No Room for “Pet Issues” in the Democratic Big Tent
Put forth on May 10, 2007 by XicanoPwr
Posted in Blogging, Classism, Política Estados Unidos, Prejudices, Racism
When it comes to prosperity, fairness, equality, happiness and peace, it is safe to assume this is the type of goal we all hope we able to live in. The only difference, we all have a different idea of what all that means, therefore, we tend to choose leaders (politicians, activist, minister, etc) whose values coincide with ours. One of the problems in American society has to do with our present political system. It has a tendency to create faux-leaders, Democrat or Republican, who parrot devotion to American military hegemony, often sticking to the status quo, and, of course, professing their faith to a preferably Protestant God.
When it comes to Democratic politics and blogging, one of the biggest weaknesses within the progressive blogosphere is the lack of diversity. This is not based on “speculative and anecdotal”. In fact, one of the elite bloggers, Chris Bowers of MyDD has provide the hard evidence for those who insisted on hard evidence, the demographics are: “85-90% white, 60-65% male, very high income ($75-$80K average income), and the highly educated (40-50% advanced degrees, and 80-85% four year degrees).”
The problem with this picture, if these people are supposed to be the “voice of the people,” shouldn’t we have a right to be concerned about which opinions get attention over others? If the intent of blogging is to be an extension of your voice by expressing what you believe and feel and if one were stroll through the netroots, the old adage comes to mind “you can tell a lot about a person by what they say.” In Matt Stoller’s, also of MyDD, post called “Building Power,” does speak volumes.
3) Complaining about how nobody cares about your pet issue: This is often a subset of whining about linking. Here’s the real truth. It’s not that nobody cares about your pet issue, it’s that it’s not a priority for most people. That’s why it’s your pet issue. You have to explain why your pet issue is worth prioritizing and how by doing so others can have an impact. Until you do, it remains your problem. Don’t take it personally if people don’t share your priorities. Instead, convince and lead the way.
It is not that hard to tell exactly how Stoller feels when it comes to issues about race and diversity. In fact, he has every right to express them. However, what concerns me is what kind of democratic consensus does the blogosphere reflect when the people participating in it are most likely to be white, well-educated men and tend to disregard issues that affect the lives of thousands of women, gays and minorities? In other words, by disregarding these very important issues, doesn’t Stoller’s view make an impact on his audience’s perception on what should be considered important in the US? In fact, it does if only A-list bloggers are being embraced by the political establishment, such as Markos Moulitsas Zúniga of Daily Kos and especially when Daily Kos and MyDD are the most read and cited by them. And more so when Moulitsas consults regularly with influential Democrats in Washington and presidential candidates hire A-list bloggers or court them with private dinners.
Recently, mi blogmigo, Nezua threw down the “gauntlet” to the elite WHITEPROGRESSIVE or as Marisacat calls them the Big Box Blogs and it seems they sort of were a little bothered by it. Which is why Matt and Chris where “tag-teaming” in their posts that was designed to put us in our place.
The reality is the netroots are trying to institute a Republican-lite model where everybody is all marching in lockstep. It is not a shock to see the elite blogger go after single-issue progressive groups or anybody who is dedicated to the cause of Democratic victory. And why not, as Stoller once wrote, “To the extent that I have a political hero, it’s probably Grover Norquist, not Ralph Nader.” The truth is everybody has their own grand vision of achieving equality in society, Markos, Chris, and Stoller are no different. The only difference, we all have our definition of equality and how they plan to achieve it.
Markos, Chris, and Stoller are true politicians, sure, they are not elected into office, but the political structure they established that makes them a politician. And the fact is, every politician expresses their vision on how they would like see the nation go and the reward it will bring in the long term, especially when an election is approaching soon. Once in office, they will implement their long-term policies for the sake of this grand vision. Truthfully, they do not desire to hear the truth. Their motives are to broker deals, and make compromises to make their vision a reality. Even though, a politician will never come right out and advocate a future that would include slavery, subjugation and exclusion, however, that does not they are against those concepts either. Oftentimes, they are masked through coded phrases, such as, how globalization will spread prosperity to the countries through capital and technology; or how the old trickle down effect is supposed to share wealth. The unspoken objective is financial and social equality for all future citizens. We all hope for the same thing but we are being offered different paths to the same goal.
