A strange thing happened to me the day the House of Representatives voted to pass the Iraq-war-funding bill. Congresswoman Jane Harman of California called as the debate was taking place. “Look, I would love to have cast a vote against Bush on this,” she told me. “We need a new strategy, and I hope we can force one in September. But I flew into Baghdad [with 150 young soldiers recently]. To vote against this bill was to vote against giving them the equipment… they need. I couldn’t do that.” I posted what Harman said on Swampland, the political blog at Time.com, along with my opinion that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama had changed their positions and voted against the funding for the worst possible reason: presidential politics.

And then Harman changed her position. After we spoke, she voted against the funding. The next day, I was blasted by a number of left-wing bloggers: Klein screwed up! I had quoted Harman in the past tense—common usage for politicians who know their words will appear after a vote takes place. That was sloppy and… suspicious! Proof that you just can’t trust the mainstream media. On Eschaton, a blog that specializes in media bashing, I was given the coveted “Wanker of the Day” award. Eventually, Harman got wind of this and called, unbidden, to apologize for misleading me, saying I had quoted her correctly but she had changed her mind to reflect the sentiments of her constituents. I published her statement and still got hammered by bloggers and Swampland commenters for “stalking” Harman into an apology, for not checking her vote in the Congressional Record, for being a “water boy for the right wing” and many other riffs unfit to print.

But the smart stuff is being drowned out by a fierce, bullying, often witless tone of intolerance that has overtaken the left-wing sector of the blogosphere. Anyone who doesn’t move in lockstep with the most extreme voices is savaged and ridiculed – especially people like me who often agree with the liberal position but sometimes disagree and are therefore considered traitorously unreliable. Some of this is understandable: the left-liberals in the blogosphere are merely aping the odious, disdainful – and politically successful – tone that right-wing radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh pioneered. They are also justifiably furious at a Bush White House that has specialized in big lies and smear tactics.

And that is precisely the danger here. Fury begets fury. Poison from the right-wing talk shows seeped into the Republican Party’s bloodstream and sent that party off the deep end. Limbaugh’s show—where Dick Cheney frequently expatiates—has become the voice of the Republican establishment. The same could happen to the Democrats.

Klein’s main point is that he is concerned that “the left-liberals in the blogosphere are merely aping the odious, disdainful – and politically successful – tone that right-wing radio talk-show hosts like Rush Limbaugh pioneered.” I feel Klein’s observation of the so-called progressive blogosphere is very accurate. The blogosphere has become more of a place where one can find hate-filled rhetoric in the land of he said-she said. Before I go on, I like to make this clear. I do understand that Joe Klein is somewhat of a hypocrite in a “pot calling the kettle black” kind of way. But this post is not about Klein, the purpose of this post is the subject of his article – the hate-filled rhetoric that has dominated the left.

The sad reality of it all, there are people on the Left who do attack others not because they disagree with their point of view, but who actually enjoy watching the other person crumble with fear. And those who are committing these offenses are not realizing the sense of despair that is being felt throughout the certain communities and communities of color who are attempting to navigate through this crazy world of ours towards a more just society. Because of this, I am compelled to speak out on the realities that are taking place in the liberal blogosphere.

I find it ironic that Klein’s article came out during the recent Brittney Gilbert vs. Jesus General dust up. I have written and rewritten this post so many times it is not funny. I had planned to provide a full break down on the sequence of events on how we got to this mess we are in now, but something inside me kept me from doing it. I just did not feel right. Instead, I will just speak from the heart. For those who would like a good break down, check out Jim McCulloch’s post, “The strange case of General Patriotboy and his lynch mob,” at Stone Bridge. I think, his post is well balanced and easy to follow. What really bothered me about all this, the whole debate was intertwined with racist and misogynistic remarks that would make any causal observer feel like they were watching an old Jerry Springer episode. Even worse was the people’s inability to step back from their A-list hero-worshiping and look at the bigger picture. In retrospect, the dispute represents the current patriarchal and racially based social structure.

