The recent sniping between DailyKos and TNR has been intensely uncomfortable for many Democrats. It's forced many people to take sides, and while most people reading this have come down on the side of DKos, it's a difficult position for anyone. This site could not have become as big and important as it has become without a broad spectrum of Democrats, and I suspect the recent "with us or against us" rhetoric has resulted in some uncomfortable feelings among many posters/TNR readers. But what tends to get lost in this mud-fight (pie-fight?) is the fact that we CAN'T be focused on each other right now. The real enemy is out there dismantling the things we believe.
The recent round of flamewars has made me really reflect on why these divisions exist. In particular, why have I historically had such a problem with the DLC and with their centrist advocates at TNR?
Issue by issue, I suspect I agree with most DLC Democrats on most positions. There are major areas of disagreement -- the war being one of them -- but I don't think that our fundamental ideologies are so different. Hell, it seems that I share a preferred Presidential candidate with Marty Peretz. Neither Ryan Lizza nor I are big fans of George W. Bush's domestic policies. I doubt anyone at TNR would disagree with the fact that we need SOME form of social safety net, which pits us all against most Republicans. While we may disagree on certain policy nuances, we share broad ideas: we want to reform the healthcare system, we want to ensure civil rights, we want to protect civil liberties as much as possible, we want some level of accountability in government.
So why have I historically had such a problem with this style of centrist commentary? I think it has MUCH less to do with what is said than simply how it's said. It is terribly disenheartening to be reading an article and have someone simply dismiss or mock your position. This is even more frustrating when that commentator does not provide any concrete alternative on his own. It is even MORE frustrating when the author simply takes a detour to attack you based on his own stereotypes, as though you are beneath consideration. All of this is most annoying when you are reading it in a purportedly liberal publication, from a supposedly Democratic commentator.
This recent massive attack on DailyKos is a sad misallocation of resources. Even looking at it from the DLC's skewed perception -- in which we are all crazy wackjobs who are destroying the image of the Democratic party among those all-important right-leaning voters -- it will be unsuccessful. Attacking Markos MAY knock him out of the picture. But in the long term that will be about as effective as shutting down Napster. This is not about Markos, and we are not drones who march to his orders. If they successfully ruin him (as they seem bent on doing) we will merely migrate somewhere new. As long as the bulk of "mainstream commentary" simply ignores or derides the liberal perspective, we will seek out alternative viewpoints. This is not a genie that can be put back into the bottle. And so this election-year attack on Markos is simply detracting from our larger, shared battle against the GOP.
Yet I have to say, some of the commentary coming from Kossacks has been just as dismissive and absolutist as the most annoying brand of centrist commentary. This is not a good thing. The fact is that a divided Democratic party can only be a good thing for a conservative, united Republican party. A party made up of dueling, absolutist activists who absolutely REFUSE to listen to each other can only end up balkanized and powerless. We cannot afford these internecine battles every election year.
Ultimately, the reason TNR can seriously think we're wackjobs is the same reason we can think they're right-wingers: it's a simple lack of civility. Both groups have become very accustomed to simply dismissing each other. The vocal centrists have been dismissing liberals since the early 1990s, while the blogosphere was founded in reaction. Both thought they NEEDED to distinguish themselves from "those other Democrats", and perhaps they did in the beginning. But the time for that internal battle is over. Now is the time for integration. Now is the time to refocus on the people who are trying to turn America into a third world country.
I wonder if the answer isn't simple integration. Markos himself is actually very moderate. He's against gun control, he's in favor of military action when it's well-planned and justified, and he's very pragmatic about protecting conservative Democrats from the South and West. But maybe it's time to bring in bigger guest posters from across the spectrum of the blogosphere, similar to what Josh Marshall is doing at TPMCafe. I really believe that one major reason that we've all become so uncivil is because we're simply not exposed to each other's views. I would love to see a simple dialogue between Peter Beinart and Hunter, or Mickey Kaus and Markos. I'm sure we'd all find that, while there WOULD BE real levels of disagreement, they would not be as big or important as many posters here think. It would be hard for someone like Beinart to really go back to TNR and think of us as radical leftists if he REALLY READ our views. I think our opinions of him would improve in a "dialogue" situation as well.
One thing is for sure: we cannot afford this battle right now. Democrats can only win through a coalition -- we're not the rich white conservatives, we are nearly all minorities (in some sense or another, if only just by our political ideology). Destroying your own coalition right before an election is pretty much the definition of terrible strategy.