A current Wreck List diary purports to equate criticism of the Obama administration and Blue Dog Democrats as excessive, abusive "self-kicking" -- as a "perfectionist" might do to him-/herself.
It further calls for a "moratorium" on such "perfectionist... self-abuse," in the interest of self-survival past the November elections, under the assumption that all such self criticism is likely to further ensure the election of Republicans, the indisputable bad guys.
First, the metaphor is all wrong. Second, this is a false dichotomy -- a classic logical "either-or" fallacy, that many of us see again and again in relation to the idea of criticizing the Obama Democrats and conservative members of our Party.
Allow me to posit an alternative metaphor, which not only suggests that it's not "ourselves" that we're "kicking," but also would lead to the uncomfortable but inevitable conclusion that criticism is, yes, reluctantly and painfully, necessary for the good of everyone involved (well, except for the asshole Republicans, of course):
If you don't like that exact metaphor, chose a similar one to your liking: The compulsive gambler, the compulsive womanizer, the drug addict, the physical abuser, etc. The particular dysfunction is not as important as the impact on the family unit, and even the community. This is a "person" who is doing damage to (him/her)self and those family members around him/her.
You don't remain silent around a drunken family member; that's called enabling, which is damaging to everyone, and does the drunk no favors in the long or short runs. Some family members will be afraid to hurt the alcoholic by criticizing -- since you don't DO that to loved ones, right? Or immediate family might be afraid to air the family's dirty linen in public, thinking that it will hurt everyone in the family if internal "squabbling" is known outside.
Current Democratic politics are more akin to an alcoholic, or otherwise dysfunctional family member. A father, mother, brother, aunt, etc. -- but in this case, more aptly the head of the household, around whose fortunes revolve the success or failure of the family unit.
But the fact is, for a drunk (etc.), as we all know, enabling or remaining silent is the worst thing you can do. While criticizing and pushing him/her to clean up is not a traitorous act. It's the only way to get them to recognize their self-destructive ways -- which are also destructive to the family as well. Keeping silent is not going to make them get sober more quickly, and in fact will allow their drunken friends to have all the influence.
You see where this is going: It's a classic logical fallacy of false dichotomy to assume that criticizing Democrats automatically makes it more likely that Repugs will take their place. We can attack outsiders who aspire to destroy the family entirely, while simultaneously seeking to get our misbehaving, beloved family members to "sober up" for the good of all Democrats, and for the country in general.
It's most certainly not either-or, and it's dependent in part on the type of criticism. But firm, "tough love" criticism of those within the Democratic Family -- who, say, wish to needlessly gut Social Security -- is not the same as virulent, hateful, slanderous lies from the evil Republicans.
It's silly to equate the two. And in this case, the Democratic Party has seriously, and dangerously, in my view, strayed from the values Democrats hold dear. Worse, said straying has endangered the entire Dem Family, and made it much more likely to suffer needlessly for many years at the hands of the outsiders. Silence allows the Overton Window of public discourse to continue drifting right, and the Democratic leadership, the president included, to continue to speak only with the right-wing Democrats and the very, very far right wing Repugs like Alan Fucking Simpson.
Now's not the time for silence. Now's the time for an intervention.
Falme on, dudes (and dude-ettes).