We are often faced with a dilemma in trying to decide which would be the best path to take to achieve our ideal utopian society. The main reason why ideologies are rejected is often based on the steps a leader is willing to apply to create this so-called perfect future. Depending on the leader, that eventually will mean good news if you were in the in-crowd and bad news for everyone else. History serves as a guide in when it comes to extremism; in order for the Nazis to create a master race that would have involved all the inferior races had to be eliminated. In other words, there was no possibility for debate. Another example, in order for the United States to expand, it entailed to employ a genocidal policy towards the indigenous population, establishing slavery, and starting a war on a nearby nation. If you were Native American, an African slave, or Mexican this meant they were on the short end of the stick, but if you were a white male desiring to explore the western frontier, it was great news. Whether it is a master race paradise or empire building, it is still paradise that motivates them and no matter how you look at it, these methods were considered and necessary that paled in comparison towards making eternal bliss for a prosperous future for the nation. The only difference between the two countries that was used in the examples, only one was allowed to accomplish its intended goal. In a zero-sum game, the ends will always justify the means.
Lets not kid ourselves, the elite bloggers are wanting to build a Grover Norquist-type party, the Big Tent idea is just a facade. They talk a big game about inclusiveness within the Democratic Big Tent. But their tent is one that is about selling out women, gays and minorities just to continue the status quo. A status quo split into oppressor and the oppressed. A world of have’s and have-not’s.
Technorati Tags: Democrat, Republican, elite bloggers, Daily Kos, MyDD, A-list bloggers
Related posts
Tags: Blogging, Democrats, Kos, Marisacat, Markos, progressive blogosphere | 
Print This Post
|
This is the blog of Edmundo "XicanoPwr" Rocha, a social worker, an activist, freelance writer and founder and editor of The Sanctuary. My interests include: immigration reform, critical race theory and it's interaction with equality/inequality and freedom/oppression as they relate to the experiences of people of color in the Americas.
Para Justicia y Libertad is a Latino-centered political blog focusing on the humanistic perspective of politics, history, and society as they relate to the Latina/o community throughout Texas and the United States.
Entries (RSS)
21 Responses to “No Room for “Pet Issues” in the Democratic Big Tent”
5 Trackbacks/Pingbacks
16 Comments
You can follow any responses to this entry through the
Comments (RSS) feed.
sizzlin’ hot.
and if not, let them prove it’s not. meanwhile, i know where i’ll be.
great post, ‘mano.
Pues, they attack you, they attack me también. And if nobody wants to fight for our rights, well then, we just have to do it ourselves and show them what it really means to be inclusive.
We poor whites, and rural people are also left out of the “real” issues by the A-listers. “Progressive” my ass… they’re just the establishment’s new guard. They’re just the latest faces in the Washington establishment, and as out of touch as the old ones. As I said to Nezua, it’s just that having taken up a new medium to send out their message, they think they have something new and exciting to say. Nah.
I don’t even bother with most of them any more. People make their decisions based on other things, like how their neighbors are treated, and what they read in the San Antonio Express-News or the Finger Lakes Times or the Wisconsin Journal of Agriculture.
It’s much more productive to me to spend my time looking at the “non-progressive” sites. What the Minutemen are up to, or the thinking of the Freepers is more likely to affect the way people look at my “petty” concerns than whatever some Newsweek writer said on some talk show about something Kos wrote.
Weird huh… I’m a white, well educated guy (though dirt poor) so should be you’re average American progressive blogger. Maybe that’s why my site maintains its Mexican address… I’m not relevent to the A-listers, but then, DailyKos, etal aren’t of much relevence to me, and I don’t have to play nice.
Rich, you keep on keepin on. I’m glad you ended up where you did so far.
You want to see a “pet issue” become a “front page” issue real fast for the blogerati?
“Univision Gives Citizenship Drive An Unusual Lift”
Just threaten the voter demographics that control the power base.
When the power shifts (which it is already) watch how fast they run to play catch-up on the very issues they have tried so hard to sweep under the carpet.
All you’ll hear from them is how supportive they’ve been all along for pet issues. ..fuck.. Markos might actually pepper his posts with Spanish, just to let everyone know how down with the cause he’s been….and of course to let the power brokers in the Democratic party know he’s an important “voice for the people”
Richard - I understand the frustration, as long as poor whites are considered separate, there will always be this divide. Not only that, the stereotype of rural whites as being a bunch of redneck, hillbilly Klan members will never be broken. It sad really. It is interesting, during the Mexican election, your site was getting linked a lot, now that it is over, you would think people would care what is happening south of the border, since Mexico is our neighbor.
