Last Call for the Jon Swift Roundup (2022 Edition)

It's time once again to continue a tradition started by Jon Swift/Al Weisel, the "Best Posts of the Year, Chosen by the Bloggers Themselves." Jon/Al was a fine writer, but also a nice guy and a strong supporter of small blogs. He was known for his satirical pieces, and his annual roundups primarily consisted of political (mostly left-leaning), cultural or personal blogs. (Thoughtful, insightful or funny posts of any flavor play well, though.)

Here are Jon/Al's massive 2007 and 2008 editions. Our smaller revivals from 2010 through 2021 can be found here.

If you'd like to participate, just write to me (Batocchio9 AT yahoo DOT com) with your best post of the year before 12/25:

Blog Name
Title of Post
Link
Author of Post
Brief Description/Pitch of the Post (1–2 sentences)

(Adding "best post" in the subject line would also help.)

To modify Jon Swift's 2008 solicitation:

I would be very honored if you would participate and send me a link to what you think was your best post of [2022], along with a short description of it. Please make the hard choice and send me only one link. I would like to post it before the end of the year, so if you could get it to me before Christmas, I would really appreciate it.

One submission per blog, please, otherwise things can get messy. Group bloggers can pick a piece among themselves, but are also welcome to submit their work via their individual blogs, if they have them.

As usual, I'm aiming to find the right balance between "inclusive" and "manageable." If you know a few excellent blogs (preferably on the smaller side) that you suspect might not be on my radar, feel free to send me their website address (and contact info, if you have it). Thanks.

Chain of Title

David Dayen, an excellent blogger based in Los Angeles, has a book out, Chain of Title: How Three Ordinary Americans Uncovered Wall Street’s Great Foreclosure Fraud. His Tumblr blog links his articles and appearances (Salon, The Intercept, The Fiscal Times, The New Republic), but if you've read his work over the years, you're aware of the time and effort he's spent covering this subject. A summary:

In the depths of the Great Recession, a cancer nurse, a car dealership worker, and an insurance fraud specialist helped uncover the largest consumer crime in American history—a scandal that implicated dozens of major executives on Wall Street. They called it foreclosure fraud: millions of families were kicked out of their homes based on false evidence by mortgage companies that had no legal right to foreclose.

Lisa Epstein, Michael Redman, and Lynn Szymoniak did not work in government or law enforcement. They had no history of anticorporate activism. Instead they were all foreclosure victims, and while struggling with their shame and isolation they committed a revolutionary act: closely reading their mortgage documents, discovering the deceit behind them, and building a movement to expose it.

The book's website features blurbs from Matt Taibbi, Rick Perlstein and others and links reviews by Publishers Weekly and Kirkus Reviews. (The book also won the Studs and Ida Terkel Prize.)

As a first-time author, David Dayen depends on getting the word out and generating early sales. I've ordered the book but haven't read it yet, although I've read plenty of Dayen's other work, and you can check it out yourself through the Tumblr link above. I'm admittedly biased because I know the guy, but if you have the money to spare, ordering a copy is a great way to support a liberal writer and get a good book to boot. (Here are the links for Amazon, Powell's and Barnes & Noble.) He'll be doing book signings in Los Angeles, the Bay Area, New York, Washington, St. Louis, and Philadelphia. If you're on that Facebook thing all the kids are doing, you can get more details from the book's FB page. Thanks.

Experiential Pagan's Book Reviews

Over at Experiential Pagan, syrbal-labrys has started a series of book reviews. She has an interesting and personal take on Go Set a Watchman, the Harper Lee book recently released with some controversy. Regardless of the book's origins and publication history, it's sparked some good discussions. (The review is hard to excerpt without spoiling it, so I won't.) Syrbal-labrys also provides a short review on Angela Carter's work. Check 'em out.

Blog Against Theocracy 2015

Over at Mock, Paper, Scissors, Tengrain has a stellar roundup for 2015's Blog Against Theocracy.

The End of Roy's Weekly Wingnut Roundups

Alas, after six years, the Village Voice has canceled Roy Edroso's brilliant weekly column looking at conservative bloggers. The columns were anthropologically fascinating, historically valuable, politically insightful, and damn entertaining to read. Roy would cover the sincere, rabid and crazy conservative base as well as the professional conservative hacks (and the former auditioning to join the latter). Dissecting insanity and bullshit is always valuable (and a good work in too short supply), but to also make the whole endeavor not only funny but genuinely witty is quite the feat. It's also a difficult act to sustain, but Roy did it, and made it look easy. Although he's continuing to post great stuff at his site, alicublog, the Village Voice columns were a concentrated and thorough examination of "rightbloggers" and their manufactured scandals of the moment. It's the kind of feature that some other outlet should pick up and fund.

