Way to be sensationalist If you actually read the post it is rather clear that within the context of the group blog that is “Liberal Conspiracy” that particular poster believes that for Liberal Conspiracy to stay relevant it needs to focus on Leftist issues rather than necessarily Liberal ones, and to reply to issues from a Leftist point of view rather than a liberal one.
The reason for saying this, as it clearly states, is that there are plenty of “Liberal” blogs out there doing a great job of spreading the word about Liberal politics and viewpoints…why jump in to the ocean when you can make a bigger splash jumping into a paddling pool?
One thing that might be dawning on one or two is that their own label of “Liberal” is not appropriate for many of their stances. The Left has hijacked the term Liberal, which adds to the confusion.
Ah, it’s posts like that which remind me why I am a liberal, and not a socialist, despite the efforts of the free-marketeer head-bangers to try and make me feel unwelcome in their “liberal” company.
Liberals do need a good wack to the back of the head from time to time, just like my mother would do when we were kids and ran out of line.
There is no excuse for invading our media, the conservative media, and prancing around in our shoes in order to infest the world with their morals, or lack off.
Anyone who still believes in global warming, abortion/muder of babies, free stuff for poor people (aka Communism), taxes for the rich who earn all of their money (whether through their parents or grandparents or lawsuit against liberal media), peace in Iraq, and collaboration with terrorists should be given an E-Z Pass on death row.
Howdo liberals. Looks like I succeeded in catching your attention then!
Couple of brief points:
1. I was invited to contribute to a blog aiming to bring together the broad liberal-left. It seems some people understand that to mean left-leaning liberals, some understand it to mean liberal-minded leftists, some understand it to mean anyone vaguely to the left of Norman Tebbit, and some understand it to mean any/ all of the above. Until someone tells me my ideas are not welcome, I’ll continue to believe my ideas are welcome, however they may be labelled.
2. At no point did I suggest that there should be a one way monologue between liberals and leftists. I understand LC to be a forum for exchange of ideas and information and nothing I said in my blog in any way challenges that. However I did imply (and I do believe) that if LC is to be of interest *to me* then it has to be more than just a liberal talking shop.
3. I only said ’shut up a moment.’ Not ’shut up liberals, you’re irrelevant’ or ‘piss off, liberals and don’t come back.’
4. Lee almost gets it: Liberal Conspiracy to stay relevant it needs to focus on Leftist issues rather than necessarily Liberal ones’ but not quite. My point was that LC needs to focus on issues that are not being focussed on elsewhere – not necessarily specifically ‘liberal’ or ‘left.’
5 That first sentence was meant to be a joke. Glad you liked it.
6. FWIW I do consider myself as much a liberal as I do a socialist. With a bit of green, anarchist, and libertarian thrown in. I had a very confused upbringing.
Lee/Chris, it is, I concede, just possible that I was being a touch on the glib and facetious side
I know that bashing liberals, small or big-L, wasn’t the main point. But I still find it presumptuous in another blogger to bat aside liberalism as a distraction to what they conceive to the the “main purpose” of LC. My conception of its main purpose – and of the word “liberal” – is different, and I’m entitled to say so. I’m very sorry if Ally F or others find that sort of discussion boring, but they’re not obliged to read it.
You can’t take the stance of “This is what being a liberal means, and anyone who disagrees can shut up because they’re wasting time and missing the point, which is xyz” and still stubbornly hang on to the word “liberal”. I would certainly agree that there are other important things to talk about, but you can’t expect a discussion to proceed sensibly when one half of the conversation feels fundamentally misunderstood.
I am also sceptical about the implication that our blogging time is somehow too precious to waste on these discussions. That suggests rather an arrogant approach to me. I’ll quite happily talk till the cows come home about both the abstract meaning of liberalism and international injustice and I don’t see that either loses out by the fact that I do both. We blog and/or comment because we’re natural pontificators, Ally F included – what on earth is wrong with blogging about everything that matters to you, and not just the things which might produce a concrete result?
Bear in mind that I say all this from the standpoint of one who enjoys reading LC, supports the idea of it and frequently comments on it. As soon as you scratch below the “meaning of liberal” debate you find that people coming from liberal and non-liberal standpoints quite often support the same ideas. I’ve had this experience myself via Liberal Conspiracy and I know I’ve benefited from it – my own experience gives the lie to Ally F’s comment. Plenty of other liberals have already decided the writing’s on the wall and they might as well not bother. For that reason alone I find this kind of deliberate turn-off – even as a prelude to a separate point – a discouraging sign.
Ally: Yes, I did get that from your post, failed to convey that your post was largely about how it is “left” issues that aren’t getting so much media exposure.
I, for one, really hope that people can join up with this way of thinking. While I really don’t get on with Indymedia and the likes, that doesn’t mean that the underlying reasons for the stories they publish shouldn’t be discussed and brought to light more intelligently where they can perhaps be considered more than just the “insane babblings of a hippy” as my friends frequently describe some of those “news” outlets.
Alix, it is just possible that I too was being a touch glib and facetious!
