BuzzMachine

The media pundit's pundit. Written by NYC insider Jeff Jarvis, BuzzMachine covers news, media, journalism, and politics.

The very foundation of democracy

13 comments on The very foundation of democracy

The very foundation of democracy
: John Perry Barlow started a blog, as many others have noted. He opened up comments; good for him. And he’s impressed with the discussion and sees it as “the very foundation of democracy.” He’s not afraid (so far) to find himself in political discussion and to scold his own:

If we in the anti-Bush forces continue to bray about our moral and intellectual superiority, we will almost certainly piss off the troubled folks in the middle who will decide the future of America in the next election. Unfortunately, elections these days are more about style and policy. I think we’re right on the policies – though more thorough and direct engagement with the other side will be necessary to put persuasive sinew into our arguments. But our style sucks. We are too often arrogant, hyperbolic, self-righteous, vindictive, and mean-spirited. Anger, no matter how justified, is not attractive to the unconvinced.

Now would be a good time for us all to come and reason together, and I am grateful to the pro-Bush newcomers to this blog for their willingness to do just that.

As we used to say, right on.

13 responses to “The very foundation of democracy”

  1. stubby Avatar
    stubby

    I love his line about their own “pious gasses”; that’s a great phrase and it perfectly describes the echo chamber (a far inferior phrase) that any of us, whatever our political leanings, are prone to wandering into, and the intellectual torpor that results from staying there too long. Breathe your own fumes for too long and you start to go all fuzzy.

  2. Mike G Avatar
    Mike G

    I note that he still assumes he HAS moral and intellectual superiority…

  3. AST Avatar
    AST

    As I posted on his site, a friend of the devil is a friend of mine.
    I think he’s dead wrong (no pun intended, at least at first) about policy, but I appreciate his willingness to recognize that his opponents aren’t all fools.

  4. The Snark Who Was Really a Boojum Avatar
    The Snark Who Was Really a Boojum

    Mike,
    That’s human nature. We do too, or else we’d convert to another view the moment we didn’t. Jane Galt made a legitimate point when she pointed out a few months ago (I’ll try to find the precise post later) that the most likely reason we’ve done a better job of maintaining intellectual coherence than they is that Old Media left us with no choice but to become familiar with their material while they were easily able to enwomb themselves as deeply as they wished for several decades. It occurred to her that now that we’ve our own news outlets such as Fox and the blogs we run a certain risk by virtue of the fact that we are now able to do the same to ourselves. So that *is* something we’re going to guard against for ourselves both now and in the future. ^_^;
    I’ll should go visit Mr. Barlow’s site tomorrow. May as well breathe some “outside air”. ^_~

  5. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    Great excerpt! So when can we look forward to Jeff Jarvis “scolding his own,” such as pro-war bloggers who “bray about their moral and intellectual superiority” (for opposing Saddam, being anti-terrorism, etc.)?
    Or is this one of those attributes that only praiseworthy in one’s opponents?

  6. brb Avatar
    brb

    “such as pro-war bloggers who “bray about their moral and intellectual superiority””
    Examples please.

  7. capt joe Avatar
    capt joe

    Swopa, Isn’t opposing Saddam a good thing? That doesn’t seem morally superior or posturing to me, just ethical.

  8. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    brb … what’s the line from the old Palmolive commercials? “You’re soaking in it”? From one of Jeff’s posts below:
    this indicates the utter bankruptcy of my fellow liberals regarding any humanitarian cause these days.
    Michael Totten is another good example. I wonder sometimes why he doesn’t just give all his posts the same title: “Someone Else I’m Morally Superior To.”
    Capt. Joe … of course opposing Saddam is a good thing, but the “morally superior” warblogger brigade insists on thinking that only they had the courage and strength to oppose Saddam, which is offensive garbage. Many intelligent, moral people opposed the war because they felt that while it would remove Saddam, it wouldn’t do enough from preventing another tyrant from taking his place.
    It seems that many pro-war bloggers are unable to see this. Maybe the arm they’re using to pat themselves on the back for opposing Saddam is blocking their view.