Duke - They will catch up alright and I fear they will do what Donna said -
As for Markos being down with the cause, he has been trying to do that ever since last year, but not as much. He of course can fool your more middle class Latinos, but his problem is the same as Bill Richardson. Zúniga, doesn’t come off as someone who is Latino. As we can see what is happening with Richardson, Markos too will have the same problem.
“It’s not that nobody cares about your pet issue, it’s that it’s not a priority for most people.”
But “it’s not a priority” is just U.S. corporatese for “nobody cares about it.” Just like “thanks for your input” means “butt out” and “resigned to spend more time with his family” means “was shit-canned.”
I’m not suggesting that Stoller was playing word games on purpose. But anyone who has dealt with middle management can translate the sentence for themselves.
I’m sorry, but quite frankly I find Markos despicable when it comes to my “pet issue” of immigrant/human-rights.
I know many who never even go to the Orange anymore because it’s pretty much a waste of time. But I blame Markos for that. He’s written on the topic only a couple of times in three years, and only when something utterly outrageous happens like the New Bedford raids…..pretty “safe” stuff to write about…. infants torn from their mothers… not too edgy.
But where is he on ALL THE OTHER SHIT that goes on day after day.
He’s utterly silent. And worse - he allows, under the guise of “the free exchange of ideas”, the worst kind of Lou Dobbs - thinly veiled, racists shit to pass as “informed debate”….I deal with it every time I’m over there.
He could easily stop it with ONE pronouncement from the mightily Kos that he firmly supports immigrant/ migrant/human-rights and all that entails….but that won’t happen…there’s .no political currency in that position just yet ….better to stick to the middle of the road and see which way the wind blows.
He makes no stand…he stakes no ground.
Listen…I AM the typical blogger demographic, white, middle-aged, middle-class. And as such have absolutely no right or claim to speak AS or FOR people of color….but I do have an obligation and duty to raise my voice WITH them.
And I’m sorry, but I think Markos could at least do the same.
XP,
sorry to monoplize your comments here, but I just came across this at MyDD:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/10/233855/905
Check out the comments. It seems to sum up the thought processes of the “progressive” blogerati…”it’s not our issue”
Your not monopolizing at all. Feel free to comment on the issue as much as you want.
So true!
*waggles a finger* But why do you always have to write these glorious, insightful things when I have (tedious, mind-numbing, time-consuming) work to do? I’m never going to get anything done!
Surfed on over here from Pandagon. As a woman, I found myself nodding in non-surprise at the comments here re: Markos & race. He’s got similar arrogance around “women’s” issues.
I can’t be bothered to read that blog anymore either.
But I’ll start reading this one!
Thanks.
Magniloquence - Thank you! Just think of it like this, you are taking a break from the tedious, mind-numbing, time-consuming work you have to do. It just happens to be a long extended break.
tinfoil hattie - Welcome and thank you so much for stopping by! Don’t hesitate to share your thoughts!
i’ve also wandered over here from pandagon ( a lurker ).
while i agree completely that some of the big boys are frustratingly tone deaf and colorblind to issues of substance — markos can hardly open his mouth without having pre-inserted the foot — i do think that the criticism of stoller’s statement is a bit off base. stoller, kos, bowers : these guys are nothing more than party activists, process wonks with enough issue savvy to keep their marginally-lefty huge audience satisfied.
i get the feeling that stoller’s admiration for norquist is borne purely out of this. they’re both party activists. nader is decidedly not a party activist, and so is of marginal value to stoller and his ilk. that doesn’t necessarily translate to the notion that a nader-type ought to be marginalized in terms of the greater debate, but as he said, we all have our “priorities.” norquist helped build a political alliance which, as o-god-don’t-we-know-it, has been damned good at what it set out to do, you know, drownings and all that — not to mention a handful of supreme court justices who are eager-beaver to turn over women’s rights and establish the new order of a rightfully christian nation.
so in that sense, is a process wonk’s norquist admiration such a terrible thing, if you replace their goals with ours?
Speak your mind
Comment Policy: First time comments are moderated. Please be patient.