While Brittney Gilbert, who used to blog for Nashville is Talking meant well as tried to expose the racist tendencies of a known blogger called Smantix by posting an excerpt of his post – Teaching Libs a Lesson – that denigrated the recently deceased liberal blogger Steve Gilliard, she unwittingly reinforced racism. Granted she did posts a lot of stuff without much comment, in which many of her readers (both new and regular readers) would have to have common sense or the initiative to figure out the context and meaning of the post themselves. However, Gilbert had already set precedence by commenting on stuff done by Smantix and his views in the past and unfortunately, she neglected to do so this time and this is how she unwittingly reinforced racism. Racism is a system that values whites over people of color and therefore, it is arrogant to assume that every reader of any blog will get the “subtlety” of every headline or every post written. For example, suppose I were to move to Nashville and I wanted to know about the local blog scene around my new town, being a minority, it would have been easy for me to assume there was an Anti-African American tinge to that blog. However, this doesn’t mean Gilbert is a racist, it would be an error for me to judge her based on this one post. Unfortunately, in this sound-bite world of ours, this is how people are judged.

Here is where I have the biggest problem; it has to do with the way Gilbert was treated. Not only was it misogynist, but also it was a total reinforcement of the patriarchal and racially based social structure we live in. Patriarchy is the single most life-threatening social disease that is assaulting the male body and spirit in our nation. As pro-feminist male, it is more than just recognizing it, but a need to speak out against it because mere recognition of an injustice being done is not enough to end it.

As Paolo Friere wrote in his classic Pedagogy of the Oppressed:

The oppressor is in solidarity with the oppressed only when he stops regarding the oppressed as an abstract category and sees them as persons who have been unjustly dealt with, deprived of their voice, cheated in the sale of their labor – when he stops making pious, sentimental, and individualistic gestures and risks an act of love. True solidarity is found only in the plenitude of this act of love… To affirm that men and women are persons and as persons should be free, and yet to do nothing tangible to make this affirmation a reality, is a farce.

Such “acts of love” are possible. Being Latino, not only do I have an insight in identifying racist behavior taking place within the Latina/o community but also, I am also able to identify the subtle sexist behavior that also takes place because, as a male, I understand the male privilege that has been given to me by society’s patriarchal rules. Although there are some who assume by not being involved in the oppression of women that should be enough, but the reality is, that is nothing more but passivity. As bell hooks once said, “if we don’t change our own consciousness, we cannot change our own actions or demand change from others.”

In a recent conversation with Brownfemipower about ally building, she pointed out how the Zapatista movement was redefining the rigid gender roles that are put on men and women. The way this came about was the willingness to listen and bring down the sexist power structure. After listening to Marcela Lagarde, a Mexican feminist scholar and a former member of Mexico’s House of Representatives (2003-2006), on the marginalization of women in revolutionary movements in Latin America, subcomandante Marcos contacted Feminist International Radio Endeavour (FIRE), a woman-produced radio/Internet broadcasting station, who put him in touch with Lagarde. After the two finished talking, Lagarde agreed to serve as their Gender Advisor to the movement. It is this type of ally building I feel Brownfemipower was talking about and one that we, as men, should model after.

The discriminatory practices within the progressive blogosphere have its roots in a male-dominated culture society. This patriarchal culture does not tolerate freedom and democracy or equal rights of men and women, because it would threaten their leadership position. What really broke my heart was reading comments after comments of people both men and women pulling out the lowest blows they could muster in an effort to shut Britney and her allies up. It clearly showed that they had little empathy for women. The minute JG sent his letter to her bosses and to the sponsors; it became misogynistic because it was for the purpose to damage Gilbert’s reputation. They did nothing more but took the focus off her pain and placed it onto JG. As a male, it was his privilege to have all the attention on his pain. During that week, JG and his followers felt they had done nothing wrong in what they did to Britney – as it was no big deal, but what do not understand, it is they who took her power away, her voice, and her personhood. In the end, JG is still employed while the other is not. Just because she resigned that does not take away the fact that the onslaught heavily influenced her decision.

How are their actions any different from the people who damaged the reputation of the woman who was unable to get a job because of the online postings that contained offensive content and personal attacks on her? What about Kathy Sierra who canceled her speaking engagements because she was afraid to leave her house? Or Jill Filipovic of Feministe and her situation with AutoAdmin? Or Brownfemipower? Or nubian? or MarisaCat? Or the thousands of women who are vilified by their allies and non-allies in public and who have no shame in making violent threats against them? NOT A FUCKING GOD DAMN THING!

I have been involved in politics for a long time and I have been using the Internet back in 1992. In those 10+ years, nothing has changed when it comes to attacking women on the Internet. It is easy to dismiss all this as being BS and state that people should find a way to grow a tougher skin and just accept the fact that we live in a world full of mudslinging and vitriol. Do we really want to live in a heartless world where people become indifferent with one another?

