On Blogging

In my ambitious efforts, I've made a sputtering effort to perform some grand writing project that any regular reader here will tell you ... has simply not materialized. The spark of the idea was two-fold: one, to celebrate whatever milestone is worth celebrating from five years of bonafide blogging. Secondly, inspired a bit from Andrew Sullivan, I wanted to follow up on his observation that blogging brings about an intellectual change in the writer.

Upon depositing my kitchen-sink draft into various drafts, my first explanation for any lack of progress was my standard rule: I just don't care to edit my thoughts very heavily. And that's a part of why I'm declaring the project officially sidelined. Editing is all well and good - and necessary. But it also removes some of the genuine-ness that I believe belongs in blogs. And maybe it's a bit of the punk influence on me that it also detracts from the rawness of an openly-stated, honestly-held position. I cannot even find words to properly sum up how much I loathe seeing an otherwise good idea get muddled by abstraction.

Alas, I've also concluded there's another reason that I have to revisit the plan for my approach. Simply put, I just hate naval-gazing. In all it's forms. There's a place for introspection. There's a place for honest self-assessment. But as some of my closest associates will likely confirm, I am just not one to do things for the sake of making myself feel better about myself. We Wythes tend to be pre-programmed with a pretty strong sense of self-confidence. It's a feature, not a bug.

Now, all that said ... the root of what Sullivan got at is still worth some form of exploration. And I think the nature of the political blogosphere has vastly changed - and mostly for the worst and on both sides - that some of the original spirit deserves to be recaptured. And I don't even know if that's remotely possible. But the idea is at least worth extolling. So, with that, pardon this exception to the rule on naval gazing.

First on that list, for me, has to do with the dangers of association. Back when OpenLeft began operation, we were treated to this bit of logic:

Over the past five years, as the audience and political effectiveness of the progressive, political blogosphere has exploded, the "short head" of the progressive, political blogosphere has undergone a transformation from a loose collection of small, independent, solo projects into a sophisticated media and activist structure driving the national political scene. This transformation has the side-effect of significantly increasing the entry costs into the "short head" of the progressive, political, blogosphere for new, independent actors. As a result, what was once a fluid, "outsider" and "open" form of new media is now, quite possibly, crystallizing into a new "establishment" all its own.

And with that, the third wave of community bloggers have charted a course to turn the progressive/liberal side of the blogosphere into nothing more than another special interest at the table. I think that - at best - that's a mistake destined for failure and disappointment. At worst, it sets up bloggers to contract the "Markos Flu" and hold totally opposing rationales of political operation. In Markos' case, that conflict is between the notion that "We're really just about winning and building a sustainable majority" vs. "liberalism is the new center and all good Democrats should vote accordingly - or be primaried." Openleft merely carries the latter to the logical conclusion of enumerating "Bush Dogs."

What gets lost in all of that is the concept of a lone blogger arguing along some form of consistent and independent thread of thought for whatever bit of logic he or she wishes to impart on the world. So it's for the virtue of that that I'd love to see more of a division between blog and state, so to speak.

The irony, as I'm well aware, is that I've since chosen to dive headfirst into the wonderful world of political hackdom. By no means, would I want to dissuade anyone who chose similarly. For my part, blogging was both a renewed option for me to get back in politics (something which began in 2001). After a short venture on the professional side, I can safely say I would not have found whatever blogging voice I have if I were still actively in it. But my own professional course has seen me go from the real world, to politics, back to the real world, and now ... back to politics. With a little luck, I'd prefer to make it a temporary stay. The real world is much more fun. But there's something to seeing things implode when you feel you can do something to prevent it. So, for now, here I am.

What does concern me is the rush to try and influence through other means on the part of bloggers. Raising money for candidates has moved from a fascinating sidestory to a primary mission, complete with the formation of PACs and hosting fundraisers. And nevermind if the donor pool fails to expand the universe of poltical donors ... there's a press release to write bragging on whatever haul you've got in the bank.

Again, it's something that detracts from the central mission of blogging and strives to leverage something that isn't a competitive advantage for the sake of diminishing bloggers to ... just another special interest at the table. I'd rather be a voice than just a mouth at the table, begging to be fed. Maybe that'll qualify me as a throwback one of these days.