“But I still find it presumptuous in another blogger to bat aside liberalism as a distraction to what they conceive to the the “main purpose” of LC.”
This is a serious point. I believe the ‘main purpose’ of LC is ‘to bring together and reinvigorate the liberal-left in Britain’ as it says in the FAQ. I don’t believe we’ll be brought together and reinvigorated by theoretical debate. We will be by uniting on causes, campaigns and actions. That was the real message of my blog.
Lee: “I, for one, really hope that people can join up with this way of thinking. While I really don’t get on with Indymedia and the likes, that doesn’t mean that the underlying reasons for the stories they publish shouldn’t be discussed and brought to light more intelligently where they can perhaps be considered more than just the “insane babblings of a hippy” as my friends frequently describe some of those “news” outlets.”
I also felt a bit annoyed on first reading Ally’s post, and it took a bit of an effort to try to figure out where he’s coming from. I think that liberals sometimes can be a bit too airy-fairy (not that there’s anything wrong with this, necessarily…) and can miss the ‘real world’ stories out. Conversely, some of those who identify more as ‘left’ can get too caught up in moral outrages and end up missing the bigger picture. I imagine that, in saying this, I could have just offended some ‘leftist’ types, without intending to do so. So, I don’t think Ally was intending to offend liberals by his comments either. Mockery can be friendly if you start from the assumption that we’re all on the same side.
Of course, this is a debate that we wouldn’t even be having without LC. I still think that values and principles matter more than causes and campaigns, but I hope that there’s a middle ground that we can all live with.
[...] in Politics, Website. Tags: blogs, comments, internet, Politics trackback Seeing the title of this post by Alix Mortimer reminded me of the reason I am trying to avoid reading the comments on websites [...]
Thank you everybode for collectively writing the post that I clearly was going to write earlier when I accidentally rattled off a dozen words instead, thought “fner” and pressed publish. Now that’s collaboration, that is.
The more I re-read your post, Ally, the more I am amused about the left “feeling unloved”. Big-L Liberals feel like this all the time! Probably personal insecurity is our best common ground…
November 12, 2007 at 2:33 pm
I read that article twice… I’m not sure it was meant that way, though I have to say I was taken aback…
November 12, 2007 at 2:35 pm
Liberal Conspiracy is clearly there for us to listen to them and not the other way round.
November 12, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Way to be sensationalist
If you actually read the post it is rather clear that within the context of the group blog that is “Liberal Conspiracy” that particular poster believes that for Liberal Conspiracy to stay relevant it needs to focus on Leftist issues rather than necessarily Liberal ones, and to reply to issues from a Leftist point of view rather than a liberal one.
The reason for saying this, as it clearly states, is that there are plenty of “Liberal” blogs out there doing a great job of spreading the word about Liberal politics and viewpoints…why jump in to the ocean when you can make a bigger splash jumping into a paddling pool?
November 12, 2007 at 3:39 pm
One thing that might be dawning on one or two is that their own label of “Liberal” is not appropriate for many of their stances. The Left has hijacked the term Liberal, which adds to the confusion.
Maybe the site needs to become “Left Conspiracy”?
November 12, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Ah, it’s posts like that which remind me why I am a liberal, and not a socialist, despite the efforts of the free-marketeer head-bangers to try and make me feel unwelcome in their “liberal” company.
November 12, 2007 at 4:17 pm
Liberals do need a good wack to the back of the head from time to time, just like my mother would do when we were kids and ran out of line.
There is no excuse for invading our media, the conservative media, and prancing around in our shoes in order to infest the world with their morals, or lack off.
Anyone who still believes in global warming, abortion/muder of babies, free stuff for poor people (aka Communism), taxes for the rich who earn all of their money (whether through their parents or grandparents or lawsuit against liberal media), peace in Iraq, and collaboration with terrorists should be given an E-Z Pass on death row.
November 12, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Howdo liberals. Looks like I succeeded in catching your attention then!
Couple of brief points:
1. I was invited to contribute to a blog aiming to bring together the broad liberal-left. It seems some people understand that to mean left-leaning liberals, some understand it to mean liberal-minded leftists, some understand it to mean anyone vaguely to the left of Norman Tebbit, and some understand it to mean any/ all of the above. Until someone tells me my ideas are not welcome, I’ll continue to believe my ideas are welcome, however they may be labelled.
2. At no point did I suggest that there should be a one way monologue between liberals and leftists. I understand LC to be a forum for exchange of ideas and information and nothing I said in my blog in any way challenges that. However I did imply (and I do believe) that if LC is to be of interest *to me* then it has to be more than just a liberal talking shop.
3. I only said ’shut up a moment.’ Not ’shut up liberals, you’re irrelevant’ or ‘piss off, liberals and don’t come back.’
4. Lee almost gets it: Liberal Conspiracy to stay relevant it needs to focus on Leftist issues rather than necessarily Liberal ones’ but not quite. My point was that LC needs to focus on issues that are not being focussed on elsewhere – not necessarily specifically ‘liberal’ or ‘left.’