The reality is words and ideas are damaging, no matter how tough someone claims to be. The attacks from the left border on the edge what the folks on the right have no problem doing. When it comes to attacking female bloggers, it is easy to hide behind the keyboard to begin their onslaught on the female psyche as they attack a woman’s physical appearance and sexuality. Worse, are the attacks by men on their self-worth as to why they are still single or, why their relationships are failing with overt misogynistic comments on how “ugly” they are to get a man or how they are too pretty to be taken seriously or how they should “put out” more for their husbands or boyfriends. When that does not work, it becomes easy for us to start labeling them a bitch, whore, vendida, traitor, cunts, ho, ugly.

While it is easy for people like progressive male bloggers like Markos Mousilitas (Daily Kos) to tell women to “develop a thicker skin,” one must really have to wonder about this line of thinking. The problem I have with this line of thinking, people become emotionless and non-caring on issues that should have our attention. As a result, these issues are always kept at a distance. If we don’t see them, they no longer have to care. Truthfully, we are a society that suffers from severe emotional repression. For example, as of this writing, this country has already murdered hundreds of thousands of innocent human beings in a foreign country, it has already imprisoned another hundred of thousands in concentration camps in this country and yet we all know this, but nobody bats an eyelash. We are destroying not only our souls, but also our physical, emotional, and intellectual infrastructure of which we are a part and cannot live without.

It is bad enough men are raised to not to display emotions, now we are forcing women to do same as we tell them to “grow a thicker skin.” By developing this “thicker skin,” all we are doing is maintaining the emotional repression with the intention of denying our deep feelings of hurt and pain, and left to express them through anger and rage. As long as we shield ourselves from actually feeling, we are preventing ourselves from walking a journey of full honesty with all our personal and structural relationships.

By minimize their efforts by asserting a perceived authority about what is considered “right” and “wrong” ways to draw attention to the issues we as people face is not only sexist, but oppressive, especially when it is done by men.

So those who continue to the silence of women and yet glorify democracy is nothing more but a hypocrite and it is they who are hurting our movement, not those who are the voice of the thousands of women who are forced to be silent.

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 [tag]elite bloggers[/tag], 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 [tag]Daily Kos[/tag] and [tag]MyDD[/tag] are the most read and cited by them. And more so when Moulitsas consults regularly with influential Democrats in Washington and presidential candidates hire [tag]A-list bloggers[/tag] 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.

This time around, [tag]Markos[/tag] thinks that if a blogger were to get a death threat, we should suck it up because “most of the time” they “don’t even exist.” Or, as Kalifornia’s Govnator, Arnold Schwarzenegger, would say, “Don’t be a girlie man.” For Kos, courage is used to taunt people into doing something stupid. Sure it is easy to say suck it up if your only threat is that someone tells you “I hope you catch AIDS” but it is another, when you get comments or emails that say “we’re moving to send your sorry asses back over the border” or “hope you enjoy your stay in Gitmo” for speaking truth to power. It is not that easy to “suck it up.” Especially for many people across the country who have already been assaulted and even killed by some psychopath cyber-stalker they did not take seriously.

However, Kos’ behavior isn’t really new really. Sadly, this Berkeley faux liberal whose ideology better matches that of Reich wingers has duped a large majority over at the Big Orange Mothership Daily Kos and the Democratic Party into thinking he is a true Dem. Kos has and will always be a pompous asshole beyond compare, a fraud, a phony and a seasoned snake oil salesman. All anybody has to do is just go over to [tag]Marisacat[/tag]’s blog. She has been warning people long before this consequence. The irony, she has been harassed and is considered to be a pariah among some of the B-listers who are now complaining about King Koz.

Very interesting, as wilfred and I had been banned the last weekend of August (Madman was personally banned by Kos, October 2005, for complaining about tired Red State Dems run as effing heroes before they do anything, yes that is Tester, Webb and Casey and others)… we were banned as individuals, not as part of a purge. I still to this day have never read the Hunter FP piece on the banning..

The Boyz, or whatever they are, have been slamming me and a lot of other people for years now.

People saying what they think that does not conform to what they want said, well, it really pisses them off. And their Box Car Site Minions and others on the Treats and Sweets Rez….

Who FP intellectually dishonest, numbers grabbing bullshit (Outing Bloggers, “Marisacat”, Paparazzi at the Box Car Site, BMT), lectures and drooling “erotica” attended by Maryscott with her tongue hanging out… Voyeurs, original and Maryscott’s reconstruction among other FP slams at MLW. In a sad, public loss of any grip on reality, METAmorphosis at MLW. Not to forget this gem. Eugene and Armando with others, did stand up routines at MLW thru 2005/06, parsing my banning over and over for the little hordes. In case you think there is something new in BlahgTown.

