The existence of liberalism as a discussion topic constitutes, in many ways, an unacceptable bias towards liberalism in the eyes of the far right (and barrier between the far and not-so-far right is creeping ever leftward). Daily, we see complaints about the liberal bias of, well, everything, to the point where, as Bill Kristol put it, the rationale for all conservative failures is bias towards liberalism.
It’s a weakness, and it’s probably going to be the downfall of movement conservatism. Eventually, liberalism can’t be blamed anymore. When you fail out of school because you tried to get a Poli Sci degree by writing “liberals are destroying America” for 20 papers a year, you failed because you did a bad job.
Remember personal responsibility? – Jesse Taylor
Whenever I can, I spend a bit of time lurking on a couple of right-wing blogs, those with comments. Have been doing it for a few years now. They can be, at times, equally as pertinent to a given issue as those on the left. As a liberal, I think it is important to engage as many points of view as possible to understand and solve an issue. I veer to the left on most issues, but my overall perspective is often one that has considered a few different views -left, moderate, right.
So, of the right-wing blogs, I have a few favorites, but, I never comment because it is simply not worth it. If you dissent from the accepted line you get bashed and called a commie pinko (when you’re not and think communism is not a viable system). And, playing devil’s advocate can get you a goodly amount a hate e-mail and /or the usual round of infantile insults. And, introducing facts is cause for ridicule and hate. It’s a culture, just like the left blogs. For the most part, you will see the same people, day in, day out, a big community with one thing in common: they all hate “liberals”. And, that means not only those they perceive as “liberals”, but pretty much anyone who disagrees with them. And, that is a signigicant departure from the culture of the majority of left blogs.
The other day, I decided to make an attempt at introducing either some facts (with supporting links) or a simple devil’s advocate argument into the middle of a few right-wing “discussions”. The blogs and the topics were chosen completely at random, and the comment areas were the basic liberal bashing festivals. As you might expect, the reaction to the “intrusion” of information was harsh.
The information that I introduced was met with complete disregard. They attacked me. Immediately. The exact same reaction, from all of the blog comment areas. I responded mostly on topic. Played along a bit, probably too much, but mostly stayed on topic.
On one blog, a poster was prone to attacking outright those who dissent with insults to their intelligence in order to divert the subject from the topic raised. A basic ad hominem and diversion. Obsessively prone to ad hominems. So, I called her on it. And, she simply denied she did it! The words were there for all to see. Yet, she simply made up excuses and launched attack after attack. At first, she claimed that the dissenter had insulted her first and she was responding to that. But, the dissenter never insulted her. Such an insult was nowhere to be found. Because it never happened. When I asked her where the insult was, she said that I was not “enlightened” enough to see the insult!
On another blog, I introduced a devil’s advocate point of view. And, was immediately attacked. I was attacked for taking the side of the “liberal” they were all focused upon hating, so I incurred their hate as well.
It is difficult to know what to write in response to all the hate you get, because part of you is saying: “This is fucking crazy.” Part of you is laughing, part of you is sad. Mostly, you have to keep the part of you that wants to respond to the playground insults from getting too involved and keep it on topic. Part of me felt bad at manipulating all of them, but the other part of me, upon reading their responses, said … Nah.
My observation has been that liberties such as free speech and the higher effort to discuss ideas are not tolerated at all in many right-wing forums. The members give “freedom” lip service, but it surely is not practiced. And, speech is censored in a very specific manner: they ignore your point and attack you and the source of the information. On more than a few right-wing sites, they will simply delete your post outright if you profess a dissenting view.
As you examine it closer, it becomes quite clear that there is a complete disregard for information, and for discussion of information, when the information comes from a perceived, or (G-d forbid!) actual liberal source. That information will be disregarded out of hand, and derided. The reporter or outlet responsible for the reporting of the information will be attacked and the person who actually posted the information into their midst will be denigrated. I’ve watched it happen again and again and again. It’s interesting, because generally, it is not something that occurs in quite that way on left blogs.
It is true that a certain form of this behavior exists on the left as well. People protect their turf when “trolls” come in to stir the pot. That’s to be expected from both sides. But, if you post a dissenting point of view that is well thought out and supported, a discussion will ensue, more often than not.
What is unique in the right-wing blogs is the sheer lack of willingness to engage information that might actually contradict their perspective. It’s denial in the strongest sense of the word. And, as noted, if that information comes from a source they consider to be “biased” (pretty much all sources that they don’t agree with) then they dismiss that information. They will do so without even considering it’s purpose, it’s role, whether it’s true, or untrue, or disinfo, or propaganda. (Or a combination of those things.)
