Circular Politics and Blogs [Free Republic extreme?]

RedState.org ^ | Jul 16th, 2005 | By: Tim Saler

[Jim Robinson]

I happen to believe that politics is circular. There comes a point when the extreme left and extreme right meet each other and more or less conglomerate into one big mess of extremism. In Internet community terms, consider the similarities in behavior between Democratic Underground and Free Republic. I think you'll find, if this is true, that there's a point where actually the ideologies are the furthest apart. When you have mainstream political debate pushing towards those points, not the farthest to the extreme mind you, that's when you have real divisiveness.

You have the MoveOn.org/Daily Kos crowd on the left, and you have the Christian Coalition/The American Cause crowd on the right. They are all cannibals of some sort, though I must admit that MoveOn.org is pretty good about not ripping into other Democratic candidates, and they represent basically the "mainstream extremes," which is to say that they represent those points of view that are diametrically opposed to one another and, in circular politics, are the most distant.

We have a lot of folks who are subscribing to those kinds of opinions these days, and so politics appears more shrill and divisive - perhaps moreso than it has ever been before. Could Ronald Reagan and Tip O'Neill be friendly after 5 PM in the political world of 2005?

Ask yourself this - could George W. Bush and Nancy Pelosi, were she Speaker of the House? I seem to find it unlikely; not because Bush hates Pelosi, but because Pelosi seems to genuinely dislike the President, and the President's supporters would rip him to shreds were he to befriend a San Francisco liberal like Pelosi.

For a long time, politics really did exist mostly in the mainstream. The candidates always seem to be somewhere near the center, where most politics takes place at least in the Beltway. Their supporters, however, used to come from wide swaths of the population. They were not extremists.

That has begun to change. Extremists are going to the polls and voting in primaries for candidates who, in previous years, might not have ever received the time of day. Truly, what business does US Sen. Russ Feingold of Wisconsin have in running for President in 2008? A divorcee and unabashed liberal, in previous elections he wouldn't be able to raise any money, or maybe even get on ballots. But in 2008, he might have a legitimate shot at the nomination - not because the time is right for his ideas, but because the time is right for extremists to get another nominee in the mold of George McGovern in 1972.

Republicans have the same problem. Will they nominate someone like US Sens. Sam Brownback of Kansas or Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania? Both could be considered mainstream extremists of the Free Republic variety, though Brownback has the ability, unlike Santorum, to think before he speaks. What of Tom Tancredo, a militant opponent to illegal immigration? No other candidate is likely to take up his cause in 2008, and he may stick with it Pat Buchanan-style up until the nomination, then give a rousing, and probably offensive, speech to the party convention.

Could 2008 be a matchup between Democratic Underground and Free Republic? No, probably not. But it may be a matchup between Daily Kos and the Christian Coalition, trading barbs about who is evil rather than who is best for America.

For the sake of our country, we have to take politics back from the extremists who can be found lurking behind the scenes, agitating and causing the degradation of our political culture. It's not a coincidence that things have gotten so bad in Washington over the past decade. New, alternative media like blogs and talk radio have given extremists on both sides an opportunity to be heard loudly.

When professional writers comment about the "echo chamber" of blogs, they are usually trying to snipe at one particular blog or another where it's suggested that there is no difference of opinion. These are usually Republican blogs since, as everyone knows, there is less disagreement and dissent on the surface within Republican communities. But let me make the statement, quite authoritatively in fact, that the true echo chamber exists within the blog community itself.

In the blog community as a whole, profanity and extremism are considered the norm. RedState.org is a fine example of keeping politics respectful and professional, by and large, and it ought to be commended for doing so. On the left, MyDD is my favorite blog, replacing TPM Cafe which I can no longer use due to my new Mac causing display issues with posts, because they too tend to forego much of the extremist, profane, and offensive banter.

We ought to be doing more to try to make the mainstream media realize that Daily Kos, Free Republic, and Democratic Underground do not speak for us, at large, as bloggers. The fact that Markos Moulitsas was invited to the FEC to speak about the freedom of bloggers, along with RedState's own Mike Krempasky, shows that he is considered one of the more prominent bloggers on the web. Why we, as members of the larger blog community, have allowed ourselves to be linked with this man of questionable decency, I do not know.

