Skip to main content

There has been a lot of meta-comment here recently about who said what to whom, who is enabling a Republican victory next year and in 2012, why Obama is a sell-out etc. This has come to a head in the GBCW diary from Colorado is the Shiznit.

That diary, and the comments flowing from it, made me think a lot about why it is that DKos has become such a bearpit, what are the causes of the flame-wars, and what are the bounds of reasonable disagreement.

I think part of the problem comes down to the need to distinguish between disagreements about the goals, and disagreements about the strategy to get there.

I would hope that by and large, there is agreement on DKos about what the goals are. There may be some who would want to go further down a road than others on particular issues, but broadly we are all heading in the same direction. We all want to see a public option in healthcare, and many of us would like to see single payer. We all want the end of DADT. We all want the war in Afghanistan ended as soon as possible. We all want to see America's standing in the world significantly improved.

The primaries are the place where differences about the goals, or the distance towards them that we can reasonably travel, are thrashed out. Eventually, a decision is reached. And we then have a choice between someone who is broadly moving towards our goals, or a Republican whose goals are at best different, and at worst, and far more often, diametrically opposed to ours.

And then the election happens, and our guy wins. So now we are moving from a debate about goals to a debate about governing. This is where issues of strategy, tactics, realpolitik and prioritisation start to bite.

So then what happens in the blogosphere is that people start to disagree with the tactics, the messaging, the prioritisation. Health care is being watered down too much and Obama is not fighting hard enough for it. Too low a priority is being given to LGBT issues. His decision to send more troops to Afghanistan is all wrong.

I have no problem with criticism that says Obama's tactics are not the best ones for achieving our goals. I positively support activism that involves demonstrating to politicians the strength of feeling in the country on some of these core issues, to counter the lobbying power of the big corporations.

But where I part company from the critics, and where I think so much of the violent ill-feeling arises, is when the critics argue that because Obama is not following their chosen tactics, or prioritising their chosen agenda, that he therefore opposes their goals.

So we see critics of the pace of health care reform claiming Obama has sold out to the insurance industry. To believe that, you have to believe one impossible thing and one unlikely one. The impossible thing is that Obama deliberately chose to spend his first year working hard to fail spectacularly in delivering health care reform. The unlikely thing is that Obama is lying every time - and there have been many - he publicly states that he wants to see a public option in the bill.

We see understandably disgruntled supporters of LGBT issues boycotting the President and claiming that he is betraying them because he has not tackled their issues in his first year in office.

And now we see those who want the war in Afghanistan ended quickly concluding that the thoughtful decision Obama has made after weeks of deliberation and much expert advice means that he positively wants to be a war president, and ignores any consideration of the possible consequences of an immediate withdrawal, something that I have little doubt Obama looked at very seriously.

Even worse, the critics of the strategy, tactics and prioritisation too often express their criticism in terms of threats not to support Democrats in the next election, and, in the worst examples, threats to primary Obama in 2012. That is a sure-fire way to get no progress towards any of the goals, and the utter destruction of much that we on the left hold dear, instead of getting steady progress, albeit much slower than most of us would like, in the right direction.

And that is why so many of us get so angry with many of Obama's critics on the left. Their legitimate argument is generally with his tactics. But they falsely assert that Obama is working against their goals when he chooses tactics they consider (and not necessarily with good reason) sub-optimal. They call him a liar, a traitor to the left, and by extension call all of us fools for having supported him.

So for goodness sake, keep making it clear just how important the goals are. Don't shut up when you think the Government is making tactical mistakes. Keep pushing the administration as far down the road on these issues as possible, as fast as can be achieved. Just don't keep making the mistake of confusing differing views on tactics, or on what is politically possible, with differing goals. And for Flying Spaghetti Monster's sake, don't do anything at all that will assist in electing more Republicans.

Originally posted to ultraviolet uk on Sun Dec 06, 2009 at 04:19 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (4+ / 0-)

    Chill the f*** out. I got this.

    by ultraviolet uk on Sun Dec 06, 2009 at 04:19:46 AM PST

  •  Engaging in honest criticism.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    burrow owl, sangemon, chicago jeff

    ....of Obama should not be seen as a threat to his 2012 re-election bid. Indeed, it should be seen as good help.

  •  The goal always (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    in politics is to make sure no more Republicans get elected.  If you are angry at President Obama fine.
    Don't shoot yourself in the foot by not voting and remember change doesn't happen over night but it will never happen if you give up.

  •  People Merely Want (0+ / 0-)

    ...the needless slaughter of Americans who are denied health care to stop. To be strong on a public option would mean that 50,000 people won't be murdered by neglect next year.

    People merely want the needless slaughter of American troops to stop by ending the war instead of escalating it.

    Clearly, the killing will continue on both fronts because this is what Obama is being forced to do by his Corporate Overlords.

    I do not see, however, that this will affect the outcome of the 2010 or 2012 elections. The Democrats have no choice in the matter and nowhere to go. They'll hold their noses and vote for even more Democrats.

    Rinse. Repeat.

  •  Jeez, you mean it's a long-term project? (0+ / 0-)
  •  This is one of the most thoughtful diaries (0+ / 0-)

    I've read here on DKos in quite a while.

    Thank you!

    It's hard to argue with your main point about the impossible and the unlikely, and I guess it just goes to show that "left" thinking humans aren't really any different at all from "right" thinking humans. It's pretty obvious to me that ego driven know-it-all self-righteousness is equally prevalent on both sides of the political spectrum. Maybe gossip, conjecture, hyperbole, and tabloid-ism are inherently human characteristics.

    Unfortunately, diaries with thoughtful titles like this one rarely get read here much anymore.

    "Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day" - Thomas Jefferson

    by sangemon on Sun Dec 06, 2009 at 05:10:46 AM PST

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site