alternative hippopotamus

An interesting discussion over at Dr. Black’s place. He tends to place the origin of the netroots, as does the illustrious Big Media Matt, at the Monica Lewinsky phase of Whitewater.

Here’s Matt expanding on an earlier post from Matt Stoller:

9/11 and Iraq are today’s signature issues, but the origins institutionally and emotionally are the battles in defense of Clinton (1998) and Gore (2000) and I don’t think the implications and meaning of this are well understood.

I think this is a good starting place for looking at the progressive movement vis-a-vis its role as grass roots/internet activism. I can’t really add much to this from a historical perspective in that my orientation, that is, what I value most about the political internet movement is different from Matt’s Y and S, or for that matter, Dr. Black.

My orientation tends to reflect a lifelong interest in the arts and philosophy. So, I’m much more interested in how Fahrenheit 9.11, or for that matter, The Path to 9.11 can influence public perception of current events. I mention both the arts and philosophy in that verite, pursuit of truth, play a role in the perception of art. An argument can be made that parts of Fahrenheit failed in the test of pursuing truth. An argument that can be mostly dismissed, but still an argument. The Path to 9.11 was fundamentally dishonest, and in terms of any philosophical test, fails. I’m sure that you’ll recall that philosophy at its root means “love of wisdom.” I’m not sure what the Greek is for “love of deception,” and for all I know they didn’t have a word for it.

Another aspect of my interest in the internet/grassroots movement is in terms of finding an alternative source for news. After the 2000 election I became convinced that the traditional news sources, the major networks, the major dailies, etc., no longer served their purpose. They became… I wasn’t sure what, but it wasn’t news any more. It was more a combination of gossip and conventional wisdom, manufactured by those within elite circles in NYC and DC, and no longer an honest and in-depth examination of what was going on in the world.

It was at this point I started watching DemocracyNow! instead of the NewsHour and reading the blogs. One of my most important reads at this time was Tom Tomorrow’s place, though in time he passed the torch to Atrios, among others.

Meanwhile, I became aware of an opposing force, what is now called the rightwing blogosphere. Its role became the unswerving support of the newly appointed President Bush, and unending contempt for the emerging progressive voice.

I mention this as the growth of the netroots occurs not in a vaccuum, but is partly defined by the “netweeds,” those voices on the internet that hope to destroy the new left.

If you have any doubt this is one of their goals, let me refer you to an Instapundit post from last year:

Various lefty readers email to say that Ward Churchill is not the authentic face of the Left.

I wish I agreed with that. But, sadly, he is its very image today.

When Ted Kennedy can make an absurd and borderline-traitorous speech on the war, when Michael Moore shares a VIP box with the last Democratic President but one, when Barbara Boxer endorses a Democratic consultant/blogger whose view of American casualties in Iraq is “screw ‘em,” well, this is the authentic face of the Left. Or what remains of it.

There was a time when the Left opposed fascism and supported democracy, when it wasn’t a seething-yet-shrinking mass of self-hatred and idiocy. That day is long past, and the moral and intellectual decay of the Left is far gone.

[…]

There’s an endless supply of guys like Churchill. And I’d love to believe that they’re marginal figures. But then I see the embrace of Moore, and the behavior of major Democrats like Boxer and Kennedy, and it’s just hard to believe. There certainly are some well-meaning people on the Left who don’t like that, but I”m afraid that they are the marginal figures nowadays.

[…]

And for those who email saying “what about Falwell on the right,” well, it’s worth remembering that the term “idiotarian” was coined with Falwell in mind. It’s just that the right has done a better job of muzzling and marginalizing its idiots, while the Left has embraced them. And if the “backlash” theory set out above is true, it will only get worse, which is bad for the Left, and bad for America.

Oliver Willis emails that my pointing this out is “vitriol.” But in fact, following my advice would be likely to help the Left, and the Democrats, do better in elections.

“Better in elections.” Heh. Indeed.