[Horatio Gates]

Free Republic shouldn't be used in the same sentence as those other two...um, web sites of dubious character nor should it be regarded as speaking for bloggers of any political persuasion. FR is a place to discuss solutions not obstruction and fomenting anti-American ideals and twisting of the Constitution to suit a perverted agenda ala the DUmpster. The left "feels" threatened by FR. Good.

[alice_in_bubbaland]

Hugh is 100% correct! Close the borders NOW!

[concerned about politics]

Apparently we're " mainstream extremists "

It's better than extreme extremists. Look at the bright side. It could be worse.

[melt]

"mainstream extremists"

Yeah, like Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington.

[perfect stranger]

Anyone that goes thru the trouble to navigate both FR and DU, never having been to either one will notice profound differences in the quality and level of discourse.

It seems that they actually encourage profanity on that site.

[The Grim Freeper]

I have this to say about Mr. Saler's opinions: God spits lukewarm out of His mouth.

[inquest]

What of Tom Tancredo, a[n] militant opponent to illegal immigration?

Or are there opponents to illegal immigration that this author would consider "non-militant"?

I didn't think so. He's just engaging in typical lib-speak.

[montag813]

Does anyone actually read DailyKOS? It is one of the most stupid, boring blogs on the internet. And it makes Huffington's site look unbiased.

[rdb3]

Free Republic is not extreme. For extremism on the Right, they need look no further than LP, LF, or anything LewRockwell.com has to say.

But Jim, with all due respect, you do have an extreme element that has been posting for a long time with nary a post nuked. You have a small but LOUD racist element on these boards. (Note: I'm not talking about avid opponents of illegal immigrantation, so stuff it one-issue types!)

The aforementioned element's lunacy goes on and on. Mods can't be everywhere at all times, granted. But what I find very disappointing is that these posts are obviously looked at by numerous FReepers, yet never is a word is said against them.

If I didn't know any better, I could say that that is a tacit agreement with these posts by Joe and Jane FReeper.

[cripplecreek]

Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin and George Washington had some pretty nasty disagreements among themselves but they survived them and won their war.

[inquest]

Instead of conservatives banding together, we are perceived as disfunction, and not united towards the common goal of defeating liberalism.

The only problem is, I'm not about to "band together" with someone who pushes liberalism, just because he calls himself a conservative. I'm against liberalism no matter what label the person calling for it wants to wear.

[Mark]

Time to declare a Jihad. I'm not sure why, but it sounds so neat.

[timpad]

 Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free-- if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending--if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power. The millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations, and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

We mainstream extremists are in good company.

[inquest]

too many politicians motivated by vindictiveness rather than the welfare of the republic.

Ain't that the truth.

[ex-snook]

Today both parties seem to represent money PACs [groups] rather than voters hence they regard each other as liars. Unfortunately both are correct. There is no more Gipper and Tip before or after 5. Sad. Money talks civility walks.

[kcvl]

Tim Saler is a freelance political analyst, activist, and writer. He is a Democrat and writes from Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Tim’s primary focus is on how government and issues affect the common person. To this extent, Tim strives intently to be, genuinely, a uniter - not a divider. Many of his friends, both personally and professionally, are conservative Republicans, whom he deeply respects. Tim also contributes to the popular websites MyDD and RedState.org, a Democrat and Republican community respectively.

Having come from a middle-class background and raised to value a hard work ethic, he firmly believes that politics and government should not be considered avenues to wealth and the abuse of power, but rather opportunities to make a difference in one’s community, state, and country.

[melt]

The major difference between the Left and us, is that they hope we lose the war. What's good for America, is bad for them. What's bad for America, is good for them.

[Alia]

Tim has a good point; about cycles and circles. But I don't think he's very clear on groups.

A more obvious match-up is.. Pax Christi (the NNC/WCC) and Orthodox Faith Right.

Author is wrong, IMHO, matching up DU with FR -- it's not a match; but only in that these are "gathering places" of different political ideologies -- which, is still not a match in re the "synergy" "yin/yang" thing.

Outside of making the "yin/yang" argument, I'll have to re-read the article to make sense of the author's point.

[Jim Robinson]

"Today both parties seem to represent money PACs [groups] rather than voters hence they regard each other as liars. Unfortunately both are correct. There is no more Gipper and Tip before or after 5. Sad. Money talks civility walks."

You mean, the more they try to take money (free speech) out of politics, the nastier (and more extreme) it gets?

[jimbo123]

So the author of this article is a Philadephia Demoncrat? Figures...