A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics
|
|
|
A Weblog of Centrist Voices in American Politics | |
|
December 26, 2004Which Blogs Hate More?The Moderate Voice has a terrific post building on a thread started by Poliblog. Are lefty blogs nicer than righty blogs, as suggested by Mahablog? In general, I think the answer is no, though because there are more conservative blogs, there may be more quantitative attacks on liberals. But what really bugs me is, they're ignoring the center again. Say something about us. Bash us! We exist. Posted by rickheller at December 26, 2004 06:10 PMComments
There are too many blogs out there for one person to read, much less analyze the relative niceness of one side or the other. That being said, I can comment on one experience that I had. I used to enjoy reading BOP mainly because their arguments were so poorly constructed, and they were so convinced that their arguments were unassailable, particularly Sterling Mayberry, who has a wonderful vocabulary. I enjoyed posting comments, which often led to protracted arguments (and I do love to argue). Around the time of the election, I suggested that the Democratic Party needed to move to the center - in fact, that they had an obligation to do so. A two-party system doesn't need a gadfly for a minority party, it needs a viable alternative. Clinton understood this, but BOP called it heresy, called me a right-wing talking-points echo, and banned me for life. That was the nastiest reaction to anything I've written. Posted by: Literally Retarded at December 27, 2004 11:22 AM(shameless blog plug ahead) You all are free to come over to PreemptiveKarma and we'll be mean and hateful to you. I write at least half of our stuff. Being a liberal that must mean I'm less nice, right? LOL : ) Besides...we've almost turned Mathew away from the dark side. Posted by: carla at December 27, 2004 12:19 PMWent to Mahablog to f/u on the post. They had me engaged until I hit these two sentences: The bald truth is that to be a Bush supporter means that you are (a) ignorant of what's going on; (b) suffering massive cognitive dissonance; or (c) are a soulless sociopathic bastard. OK, I thought maybe this is just humor to prove a point but then a little further on: I postulate that rightiness (as opposed to actual political conservatism, which is something else entirely) is less an ideology than a pathology, bordering on sociopathy. Those who don't tidily conform to their world view are not human beings, in their minds. Democrats, liberals, neighborhood children who might be electrocuted ... Maybe blogs that have such a demeaning approach to those who disagree simply filter out the "more reasonable folks" who disagree with them but who prefer not to be ridiculed. Posted by: chris at December 27, 2004 01:17 PMI find that right-leaning blogs and left-leaning blogs have distinctly different styles of discourse. For example my experience has been that left-leaning blogs tend to be snarkier so some of one's experience in reading them may depend on one's tolerance for snark. YMMV. Neither side of the blogosphere is exempt from fault. It would be nice if everybody would abstain from ad hominem arguments but I doubt it will happen anytime soon. Posted by: Dave Schuler at December 27, 2004 01:49 PMDave; Here's a definition that gets at what I mean particularly:
And right-leaning blogs are certainly not snark-free. But it seems to me to be an attitude more affected by left-leaning blogs. As I said before YMMV. Posted by: Dave Schuler at December 27, 2004 04:05 PM And to give a concrete example of what I'm talking about compare Instapundit with Eschaton. IMO these are blogs that occupy very similar ecological niches (not to mention Ecosystem niches) but have very diffent discoursive styles. Would I be incorrect in characterizing Reynolds as libertarian/center-right and Black as center-left/left? Posted by: Dave Schuler at December 27, 2004 04:09 PMSnark seems to be getting a bad rap here.... Snark has it's place, especially with passionate debate. It's not necessarily the same thing as ad hominem, either. It's more a use of sarcasm or irony. What I find on the righty blogs is the "back patting" and "rah rahs". It seems a constant. The comments tend to run to the obtuse in many ways as well. Statements are often made as fact with no actual citations or proof....and the lemmings chime in to agree. It's oddly unsettling and much more irritating than anything I would consider "snarky".
Oh, carla, go back and look at my comments. I'm not disparaging snark. My point is that the discoursive styles of left-leaning blogs and right-leaning blogs differ. And you're absolutely right: snark and an appeal to the ad hominem fallacy are not the same thing. Posted by: Dave Schuler at December 28, 2004 08:16 AMStatements are often made as fact with no actual citations or proof....and the lemmings chime in to agree. Carla, that's one of the best capsule descripts of echo-chamber blogdom, ALL stripes, that I've ever seen! And I think one of the absolutely definitive hallmarks of True Believer echo-chamber blogdom is when those instantly lemming-chorused statements are pejorative ad-hominem snarks directed at The Other Side.... I wonder if it's even possible to objectively measure the hyperbolic levels of vituperated apostolic venom in such obvious equivalent opposites as, say, DU and the Freepers. Tully: I will grant you that DU and Free Republic are opposite sides of the same exasperatingly lemming-ish coin. I've read both..frequent neither and find them equally irritating. That said...I find lefty blogs in general to have more source citations to back up contentions and much less in the way of "rah-rah" obtuseness. What's worse...on righty blogs when one asks for source citations, one tends to get one's throat jumped down by the defensive masses (in general). There's some of it on lefty blogs...but not nearly to the same degree. It's my experience that lefties (again...in general) tend to be more about searching for information to form an opinion. Righties tend to be about searching for information as ammunition to cement an opinion...if they search at all. Posted by: carla at December 28, 2004 02:04 PMIt's my experience that lefties (again...in general) tend to be more about searching for information to form an opinion. Righties tend to be about searching for information as ammunition to cement an opinion...if they search at all. I wonder if conservatives feel the exact opposite way. As a centrist, I find the "searching for information as ammunition to cement an opinion" approach (Richard Paul, a critical thinking scholar, calls this weak-sense critical thinking) to be an equal opportunity flaw. I claim a willingness to do research for the purpose of forming an opinion to be a centrist feature, and an aspiration which we do a better job of approaching than either left or right. But then, that puts me in a similar boat as the lefties and righties in thinking my clan does the best job of this...even though i still get to have the thesis-antithesis-synthesis progression tale on my side. Dave; PS Not to be too academic but what's the etymology of snark? Posted by: Chris at December 29, 2004 05:04 PMSnark attack? LOL I like that. If only we could get the "Jaws" theme to go with it. :) Posted by: carla at December 29, 2004 06:46 PMBut what really bugs me is, they're ignoring the center again. Say something about us. Bash us! We exist. A suggestion: “A member of the centrist no-fallacy zone” is too vague and will probably get one pegged as a dissembler from the other wing. generic cialis information including how to buy online at cheap prices , find out about generic cialis here. I have always looked for a possibility to find information as quick as I can. Now there is the internet. And I really appreciate people like you who take their chance in such an excellent way to give an impAression oI have always looked for a possibility to find information as quick as I can. Now there is the internet. And I really appreciate people like you who take their chance in such an excellent way to give an impAression on certain topics. Thanks for having me here.. Posted by: Albert at January 6, 2005 04:59 AM |
Archives
March 2006
February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003
Recent Entries
Dubai Out
Why So Long Between Democracies? Round One, Centrism Rock Lobster? Blackwell Releases "Worst-Treated" List "IRV" used in Burl., VT for mayor election. Great idea! Random Thread Election 2006: Round One A Proper Multiculturalism Bush proposes line item veto act - what's changed?
|
