Why Do We Blog
Posted by
Kevin
Jeanne wants to know why people blog:
For a couple of years, I’ve been reading about two dozen left-wing blogs a day, and a few more on the right. I’m finding it harder and harder, as evidence of the corruption in this government mounts, to read the ones on the right. In the past left-wing blogs gave me information I would have missed otherwise, and made me feel that my perceptions of what was going on in the world were shared by lots of people. But I’m starting to feel that all we’re saying is “Bad Bush,” which is a perfect legitimate thing to say, but I’m not sure hundreds of us need to say it.
I’m not sure anymore why people write blogs, and why people read them. So I guess I’m trying to start a conversation. What do you get from blogs that you wouldn’t get elsewhere? Why are they worth reading? Why are they worth writing?
I do this for a lot of reasons, obviously, the same way that people do anything they aren’t paid for for a lot of reasons. I have always been a politics junkie. Well, no, I have always been an argument junkie — if I couldn’t argue about politics, I doubt I would be as interested in it. I started the blog in part to hopefully improve my writing skills, but mostly for the fun of having the arguments. The blog has turned into something that occasionally allows me to help causes I believe in in a more tangible fashion, but it is still primarily about the conversations with commentators and other bloggers. I think of blogs as the digital equivalent of conversations with your neighbors. It is just that your neighborhood is a lot larger than it ever could have been before. And your neighbors find information that you probably would have missed yourself.
In terms of Jeanne’s question, then, I think there is a lot of value in a hundred people saying “Torture is bad.” — particularly in the case of someone as eloquent as Jeanne. Because sometimes decent people, out of fear or a misplaced loyalty or a lack of information, can be convinced that torture is not wrong. Someone reading Jeanne’s work would be hard pressed to hold that opinion at the end. Jeanne’s work also provides ammunition for her readers in their conversations in the real world.
Which is, I think, the point. Democracies are just a series of conversations. Blogs are one more way to have those conversations, and one more way to understand the conversations people around you are having. Everyone who writes a blog hopes that something they have written has caused a reader to think about an issue harder than they would have normally, or, even, started to change someone’s mind. It’s no different than talking to your neighbors, your co-workers, your friends.
“But I’m starting to feel that all we’re saying is “Bad Bush,” which is a perfect legitimate thing to say, but I’m not sure hundreds of us need to say it.”
I think what she is saying here is that all of the “Bush is Bad and must be defeated” propoganda has become overkill and may start a backlash against the extreme left.
“Because sometimes decent people, out of fear or a misplaced loyalty or a lack of information, can be convinced that torture is not wrong.”
Suppose your son or daughter were kidnapped by terrorists, and the application of sleep deprivation or stress positions to extract information from a prisoner could save their life. Would you be in approval then? I think you would.
Alan Dershowitz just wrote an excellent article about the need to have an open discussion about what constitutes appropriate interrogation techniques and what is torture. You can probable google for it if you’re interested.
Comment 6/16/2004
Dear Lean Left,
Did you guys know that Bush appointed a former pharmaceutical and tobacco industry lawyer as lead council to the U.S. FDA? His name is Daniel Troy and he recently asked pharmaceutical companies what he can do to help them when they are being sued for product liability.
Just something I thought ya’ll would like too chew on if you didn’t already know this.
Comment 6/16/2004
“I think what she is saying here is that all of the “Bush is Bad and must be defeated” propoganda has become overkill and may start a backlash against the extreme left. ”
Umm, no. Not even close. In fact, I don’t see how anyone who speaks English could come to that conclusion from what she wrote.
“Suppose your son or daughter were kidnapped by terrorists, and the application of sleep deprivation or stress positions to extract information from a prisoner could save their life. Would you be in approval then? I think you would. ”
No, becasue it wouldn’t — and their widespread use would increase the danger to everyone else I care about. Torture doesn’t work, period. Never has. The information gotten from torture is almost univerally useless. If I found out that the cops were torturing people instead of using methods that actually work to find my child, I would be beyond angry.
Comment 6/16/2004
Sorry but you’re dead wrong. In the Dershowitz article he specifically cited a case of a woman whose child had been taken hostage and aggressive interrogating techniques (which liberals now self-servingly call torture) saved his life.
Comment 6/16/2004
Now back to why do people read blogs; I for one find them a great way to stay informed. I am constantly pointed to articles that a blogger found intersting enough to comment on, and which I wouldn’t have seen without reading their blog. From there, I can take what the blogger had to say in context, and formulate my own opinion. Bloggers sometimes point out an important detail I would have overlooked upon first reading, something buried in paragraph 28 of a long article.
Instead of getting my news only from my local paper (or T.V, Ugh!), I can see how the same news is viewed by people who have a different perspective on the story than I do. Even when I don’t agree with the blogger’s conclusion, I at least have a better idea of how they came to an opinion that’s different from my own. And to me, that’s a very good thing.
Comment 6/17/2004
Lynn
Thats a good point, and mirrors the way I use blogs myself.
Flounder
So the one time it worked — assuming it did, since you don’t provide links — makes up for all the other times it did not, and for all the other times innocents or people who didn’t known the information were tortured? So all the studies by the CIA and human rights organizations pointing out that torture does not provide reliable information are just made up?
And torture remains torture , whatever the buzz word you have come up with to make yourselves feel better about betraying American ideals and excusing monstrosities. Tell, me, flounder — how many innocent people is it alright to torture? 5? 10? 100? 1000? Give me a number so I won’t have bother you to we have hit the magic flounder threshold of allowed atrocities.
Comment 6/17/2004