold a grudge against the Dems for working just as hard as the GOP to keep Nader’s voice silent in the debates.
There’s a few things I just don’t say that often on the blogs, because I know I’ll suddenly get sliced off with razors from the side I imagine I’m on.
Had a comment on a blog about big ugly face piercings some months back, how disgusting I found it in a fast food counter rep, and all of a sudden it was like I was Dick Cheney’s evil twin. “You’re prejudiced! You’re a Nazi! You HATE the poor young people who are just like us inside, and only struggling to make an honest living!â€?
Tried to comment on a feminist blog a while ago, and I left feeling that half the women online now think I’m an insidious woman-hater. It made me want to lash back with equal name-calling bile, and it absolutely estranged me forever from commenting or caring about any issue on that site.
And for years, I’ve had strong misgivings about conservation/recycling being a mere displacement activity used instead of facing the REAL environmental problem – human population growth. All the energy aimed at recycling, or turning down the thermostat, as if that’s going to fix anything while population continues to increase, seems misdirected. But I have never yet found anyone on “my sideâ€? I could really discuss it with.
... And yeah, there’s this: Even as I consider posting this comment, I’m cringing very slightly inside, thinking the feminists will find me and attack again, or the face-piercing advocates will once again declare me an enemy to America’s youth, or my fellow environmentalists will question my fitness to be allowed near a computer keyboard.
By: By Hank Fox on 2007 06 09
“you shall be roundly condemned by every right-thinking individual for implying that not all perfessers are not not Maoists.”
No reasonable person would claim they were.
You’ve also got your Stalinist apologists, your Trotskyites, your bare-nekkid scam artists…
By: By richard mcenroe on 2007 06 11
Chris, thank you! You capture what’s been bugging me about this very nicely, I wish I’d written much of this.
By: By djw on 2007 06 13
Dear Progressive Blogosphere;
I quit.
Ummmmm… you are exactly who, again?
By: By dave™© on 2007 06 13
Ummmmm… you are exactly who, again?
Apparently, someone worthy of enough of your time and energy that you’re posting a comment on his blog.
Unintentional irony. The very best kind.
By: By Sheelzebub on 2007 06 13
To go along with Dave, just above, I never realized you were a progressive political blogger. Somehow I missed those entries and only read about Zeke and nature. I’ll keep coming back for the nature.
Pablo
By: By pablo on 2007 06 13
Would someone please tell me wht “PCM” means?
Party of Moldovan Communists?
Pulse Code Modualtion?
What?
I wish bloggers would at least ONCE in the text of a particular post would give the definition of an acronym before using the acronym throughout the rest of the post. If gives dudnerheads like me the ability to keep up with the conversation.
Thanks.
By: By Joe Max on 2007 06 13
Joe:
Early in his post Chris referred to “Progressive Marshmallow Coalition”, thereafter PMC for short.
But the last mention was misspelled as PCM instead of PMC. It’s just a typo.
Dude-nerheads is kind of a fun word, by the way.
At least, I enjoyed pronouncing it like that.
Chris: hope to see you back soon. I can only imagine that the late S.G. would have been horrified by all the destructive behavior recently displayed by those claiming to honor his memory.
S.G.‘s writing, like yours, could balance righteous anger with informed scholarship, as the subject might require.
By: By omegapet on 2007 06 14