"In "#EmployRoy: The ‘Employ Roy Edroso Because He Is A National Treasure And Not The Girl In This Picture’ Project," TBogg makes the case for just this (and supplies a hatchtag). Quoth the Bogg:

Needless to say this is a national disgrace because Roy is a Fucking National Treasure, who should have a regular paying gig writing commentary somewhere, slipping his rhetorical shiv in between the 7th and 8th rib of a conservative and giving it a delicate twist and wiggle.

While the secret leftwing email listserv, DestroyAmerika!!!AbortBabiesList, will no doubt get the word out, please see your way to maybe possibly sorta kinda dropping a hint here and there at one of those websites you visit when you’re at work and you’re supposed to be working on next years budget or awaiting for the launch codes in order to destroy mankind as we know it.

Some good political bloggers have managed to acquire decent-paying gigs, but that number remains relatively small. There's not a robust liberal counterpart to conservative wingnut welfare or the conservative Wurlizter. It's also far more common for conservative hacks to be given lucrative gigs over genuinely insightful analysts, even at supposedly legitimate media outlets. The commentators at alicublog ("the alicurati") are trying to pressure Roy to install a donation button at least, but it'd be great if some other outlet picked up his canceled feature. (I can think of several other writers on my blogroll who deserve steady gigs as well, but any progress would be welcome.)

Digby Wins the Hillman Prize

Congratulations to the incisive and indefatigable Digby for winning the 2014 Hillman Prize for Opinion and Analysis Journalism. You can read the Sidney Hillman Foundation's announcement here and her characteristically humble post on the matter here. (But surely you were reading her blog Hullabaloo already.)

CPAC 2014

Every year, the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) yields an interesting look at the conservative/libertarian movement in America, from professional political figures trying out their latest (or well-worn) pitches on the faithful to more grassroots figures (often a little nutty, but more sincere).

Roy Edroso has written a series of a pieces that can be accessed through posts one, two and three. (As I wrote over at his place, I appreciate his kindness with the people who aren't, um, professionally evil.)

Media Matters: "This CPAC Panelist Thinks It's A "Liberal Lie" That A State Has Ever Banned Gay Marriage." That would be Michael Medved, who apparently has taken reactionary petulance to the level of braying ignorance.

John Hudak of The Brookings Institution tweeted up a storm, including this picture of a near-empty minority outreach panel.

TBogg: "Christine O’Donnell is waving, not drowning in a sea of obscurity" (there's also a Balloon Juice thread on the subject).

Also from TBogg: "Watch: Sarah Palin revises kid’s book “Green Eggs and Ham” for an enthralled CPAC crowd." (Word salad as political performance art. The audience ate it up.)

Jim Newell at The Guardian has written a series of posts, including "Perry and Norquist use CPAC to talk tough on appropriating liberal policies."

Dave Weigel's CPAC series includes Conservatism in America, 2014."

Digby has a few commentaries, including "The jawdropping, stunning, breathtaking chutzpah of Michele Bachmann" and "So much for the GOP's youth outreach."

Wonkette has a few posts, including "Reaganpalooza! A Children’s Treasury of Douches Near But Not Officially Part of CPAC."

Charles Pierce also has a CPAC series.

Balloon Juice posted and rounded up many other pieces on CPAC, in "Return of the CPAC," "Dueling Social Theories at CPAC," CPAC for Kooks" and "CPAC Roundup."

Finally, a NSFW piece on CPAC-related (and mostly gay) Craig's List casual encounter ads. (This happens every year, but some of the ads this time, are... creative.)

TBogg Leaves

The always amusing and often savagely biting TBogg is retiring after 13 years of blogging. I hope he comes back occasionally, but thanks to him for all the snark, which sometimes contained a well-placed dagger.

Update: He's back! And at a new website. With all the great material out there taunting him, is it any surprise? Just when he thought he was out... they pulled him back in.

Crooked Timber's 10th Blogiversary

The thoughtful, erudite, and whimsical site Crooked Timber turns 10 today. Head over to say hi. (One of the best posts, from last July: "Let It Bleed: Libertarianism and the Workplace." If you read the threads and backtrack through the links, particularly the previous posts linked in the opening, you could easily wind up reading for hours. It's great stuff.)

