Having attended YearlyKos I am both excited, and worried, about what I had encountered. And oftentimes for the same reasons. There are a great many people involved in our community here, who are very new to activism. That they know and care to know, on average, little about how activism has formerly been done, is a question mark followed by an exclamation point.
Optomism. Energy. Expertise.
Despair. Hubris. Inexperience.
The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.
---Benjamin Franklin.
The involvement of the internet, and a fresh crowd of people, does not mean this has not occurred before. There are many pitfalls that "movements" encounter and, my point is, this community is not being wary enough of them.
For starters, note the turnover in the names of the regular posters you recognize. If you been here a year or so, you've probably seen names come and go. Some of those names have continued blogging on politics elsewhere, like Stirling Newberry. Others and these are harder to account for, seem to have faded away completely. By the dozens, the hundreds, the thousands. (That a few blasts from the past appeared at YKos, while many others have been forgotten, brought this to mind.)
Simply put, the notion that one can build a shiny ivory tower, peopled exclusively with paragons of the movement, and that the masses will then flock to its leadership, is flawed. What too many progressive (and other) movements have found in the past is that the appearance of health and vigor can endure, and even increase, past the point where the opportunity for true popularity has fallen by the wayside.
This is not a defense of "trolls." This is not a defense of conspiracy theories, MetaDiaries, or any side in any inter-site conflict.
What I'm advocating is that everyone here realizes that we need to win popular elections. We need to improve journalism, function as the reality-rooted swift crew for Democrats, and fund campaigns too. But most importantly it comes down to winning elections. Improving platforms, philosophical foundations for them, and the way these are presented, is important. But ultimately winning elections is essential.
To that end, we need to view politics as separate from everything else we want to accomplish in this life individually and collectively. Politics is about low common denominators as well as soaring inspiration. In fact where the latter occurs with any success it tends to play on the former. That's depressing... If you were expecting too much.
Private enterprise, along with apolitical advocacy and activism, are underrated around here. Without getting into the "single issue group" trap of forgetting the political coalition one depends on, there is a great deal of appeal in branching off DailyKos into more specific activism.
I suggest that when you find yourself arguing with fellow Kossacks on issues where you know darn well a plurality of Americans don't, or won't soon, agree... Then skip it. Don't get into a gratuitous argument. State a case politely, and save the energy that might be misspent on an argument for a constructive effort on that issue.
Politeness (mutual respect and failing that, singular restraint) is an important commodity in movements. Too often the fighting spirit, the pure spirit of the crusade, overcomes it. That is vainglory; that's the best word for it however humbly it may bubble to the surface, and it is a hazard.
This pertains to YearlyKos because I observed no arguments at YearlyKos that did not involve Joe Trippi and Jerome Armstrong as participants. This is meaningful because people don't like sniping and drivebys in reality. Movements that have squabbling occurring in a chaotic and unpredictable fashion, are dysfunctional and however long they may last, will never achieve broad appeal. No one should mistake a few apparent exceptions (such as Stalinism) with anything that will work here, or in America generally.
The challenge is to not mistake a lack of discipline with discipline. If it feels good, if it feels like you are getting a dig in, then (unfortunately) it's not positive discipline, but self gratification and promotion... To an implicity narrower group. For a small club or congregation, such instincts serve well. But a mass movement aiming to pull a plurality of voters along with it, is not well served by primal codes of behavior. Not in a nation as big and diverse and upset as this.
We present a collection of end goals and practical platform items to achieve these. We decide upon these for a wide array of philosophical reasons. We can expect broad agreement on the determinations, but not on the subjective decisions that lead us (and hopefully others) to them. So, while it is useful to talk to voters about philosophical motives in isolated "markets," it is unwise to imagine that true unity is possible or even desirable on that front popularly, and here as well.
In closing let me say that I'm as guilty as anyone of these missteps. This is not, in itself, a dig at anyone, or the community.
Many people don't vote and many others take the decision somewhat less seriously than the question of where to get an oil change. People by and large hate politics in this country, which explains why the party that is increasingly dependent on hatred of politics ever wins.
I think we should make the case that our current movement is more about defeating extremism than advancing another brand of it. But at the same time, some people are undeniably hungry for extremism and will only switch to a side that offers big, energetic solutions. We need to provide all of those things. Amelioration and inspiration. To that end, we need diversity here. And we need to recognize that.