(Oh and as a chocolate on the pillow or extra vodka in your OJ: don’t miss the BMT proprietaire being cute with his hints.)

I won’t be stopping. And I am so amused at the lately landed stress and anger, sturm and drang, directed at Kos. Sure did ramp up after the BlogRoll trim…

However, if your inner-kindergarten self still insist she has cooties and anybody else who associates with her has cooties, then all one has to do is do a simple Google search on “banned by Kos” to see what Kos is all about. I genuinely understand when people have an agenda of trying to find a common ground among the more conservative wing (AKA centrist) of the Democratic Party. However, the deal with Markos, there are those who continue believing he is Dem. The reality is, he started off as Republican and changed sides roughly around the same time when other Republicans switched sides because they realized the Religious Right successfully infiltrated their [tag]Republican[/tag] Party and were able to exert considerable influence on policy and lawmaking. Instead of fight them off; they have opted to take over the [tag]Democratic Party[/tag]. That is why we are the big tent party. The central problem is this: there are those in the progressive blogosphere who believe it is wrong to criticize. Nevertheless, if the [tag]progressive blogosphere[/tag] is NOT the place to criticize and rail against Markos and DailyKos, then what is the proper arena? By keeping things inside it will only fester for so long before it finally explodes.

However, there is a double standard. Markos consistently criticizes whomever he elects to criticize, including Democratic politicians and other progressives. For him to try to use his muscle and personal connections to squelch criticism of himself and his opinions is very Orwellian – “All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others.” It is not surprising that the chickens came, home to roost. The more Markos and his followers stopped others from challenging his opinions throughout the blogosphere, it was inevitable that revolt against the authoritarian and totalitarian impulses are taking place. Just look below this post on the number of people who are speaking out (courtesy of Wampum).

Regardless of whether it is coming from the left or right, totalitarianism is just as brutal and will repeatedly have to have a need to justify its so-called “goodness” to the world. Even worse is when mindless followers are complied to remain mindless in the face of over whelming evidence. Terror is used to keep the faithful from straying and indoctrination to imprison the mind. Fear of change, the outside world, of not having a strong ruler are amplified to increase their need on the totalitarian regime.

Given the state that we are in, we have voluntarily surrendered our freedoms that we once held to be essential. Do we even care that homes are being bugged, our emails being read, our letters being opened? Where we have feared the ominous presence of Big Brother constantly gazing through the multiple security cameras around us, we are have now become oblivious to them and worse, we have become a voyeuristic society while our constant need to check a person’s background has become second nature. As we continue to be force-fed shadows on the wall of Plato’s Cave, people are disappearing right before our very eyes, vanished without a trace in the name of the “border security.” Is all this just an Orwellian dress rehearsal in preparation for the larger scale version?

Instead of running away from living in the world Orwell feared, the modern world celebrates it. When we hear Bush and our war hawk Democrats begging people to give war a chance, are these signs we are embracing the language of doublespeak and newspeak, “War is Peace?” If so, then it should not come as a shock that Markos Moulitsas Zúniga is the poster boy for “progressive is conservatism.”

People who have spoken out
brownfemipower at Woman of Color Blog
Zuzu at Feministe
Jessica at Feministing
Belledame at Fetch Me My Axe
Echnide of the Snakes
Mark at Norwegienty
Jill at Brilliant at Breakfast
Bitch PhD
Chris at Creek Running North and Pandagon
Kip at Long Story, Short Pier
Bruce at Crablaw
Melissa at Shakesville
Jeff at Blog of the Moderate Left
Interrobang
Stephen at The Thinkery
Amp at Alas, A Blog
Amanda at Pandagon
Lindsey at Majikthise
Dan at Fitness for the Occasion
Nezua at The Unapologetic Mexican
Natasha, at Pacific Views
Kevin at Slant Truth
Aaron at Faithfully Liberal
Ntodd at Dohiyi Mir
Trifecta at New PairODimes
Steven D at Booman Tribune
Sheelzebub at Pinko Feminist Hellcat
Myra at Reno and Its Discontents
twoluvcats at a wealth of semi-useless information!
Scott at Lawyers, Guns and Money
PZ at Pharyngula
skippy the bush kangaroo
Mickle at The True Confessions of an Hourly Bookseller
WebWeaver’s World

Renee at the Independent Bloggers’ Alliance
Terrance at The Republic of T
Vox Aemeliae