Looking at Democracy via Zencomix

Blogger Zencomix/Dave Dugan writes:

I've entered a contest sponsored by the Illinois Humanities Council and The MacArthur Foundation called Looking At Democracy. There's $100,000 worth of prize money, and $5000 of that money is a "People's Choice" Award. Voting is open to the public, and you can help me win the $5000 by voting for my submission.

You can vote for his entry (pictured above), "Truth or Consequences," here and peruse the other entries here. (Hey, I'm biased, but I think his piece is one of the better ones I've seen over there – and it's a great piece for the Blog Against Theocracy.)

Digby's 10th Blogiversary

The insightful and indefatigable Digby is celebrating her 10th blogiversary. As usual, she's running an end-of-the-year fundraiser, and re-running some of her greatest (and most relevant) hits. Head on over!

skippy's 10th blogiversary

(Allegedly not an actual likeness.)
It's the 10th anniversary of skippy the bush kangaroo contributing to blogtopia (and yes, he coined that phrase). Head over to give your regards.

When thinking of skippy, three things come to mind:

1. Persistence: He's been at this for 10 years, which is a very long time in independent political blogging. He and his co-bloggers (especially Cookie Jill) post regularly.

2. An Aversion to Capital Letters: skippy eschews capital letters on his blog, either out of a love for e.e. cummings or due to the trauma of a childhood Sesame Street viewing party gone horribly wrong.

3. Generosity: skippy has a ridiculously extensive blogroll, and his site regularly links other blogs. He and the late Jon Swift/Al Weisel also co-founded Blogroll Amnesty Day, an annual event dedicated to linking smaller (or equally small) blogs. The kangaroo is all about karma and spreading the luv. The big aggregator blogs will link major news articles and posts by prominent bloggers, and while some of those pieces are quite good, skippy & co. will also find great pieces off the beaten path. It's much appreciated.

How I Became a Rape Victim

The blog HerbsandHags has a very honest, insightful, powerful and disturbing post up called "How I Became a Rape Victim." Her blog warns, "Some of my posts deal with rape and that means that bits of this blog may be triggering." Most of the post is about her struggle to acknowledge what actually happened to her, despite all the pressures for her to believe otherwise. Her follow-up posts responding to some people are also good, although I really wish they weren't necessary. It's not an easy read, but that's the point; it's an extremely thought-provoking and courageous piece.

The Aristocrats

I read a great deal of fantastic stuff on the internet tubes I rarely get around to linking, apart from my Mike's Blog Roundup stints at Crooks and Liars. (Limited blogging time, alas.) Without slighting the many other excellent pieces I've read so far this year, this post by Jonathan Schwarz at A Tiny Revolution is absolute fucking perfection, and wins the internets for the day, the week, and possibly the year. It may sound grandiose, but the best comedy and most biting satire depend on truth, and really can be transcendent. This piece might not hit all readers as hard, but I know some people who will really appreciate it as the pure distillation of a certain something, especially if they get the references and know the story (and comedy tradition) behind ATR's name. (It's explained in a link on the sidebar, and also see this post. Wheels within wheels, man.) The Emperor's New Clothes isn't just a fairy tale; it remains the eternal ethos of the ruling class. For folks who sometimes feel like members of the endangered sane staring at naked emperors, it can often also feel like they're taking crazy pills. We might not be able to save the world, but there's a great deal to be said for a few well-placed, artful "fuck you"s to the appropriate people and sharing some warmth and laughter with our comrades along the way. Viva the blogosphere. Bravo.

Update: Driftglass, who not incidentally has been one of David Brooks' sharpest critics for years, wrote a similar post back in 2007. I believe that's called prescience or something.

Update 2: David Dayen (D-Day), who's done some standup comedy, also referenced "The Aristocrats" in a post, although in 2009 and with a different approach.

Blue Girl's 7th Blogiversary

It's the seventh blogiversary of Blue Girl at They Gave Us a Republic. Swing by and say hi.

Skippy on the Potential SAG-AFTRA Merger

The potential merger between SAG (the Screen Actors Guild) and AFTRA (the American Federation of Television and Radio Artists) might not be big national news, but it's certainly big out here in Los Angeles. Blogger skippy, a member of both performers' unions, has some thoughts on all this, and explains why he's voting no on the merger in posts one, two and three.

Happy 7th Blogiversary, Blue Gal

Reliable sources inform me that it is the indefatigable, multi-talented Blue Gal's 7th blogiversary. Head over and say hi. Also, it'll be the 100th podcast of the Professional Left Podcast this Friday, but since you're a regular listener, you already knew that, didn't you?