  9. s'wonderful Avatar
    s’wonderful

    Convinced of your own “moral and intellectual superiority”? Congratulations, you’re human.
    C’man people. We all have convictions and that’s a GOOD thing. But pursuading someone to your argument should have very little to do with how much you believe what your saying (assuming intellectual honesty, of course.) Just try really hard not to insult the person you’re trying to convince. It’s called class. And it works.
    Unfortunately, (sorry, jeff) but blogging does not seem conductive to manners. I think often, in the economy of the blogged word, class and style are get short shrift.

  10. brb Avatar
    brb

    “this indicates the utter bankruptcy of my fellow liberals regarding any humanitarian cause these days”
    What does ‘this’ refer to? Or would providing context weaken your argument.
    “Many intelligent, moral people opposed the war because they felt that while it would remove Saddam, it wouldn’t do enough from preventing another tyrant from taking his place.”
    Really?? Do you see that there is a high liklihood of another tryant taking over Iraq? If not, are you willing to admit that your judgement was flawed? Or at least inferior to that of Bush?

  11. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    “this indicates the utter bankruptcy of my fellow liberals regarding any humanitarian cause these days”
    What does ‘this’ refer to? Or would providing context weaken your argument.
    As I noted, it’s from a post of Jeff’s (from January 4th, just scroll down).
    Do you see that there is a high likelihood of another tyrant taking over Iraq?
    Yes, absolutely. We have done almost nothing to establish democracy over there, and even less to ensure one that is secular and tolerant. You may not know this because the blogs that profess to be so fervent about bringing democracy to Iraq seem to have an unspoken rule against discussing the actual progress or lack of same toward that goal.
    (Go to my homepage and do a search for “Sistani,” and you’ll be able to catch up. I did one here, and there were no results — can that be right?! Last I checked at Instapundit, there was one hit from last April. Salam Pax said just before the invasion that the way to support democracy in Iraq was to keep an eye on what happened after the war; I guess Jeff and Glenn R. aren’t interested in watching.)

  12. brb Avatar
    brb

    “Yes, absolutely. We have done almost nothing to establish democracy over there…”
    OK, you have your OPINION, I have mine, Bush has his. Time will tell who is right. Comments like this are meaningless because they cant be proven or disproven. What does “almost nothing” mean? I think the full phrase should be “almost nothing in my opinion”
    I have no interest in reading the weblog of someone who brings no facts in to back up his opinion. Surely there is some verifiable fact (Noam Chomsky’s opinion does not count as sacred text here) to support your claim that could fit into a post here. I can point to Iraqi Kurdistan. What can you point to? Sadamite holdouts? Given the lack of support for your position you provide, it would appear that you base your opinion on the racist idea that Arabs cant have democracy. What do you base your opinon on if not that idea?
    What if the country in question were South Africa. Would you have given up on the whole project because of the violent opposition of white South Africaners?

  13. Swopa Avatar
    Swopa

    So, what is it like, being willfully ignorant?
    I have no interest in reading the weblog of someone who brings no facts in to back up his opinion.
    Duh, maybe I was referring you there because you’d find the facts there (and posting a 10-page comment on someone else’s blog is generally seen as rude).
    But your post demonstrates the real reason you won’t go — you don’t want to find out the basis for my opinion. You’d rather live in your fantasy world of straw-man leftists who worship Noam Chomsky (someone whom I’ve NEVER READ A WORD OF, you fool) or believe easily ridiculed theories like “Arabs aren’t ready for democracy” (which I don’t believe at all).
    I’m sorry that I don’t fit your comfortable stereotype. If you’d like to educate yourself about what a real antiwar liberal believes, feel free to visit my site (you could even start here). If you’d rather remain ignorant and debate with shadows, just carry on as you are.