« Good Max | Main | Torture and Cruelty »

Real Diversity

Jeanne D'Arc made a worthwhile point yesterday, jumping off from a discussion of women and blogging:

The political monolith at the top of the blog ecosystem concerns me as much as the gender monolith. It doesn't exactly mirror the bias of the media in its assumption that reasonable opinion runs from center-left to extreme right -- Atrios, Kos, and even Kevin are well to the left of what passes for left in most of the mainstream media -- but it's not as much of a challenge to that political box as one might hope for.
This is true, and it's much truer of the "real" commentariat than the blogosphere. And it's not just a matter of the marginalization of the left (one never even hear adocacy of what would be a tame center-left view in, say, France). There are, to be sure, plenty of frothing-at-the-mouth rightwingers given access to the media, but their rightwingery is largely expressed as just that -- froth. Vile smears against Democrats, liberals, etc., rather than actual advocacy of positions that are well to the right of the status quo. I've read, for example, many columns in major newspapers advocating that we privatize Social Security. I've read zero that state -- even as an impossible dream to which privatization is the feasible second-best -- that we ought to simply abolish Social Security and replace it with nothing (other than lower taxes) even though I know perfectly well that this is what many people think. I linked a while back to a poll showing that only 80-something percent of people would vote for a woman as president. Where's the case against women in office? Where's the argument that gay sex is intrinsically wrong and that in order to deter it practitioners should be thrown in jail? I don't exactly regret that these views don't get aired, but it does impoverish our discourse in its way.

In my (admittedly limited) experience as a consumer of European media, the debate is much more wide open over there. All kinds of crazy shit -- from both the left and the right -- gets a little space to be heard. Here in the states, pundits are expected to act like press secretaries, always trying to hew to the dictates of the median voter theorem and not admit to having any policy preferences that are far from the mainstream. But in a country of almost 300 million people, on any given topic there will be lots and lots and lots of folks whose views are far from mainstream. The world would be, at a minimum, a more interesting place if this was better reflected in the public discourse.

March 17, 2005 | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345160fd69e200d834733b8469e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Real Diversity:

Comments

I think it would probably be a more annoying place.

Posted by: JakeV | Mar 17, 2005 10:21:22 PM

Where's the argument that gay sex is intrinsically wrong and that in order to deter it practitioners should be thrown in jail?

Most recently, that argument was seen in Texas.

Posted by: bobo brooks | Mar 17, 2005 10:29:16 PM

You don't watch enough fox news.

Posted by: Atrios | Mar 17, 2005 10:29:21 PM

I know the European situation well, having lived there for 12 years, and to this day I read the papers in Italian and German online. It's true, and fun, to be able to read an authentic Communist daily like Il Manifesto in Italian. Nothing that weird, so to speak (I actually don't see why it's weird; it's more sad and grand at the same time) that is available on newstands this side of the pond. But there's plenty of self-censorship going on in Europe too. A prime example is anti-Semitism. It's rampant in Europe, even and perhaps especially on the Left. But it has to be expressed indirectly.

Posted by: John | Mar 17, 2005 10:37:12 PM

"A prime example is anti-Semitism. It's rampant in Europe, even and perhaps especially on the Left."

Please don't confuse anti-Israeli sentiments with anti-semitism.

Posted by: Petey | Mar 17, 2005 10:41:51 PM

Likewise, I think many on the left are in favor of single-payer healthcare, but one rarely sees anyone try to make that argument...

Posted by: Petey | Mar 17, 2005 10:43:54 PM

Atrios: I do watch enough Fox News. That's exactly what I'm talking about. The rightwingery there is really, really frothy. Nutball vehemence and goofy empirical claims are in order. And table-pounding, lots of table-pounding. Smears, to be sure. All manner of craziness. But almost nothing in the way of policy views to the right of whatever the Preisdent happens to be proposing at the moment.

Posted by: Matthew Yglesias | Mar 17, 2005 10:58:40 PM

[A]lmost nothing in the way of policy views to the right of whatever the Preisdent happens to be proposing at the moment.

Considering that this administration is advocating wars of aggression and torture as sane options, it's tough to imagine what you're hoping to see. Actual--instead of crypto--fascism?

Posted by: bobo brooks | Mar 17, 2005 11:06:05 PM

Anti-semitism, and not just anti-Israeli sentiments, are strong in Europe, perhaps especially on the Left. I stand by my previous statement. If you wish, I can fish around for references to back up my claim. It's a well-known phenomenon.

Posted by: John | Mar 17, 2005 11:08:33 PM

I think the narrowness of American political discourse has its merits. Someone on Crooked Timber probably said something about this, but I forget who or when.

Posted by: praktike | Mar 17, 2005 11:17:38 PM

"But almost nothing in the way of policy views to the right of whatever the Preisdent happens to be proposing at the moment."

Sure. Fox is a Republican channel instead of a rightist channel.

But I'd say the explanation in the difference between the American and French media is explained by the difference between the American and French political systems.

By having two centrist political parties, rather than a whole parliamentary spectrum of parties, almost all political discourse gets organized around those two centrist parties. Without viable far left and far right parties, there are few supports for those types of arguments.

If the framers had devised a parliamentary system in America and we thus had a viable beer-drinkers party, I bet we'd find more visibility for the beer-drinkers arguments.

Posted by: Petey | Mar 17, 2005 11:18:11 PM

"Anti-semitism, and not just anti-Israeli sentiments, are strong in Europe, perhaps especially on the Left. It's a well-known phenomenon."

Well-known in your mind perhaps, but I'd dispute it.

Posted by: Petey | Mar 17, 2005 11:21:27 PM

America is about consensus rather than coalitions?

