16.1.07
Blah blah blah
(Apologies to Husker Du)
What a fucking loudmouth. Other people may have glowing bullshit to spew about Gilliard - if that's what you want, go read them.
First of all, as Comrade Max points out, however you choose to define "Internet Left", Gilliard is not the only member of it. Neither is Kos. Come in out of this solipsistic little bubble, man.
But let's leave aside exaggerated self-importance: this one line tell you everything you need to know about where this post is going:
The "Internet Left" has done more in three years than any of the groups you hail as heroes from the 1960's did in 10 years.
Really? Like what? How far has the "Internet Left", in these three glorious years, been successful in stopping this fucking war in Iraq? Helping out the lower class, or even the middle class? Placing any kinds of checks on the increasingly open authoritarian and imperial (we can't say "fascist" - that wouldn't be "serious") Bush presidency? You fucking ponce.
I'm serious - what achievements does this veritable Red Army have under its belt? If this is a reference to helping elect Democrats to office, big fucking deal. I remember what the Democrats were doing when they weren't in power (these are just some examples from the past three awesome years, which I refer to forthwith as Years 0-2 of the Inter Left Era (ILE) - don't get me started on the Leftist paradise that was the Clinton era):
- Supporting and enabling the Iraq war. More Democratic senators supported the 2002 Congressional blank check to Bush than opposed it. If these 28 schemers had joined with those opposing it, the authorization would have failed 52-48. If there had been the same party discipline among the Democrats as among the Republicans (only Chafee voted against it), we wouldn't be where we are today.
But, of course, we can't even frame this in terms of "party loyalty", because opposition to the war wasn't a Democratic position. And this "Internet Left" that Gilliard wants to put on a pedestal was also divided (notwithstanding opposition by Kos and Gilliard), with many flat-out supporting it. Try, for example, reading Matthew Yglesias' pro-war bullshit from 2002 and 2003 - oh, wait, you can't, because he has purged them all from the public domain).
- Support of the 2005 bankruptcy bill. A total of 73 Democratic representatives voted for this gift to the credit card industry. And you want to talk about the working class "slowly being screwed"? I suppose doing it rather quickly, on the other hand, is pretty alright.
- How about the 19 Democrats who voted for cloture on the debate concerning Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court, the last chance the Democrats had to keep this hard-right nutjob from fucking things up for the next 30 years?
You'll have to excuse me if I'm less than impressed by the triumphalist tone extolling the "Internet Left's" achievements when they boils down to bullshit like this.
Treating the fact that the "Internet Left" helped elect Democrats to office as a major accomplishment makes a mockery of the "strengths" that Gilliard cites: no leaders and "empower[ing] people to act on their own or with others". Is this supposed to be serious? Indicative of this confusion, which revolves around treating the "Internet Left" as some kind of independent political force rather than the unpaid (and, let me predict, in the final analysis, unappreciated) proxy of the Democrats, is this incredible statement:
I think what you resent about the "Internet Left" is that they get things done. The Greens can't get past the city council level. Chris Bowers got millions of dollars to win races. Which might actually change people's lives and not end up in a circle jerk discussion.
What "races"? Why not come clean and tell us that Bowers was a shill for the Democrats? This is a joke, and a particularly cruel one. Buy a fucking clue.
As for the dig at Marx: Fuck you. Seriously - fuck off.
But to show that even clueless wankers like this, caught up in the liberal flipside of conservative/neocon delusion and denial of history, have a sense of humor, I'll end with this:
You [Comrade Max] laud these groups, but forget what they did. They [e.g., the SDS and the Black Panthers] shifted the discussion on the left from civil rights to toasters. They embraced the consumer economy and sought to perfect it, while the working class was slowly being screwed.
Yeah - those Black Panthers really were into toasters.
(Apologies to Husker Du)
What a fucking loudmouth. Other people may have glowing bullshit to spew about Gilliard - if that's what you want, go read them.
First of all, as Comrade Max points out, however you choose to define "Internet Left", Gilliard is not the only member of it. Neither is Kos. Come in out of this solipsistic little bubble, man.
But let's leave aside exaggerated self-importance: this one line tell you everything you need to know about where this post is going:
The "Internet Left" has done more in three years than any of the groups you hail as heroes from the 1960's did in 10 years.
Really? Like what? How far has the "Internet Left", in these three glorious years, been successful in stopping this fucking war in Iraq? Helping out the lower class, or even the middle class? Placing any kinds of checks on the increasingly open authoritarian and imperial (we can't say "fascist" - that wouldn't be "serious") Bush presidency? You fucking ponce.
I'm serious - what achievements does this veritable Red Army have under its belt? If this is a reference to helping elect Democrats to office, big fucking deal. I remember what the Democrats were doing when they weren't in power (these are just some examples from the past three awesome years, which I refer to forthwith as Years 0-2 of the Inter Left Era (ILE) - don't get me started on the Leftist paradise that was the Clinton era):
- Supporting and enabling the Iraq war. More Democratic senators supported the 2002 Congressional blank check to Bush than opposed it. If these 28 schemers had joined with those opposing it, the authorization would have failed 52-48. If there had been the same party discipline among the Democrats as among the Republicans (only Chafee voted against it), we wouldn't be where we are today.
But, of course, we can't even frame this in terms of "party loyalty", because opposition to the war wasn't a Democratic position. And this "Internet Left" that Gilliard wants to put on a pedestal was also divided (notwithstanding opposition by Kos and Gilliard), with many flat-out supporting it. Try, for example, reading Matthew Yglesias' pro-war bullshit from 2002 and 2003 - oh, wait, you can't, because he has purged them all from the public domain).
- Support of the 2005 bankruptcy bill. A total of 73 Democratic representatives voted for this gift to the credit card industry. And you want to talk about the working class "slowly being screwed"? I suppose doing it rather quickly, on the other hand, is pretty alright.
- How about the 19 Democrats who voted for cloture on the debate concerning Alito's nomination to the Supreme Court, the last chance the Democrats had to keep this hard-right nutjob from fucking things up for the next 30 years?
You'll have to excuse me if I'm less than impressed by the triumphalist tone extolling the "Internet Left's" achievements when they boils down to bullshit like this.
Treating the fact that the "Internet Left" helped elect Democrats to office as a major accomplishment makes a mockery of the "strengths" that Gilliard cites: no leaders and "empower[ing] people to act on their own or with others". Is this supposed to be serious? Indicative of this confusion, which revolves around treating the "Internet Left" as some kind of independent political force rather than the unpaid (and, let me predict, in the final analysis, unappreciated) proxy of the Democrats, is this incredible statement:
I think what you resent about the "Internet Left" is that they get things done. The Greens can't get past the city council level. Chris Bowers got millions of dollars to win races. Which might actually change people's lives and not end up in a circle jerk discussion.
What "races"? Why not come clean and tell us that Bowers was a shill for the Democrats? This is a joke, and a particularly cruel one. Buy a fucking clue.
As for the dig at Marx: Fuck you. Seriously - fuck off.
But to show that even clueless wankers like this, caught up in the liberal flipside of conservative/neocon delusion and denial of history, have a sense of humor, I'll end with this:
You [Comrade Max] laud these groups, but forget what they did. They [e.g., the SDS and the Black Panthers] shifted the discussion on the left from civil rights to toasters. They embraced the consumer economy and sought to perfect it, while the working class was slowly being screwed.
Yeah - those Black Panthers really were into toasters.