But, the primary difference between the left and the right is in how they deal with their hate. Both sides hate the other. But, there is an important point of separation.
The right-wing blogs are riddled with examples of calls to destroy liberalism, of scapegoating liberals, of discussion of how to eliminate liberals from the democratic equation. That is not a perspective you will find on the left. To my knowledge, Liberals do not profess to a desire to destroy conservatism as an ideology. (Unless you cite a kook group such as the Socialist Workers. Not modern liberals by any stretch.)
The effort from the right to destroy the left is classic fascism. How do we know this is true? Because the right is using the left as a scapegoat. The left is to blame for everything.
Consider this from Lew Rockwell:
The most significant socio-political shift in our time has gone almost completely unremarked, and even unnoticed. It is the dramatic shift of the red-state bourgeoisie from leave-us-alone libertarianism, manifested in the Congressional elections of 1994, to almost totalitarian statist nationalism. Whereas the conservative middle class once cheered the circumscribing of the federal government, it now celebrates power and adores the central state, particularly its military wing. [...]In the last years of the 1990s, the GOP-voting middle class refocused its anger away from government and leviathan and toward the person of Bill Clinton. It was said that he represented some kind of unique moral evil despoiling the White House. That ridiculous Monica scandal culminated in a pathetic and pretentious campaign to impeach Clinton. Impeaching presidents is a great idea, but impeaching them for fibbing about personal peccadilloes is probably the least justifiable ground. It’s almost as if that entire campaign was designed to discredit the great institution of impeachment.
In any case, this event crystallized the partisanship of the bourgeoisie, driving home the message that the real problem was Clinton and not government; the immorality of the chief executive, not his power; the libertinism of the left-liberals and not their views toward government. The much heralded “leave us alone” coalition had been thoroughly transformed in a pure anti-Clinton movement. The right in this country began to define itself not as pro-freedom, as it had in 1994, but simply as anti-leftist, as it does today. [...]
The vigor and determination of the Bush administration has brought about a profound cultural change, so that the very people who once proclaimed hated of government now advocate its use against dissidents of all sorts, especially against those who would dare call for curbs in the totalitarian bureaucracy of the military, or suggest that Bush is something less than infallible in his foreign-policy decisions. The lesson here is that it is always a mistake to advocate government action, for there is no way you can fully anticipate how government will be used. Nor can you ever count on a slice of the population to be moral in its advocacy of the uses of the police power. [...]
I’m actually not surprised at this. It has been building for some time. If you follow hate-filled sites such as Free Republic, you know that the populist right in this country has been advocating nuclear holocaust and mass bloodshed for more than a year now. The militarism and nationalism dwarfs anything I saw at any point during the Cold War. It celebrates the shedding of blood, and exhibits a maniacal love of the state. The new ideology of the red-state bourgeoisie seems to actually believe that the US is God marching on earth not just godlike, but really serving as a proxy for God himself.
Along with this goes a kind of worship of the presidency, and a celebration of all things public sector, including egregious law like the Patriot Act, egregious bureaucracies like the Department of Homeland Security, and egregious centrally imposed regimentation like the No Child Left Behind Act. It longs for the state to throw its weight behind institutions like the two-parent heterosexual family, the Christian charity, the homogeneous community of native-born patriots.
That is why John Kerry lost the election for President in November of 2004. John Kerry was labeled a liberal. And, liberals are evil. They are the scapegoats. By contrast, there is no effort on the left to scapegoat the right. Some liberals will tell you we’re all to blame. Some will say Bush is to blame for some stuff. But, I don’t know any liberals who think that the right is to blame for everything. The left is a culture of ideas. It’s not a scapegoat culture. It is, by and large, a culture of disagreement. We can’t even agree amongst ourselves, which is why we are not in power.
It is important that all information be considered to solve problems. We are doing a disservice and putting ourselves at greater risk as a nation by not engaging and vetting information from all sides. Simply dismissing information because it is conservative or liberal is dangerous for us all. Especially considering the fact that we are at war and we are all at risk.
The left is obsessive about posting on the issues that they see being mishandled by the party in power. But, obsessed with destroying the conservative movement? Hardly. It’s not something that most liberals care about. We’d rather simply get into power again. And, we will.
We’ll save their sorry butts in the process too.