" Someone on Crooked Timber probably said something about this, but I forget who or when."

I am pretty sure I remember that post. Could have been Henry or Chris or John or John. Or maybe Belle or Eszter. It was very good.

Posted by: bob mcmanus | Mar 17, 2005 11:24:21 PM

I think European media are the exact reverse. You can find all sort of crazy ex-commie leftists with froth in their mouths against American imperialists.

The funny thing is that the one extreme is feeding of the other extreme.

Posted by: Nick Kaufman | Mar 17, 2005 11:28:28 PM

You're right that in terms of specific policy proposals Fox News is "whatever Bush and the RNC says today." But, in terms of general sentiment expressed in more abstract terms, on taxes and other economic issues, immigration, racial issues, etc... they're far more to the right than you're giving credit. It's a lot froth, but not just.

Posted by: Atrios | Mar 17, 2005 11:54:01 PM

Right, Atrios, but once the GOP stakes out a clear position, they get in line wid a quiKness.

Posted by: praktike | Mar 17, 2005 11:56:45 PM

Petey,

I think it's wishful thinking on your part to think that anti-Semitism in Europe has withered away in the last few decades. Anti-Israeli sentiments are often just a PC way to express anti-Semitic prejudice (and the reverse is obviously not true, except perhaps in some Muslim extremist literature). In March 2003, in an EU-sponsored Brussels conference against antisemitism, European Commission President Romano Prodi deplored “the criticism of Israel inspired by what amounts to antisemitic sentiments and prejudice (source: Philip Roth Institute)." Having lived both in Italy and Germany for long periods of time, I'm convinced Prodi knows what he's talking about.

Posted by: John | Mar 18, 2005 12:00:24 AM

"Anti-Israeli sentiments are often just a PC way to express anti-Semitic prejudice"

You can keep repeating that, but it won't start making it true. I'm often struck by the pro-Israeli anti-semitic commentators on the American right in the Falwell/Robertson vein.

Europe is broadly less attuned to ethnic and racial sensitivities than America for a wide variety of historical reasons. But I don't think that has much to do with the topic of the thread. And I don't think the anti-Israeli sentiments of some of the European left are indicative of anti-semitism.

Posted by: Petey | Mar 18, 2005 12:15:05 AM

Petey,

I love how you euphemize racism as being less attuned to ethnic sensitivities. But I agree with your point that racism is stronger in Europe than in America for a wide variety of historical reasons. Which brings us back to the topic of the thread: do we really want the racists in our midst to be more straightforwardly so in public discourse? A degree of self-censorship is an excellent thing. Was is not Freud who said that repression [of instincts] is the foundation of civilization?

Posted by: John | Mar 18, 2005 12:27:09 AM

"I love how you euphemize racism as being less attuned to ethnic sensitivities."

No euphemism. See Trent Lott for an example of how somehow can be racist and simultaneously attuned to racial sensitivities.

"But I agree with your point that racism is stronger in Europe than in America for a wide variety of historical reasons. Which brings us back to the topic of the thread: do we really want the racists in our midst to be more straightforwardly so in public discourse? A degree of self-censorship is an excellent thing."

I don't agree with your premise that America is more attuned to ethnic and racial sensitivities than Europe because our political discourse is narrower. I don't think the two things are particularly connected.

Posted by: Petey | Mar 18, 2005 12:40:13 AM

Petey,

I agree with you that there is no particular connection between the fact, as I say, that racism is weaker in American than in Europe and the fact, as you say, that our political discourse is narrower. I'm glad you despise the likes of Trent Lott. I imagine you feel the same way about Robert Byrd, and Louis Farrakhan, and shall I continue? Or is your exclusive mention of right-wingers as baddies a form of self-censorship?

Posted by: John | Mar 18, 2005 12:59:27 AM

Anti-semitism, and not just anti-Israeli sentiments, are strong in Europe, perhaps especially on the Left. I stand by my previous statement. If you wish, I can fish around for references to back up my claim. It's a well-known phenomenon.

It's nothing of the sort. It's a meme, belonging in the same category as the notion that the American left is unpatriotic.

Posted by: Donny | Mar 18, 2005 8:24:52 AM

republicans prefer to lie (about themselves and about liberals) because it has proven to be a winning strategy as opposed being banished from the political spectrum if they told the truth of their intentions (just take a look at the Texas republican party platform if you think there would be any republicans in office if they told the truth). There is no incentive what-so-ever in American politics to be truthful; we only get shades of lying and more lying.

Its the fault of the winner take all system here (and our other quirks such as the Senate and the electorial college) as opposed to the parliamentary system everywhere else. Overtime, Parliamentary government will continue to widen the gap with America in proving to be the better, more inclusive, more responsive system for a people.

Posted by: justfred | Mar 18, 2005 8:49:45 AM

republicans prefer to lie (about themselves and about liberals) because it has proven to be a winning strategy as opposed being banished from the political spectrum if they told the truth of their intentions (just take a look at the Texas republican party platform if you think there would be any republicans in office if they told the truth). There is no incentive what-so-ever in American politics to be truthful; we only get shades of lying and more lying.

Its the fault of the American winner take all system here (and our other quirks such as the Senate and the electorial college) as opposed to the parliamentary system everywhere else. Overtime, Parliamentary government will continue to widen the gap with America in proving to be the more inclusive, more responsive system for a people.

Posted by: justfred | Mar 18, 2005 8:50:40 AM

CORRECTION: just take a look at the Texas republican party platform if you think there would be any republicans in office ON A NATIONAL LEVEL if they told the truth"

Posted by: justfred | Mar 18, 2005 8:52:14 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.