5 That first sentence was meant to be a joke. Glad you liked it.
6. FWIW I do consider myself as much a liberal as I do a socialist. With a bit of green, anarchist, and libertarian thrown in. I had a very confused upbringing.
Liberally yours,
Ally
x
November 12, 2007 at 4:27 pm
Lee/Chris, it is, I concede, just possible that I was being a touch on the glib and facetious side
I know that bashing liberals, small or big-L, wasn’t the main point. But I still find it presumptuous in another blogger to bat aside liberalism as a distraction to what they conceive to the the “main purpose” of LC. My conception of its main purpose – and of the word “liberal” – is different, and I’m entitled to say so. I’m very sorry if Ally F or others find that sort of discussion boring, but they’re not obliged to read it.
You can’t take the stance of “This is what being a liberal means, and anyone who disagrees can shut up because they’re wasting time and missing the point, which is xyz” and still stubbornly hang on to the word “liberal”. I would certainly agree that there are other important things to talk about, but you can’t expect a discussion to proceed sensibly when one half of the conversation feels fundamentally misunderstood.
I am also sceptical about the implication that our blogging time is somehow too precious to waste on these discussions. That suggests rather an arrogant approach to me. I’ll quite happily talk till the cows come home about both the abstract meaning of liberalism and international injustice and I don’t see that either loses out by the fact that I do both. We blog and/or comment because we’re natural pontificators, Ally F included – what on earth is wrong with blogging about everything that matters to you, and not just the things which might produce a concrete result?
Bear in mind that I say all this from the standpoint of one who enjoys reading LC, supports the idea of it and frequently comments on it. As soon as you scratch below the “meaning of liberal” debate you find that people coming from liberal and non-liberal standpoints quite often support the same ideas. I’ve had this experience myself via Liberal Conspiracy and I know I’ve benefited from it – my own experience gives the lie to Ally F’s comment. Plenty of other liberals have already decided the writing’s on the wall and they might as well not bother. For that reason alone I find this kind of deliberate turn-off – even as a prelude to a separate point – a discouraging sign.
November 12, 2007 at 4:29 pm
Ally: Yes, I did get that from your post, failed to convey that your post was largely about how it is “left” issues that aren’t getting so much media exposure.
I, for one, really hope that people can join up with this way of thinking. While I really don’t get on with Indymedia and the likes, that doesn’t mean that the underlying reasons for the stories they publish shouldn’t be discussed and brought to light more intelligently where they can perhaps be considered more than just the “insane babblings of a hippy” as my friends frequently describe some of those “news” outlets.
November 12, 2007 at 4:59 pm
Alix, it is just possible that I too was being a touch glib and facetious!
“But I still find it presumptuous in another blogger to bat aside liberalism as a distraction to what they conceive to the the “main purpose” of LC.”
This is a serious point. I believe the ‘main purpose’ of LC is ‘to bring together and reinvigorate the liberal-left in Britain’ as it says in the FAQ. I don’t believe we’ll be brought together and reinvigorated by theoretical debate. We will be by uniting on causes, campaigns and actions. That was the real message of my blog.
November 12, 2007 at 5:00 pm
Lee: “I, for one, really hope that people can join up with this way of thinking. While I really don’t get on with Indymedia and the likes, that doesn’t mean that the underlying reasons for the stories they publish shouldn’t be discussed and brought to light more intelligently where they can perhaps be considered more than just the “insane babblings of a hippy” as my friends frequently describe some of those “news” outlets.”
Absolutely on the button. My thoughts exactly.
November 12, 2007 at 5:53 pm
I also felt a bit annoyed on first reading Ally’s post, and it took a bit of an effort to try to figure out where he’s coming from. I think that liberals sometimes can be a bit too airy-fairy (not that there’s anything wrong with this, necessarily…) and can miss the ‘real world’ stories out. Conversely, some of those who identify more as ‘left’ can get too caught up in moral outrages and end up missing the bigger picture. I imagine that, in saying this, I could have just offended some ‘leftist’ types, without intending to do so. So, I don’t think Ally was intending to offend liberals by his comments either. Mockery can be friendly if you start from the assumption that we’re all on the same side.
Of course, this is a debate that we wouldn’t even be having without LC. I still think that values and principles matter more than causes and campaigns, but I hope that there’s a middle ground that we can all live with.
November 12, 2007 at 8:59 pm
[...] in Politics, Website. Tags: blogs, comments, internet, Politics trackback Seeing the title of this post by Alix Mortimer reminded me of the reason I am trying to avoid reading the comments on websites [...]
November 12, 2007 at 11:33 pm
Thank you everybode for collectively writing the post that I clearly was going to write earlier when I accidentally rattled off a dozen words instead, thought “fner” and pressed publish. Now that’s collaboration, that is.
The more I re-read your post, Ally, the more I am amused about the left “feeling unloved”. Big-L Liberals feel like this all the time! Probably personal insecurity is our best common ground…
November 13, 2007 at 12:18 pm
* nances past *
I keep meaning to add you to my RSS. Maybe I’ll remember if I leave a comment here…