Political Disciplinarians of the Blogosphere
Press Action
Tuesday, January 27, 2004
http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/hand012272004/
Securing the Ideological Blinders on the Democratic Party
There’s a natural tendency among political activists to seek a community of like-minded souls. The pack mentality is evident in all segments of life. Acquiring strength in numbers is an obvious strategy toward ensuring a group’s political platform gets a hearing, gains stature, or actually becomes the law of the land.
Ever since the Bush team wrested control of the presidency from Al Gore and the Democrats in the 2000 presidential election, Democratic Party activists have been attempting to use their stature in our political duopoly to corral those people who might be inclined to stray from the party in the next presidential election.
When 2004 presidential campaigning shifted into high gear about a year ago, Democratic Party activists began preaching the virtues of voting a Democrat back into the White House and how a second term for Bush would cause irreparable harm to the United States and the rest of the world. As part of this process, Democrats have been warning us about the consequences of our actions if we don’t offer our full support to the Democratic nominee
The most notable manifestation of this attempt at party discipline is the Democrats’ constant attacks during the last three years on someone who isn’t even a member of their party — Green Party 2000 presidential candidate Ralph Nader.
This attempt at control by the Democratic Party appears to be backfiring and alienating some of the people who the Democrats were trying to woo. Instead of building coalitions, Democratic Party activists are attacking individuals and groups who may have been inclined to work with them if the Democrats had displayed less rigidity in their outreach and had been able to boast a track record on foreign policy and civil liberties much different than Bush’s.
The Democrats have disciplinarians in all realms of political life. In the “blogosphere,” one of the Democratic Party’s unofficial ideology cops — and there are many — is someone who uses the pseudonym Atrios and edits a weblog named Eschaton. (Atrios says he wishes to remain anonymous because he prefers not to mix his work as an editor of a blog with what goes on in the rest of his life.)
Eschaton is a useful website that serves as a clearinghouse for information about U.S. politics and society. In addition to linking his readers with nuggets of political intrigue and irony on the Web, Atrios also offers his opinion on current events, including how best to get the Democrats back into control of our affairs on the national level.
Like most Democratic Party stalwarts, Atrios uses Eschaton as a platform to target mostly Republicans. But he’ll take the occasional swipe at people with opinions deemed outside the realm of acceptable political discourse by the gatekeepers of our two-party system. On these occasions, one of Atrios’ favorite targets is Alexander Cockburn.
To his credit, Atrios does not shy away from criticizing centrist or liberal-leaning political pundits, such as Eric Alterman. But for the most part, Atrios is a disciple of Alterman, especially in regard to the latter’s attacks on Cockburn.
In an August 2002 entry on his website, Atrios agreed with Alterman’s lumping of Cockburn into the group of “anti-Semites of the black and extremist left-wing varieties.”
Earlier this week, Atrios responded to blogger Andrew Sullivan’s claim that Atrios “never seems to criticize the left.” Atrios said that anyone who reads his blog knows that he regularly criticizes the New York Times and Salon. “I’ve criticized the American Prospect and even the liberal New Republic.”
Atrios added: “I don’t care what some guy with a sign or some other person-we’re-going-to-pretend-is-representative-of-the-left says or does. I don’t really feel the need to scream and shout every time Cockburn writes something I don’t agree with, largely because I never read him. He doesn’t represent me or the Democratic Party, so why should I?”
In response to this confession about not reading Cockburn, an Eschaton reader asked Atrios: “Why do you waste your time reading Andy S. while ignoring Alexander Cockburn? Cockburn has some annoying lefter-than-thou tendencies, but he’s also very well-read with a broad and deep understanding of many issues. He’s also very funny, unlike AS.”
As with Cockburn’s CounterPunch, Atrios’ blog is a valuable resource on the Web that’s worth reading. As you read Eschaton, though, make sure you take note of Atrios’ work as a Democratic Party booster and his blinders for ideas alien to the U.S. political duopoly. -- Mark Hand