(She's the brainy, crafty sort.)

Deliver Us to (White) Spite

There's another Republican debate looming, and the past ones do not bode well for the Republic. The conservative faithful keeps looking for a savior, finding and then rejecting one candidate after another... and rejecting reality, history and compassion as well.

Scott Horton looks at the succession of conservative sweethearts in "A Snapshot from the Age of Distraction":

It’s not unusual for a political candidate or two to rise dramatically and then melt beneath the lights of the public stage—this happens in almost every election cycle. But it is unusual for so many candidates to rise and collapse in such rapid succession, while still at an early point in the elections. It may tell us something about the quality of the candidate pool. Or it may be revealing of the fickleness and immaturity of the voter group the populists are competing to capture. Or both.

In any event, however, it is characteristic of our current political process. We have created an environment in which scrutiny of political candidates is superficial, and in which candidates can get away with knowing only enough about critical issues to fill a three-by-five-inch filing card. Illiteracy about key economic issues is widespread, and vacuous, simplistic formulations are put forth without being challenged or parsed. Bogus claims about history are made without shame or correction. That would be a fair summary of the televised debates, which offer little actual debating and are often packaged to resemble a television game show. Is America going about picking presidential candidates the way viewers choose their favorite contestants on “American Idol”? America today faces the very real prospect of a double-dip recession, and is deeply enmeshed in two land wars in the Middle East (one of which marks its first decade this week) that are unpopular but that our political elites don’t want to discuss. It faces the prospect of a “lost generation” of un- and underemployed youth. But our political culture continues to avoid vital issues. Instead, we are treated to political tragicomedy. The rapid rise and fall of candidates in the Republican contest is a telling sign of our Age of Distraction.

Charles Pierce has joined the already excellent Esquire political team, and his ire is provoked by a silly Hill piece claiming that Herman Cain's success proves that observations about racism in the conservative movement are overblown. As Pierce writes in "The GOP Is Not Giving Up 50 Years of Bigotry for This Guy":

Jesus God, man, read some history, will you? Or, otherwise, some conservative might come up to you one day and you'll trade him your car for a bag of magic beans. If you don't want to read, at least Google "Harry Dent" or "Southern strategy." Republicans made a conscious choice to abandon the traditions that began with Lincoln and produced Edward Brooke in order to profit politically from the backlash against the accomplishments of the civil-rights movement and the remnants of white-supremacy, especially in the South. This wasn't an accident. It was a shrewd — if amoral — calculation. That is how black voters came to be attached to the Democratic party; hell, it's why Martin Luther King, Sr. stopped being a Republican. If you think that party is willing to surrender 50 years of profitable bigotry for the political phenomenon that is Herman Cain, well, you should take it up with the future of the GOP, Congressman J.C. Watts, or former chairman Michael Steele, who also represented the new multiracial party for a while. I also wish you luck with your beanstalk.

For more on Cain and his appeal to conservatives, I'd recommend checking out the many posts on the subject at We Are Respectable Negroes. (See also Adam Serwer and Matthew Yglesias.)

Roy Edroso writes sympathetically about "the end of the affair" between Sarah Palin (who declared she is not running for president) and the conservative faithful, who didn't recognize the scam and truly believed:

...the salt-of-the-earth types who are now left standing at Palin Central, waiting on a train to Galt's Gulch and glory that will never arrive.

I note this with some sadness, and not only on my own account. Most of Palin's retinue will peel off without many tears to the Perry and Bachmann bandwagons, where their thirst for blood and bullshit may be slaked. But I spare a thought for those who actually believed in Palin -- who thought this venal con woman was the real deal, their mama grizzly, their wingnut messiah -- someone who, though swimming in unearned wealth and privilege, understood their underwater double-wide lives and, though incredibly averse to responsibility, would bravely take up the Old Standard and be the backwoods Boudicca of their redneck resurgence.

She was as close to a new Reagan as the Tea Party people had -- simultaneously sunny and impenetrable, a great grinning billboard behind which they could safely wreak their bitter vengeance on the hippies, ethnics, and paupers on whom they blamed the modern world. How long will it take for them to move on, and where to? And -- here's a strange thought, coming from someone who expected to see her crowned -- whether they did or not, are there enough of them that anyone will notice? Or was the whole idea that battalions of backwards-looking, flintlock-shouldering patriots marched with her just a scam as well? That would seem the cruelest thing for them to find: that they were doomed all along, and had only seemed close enough to victory to yearn for it because hucksters found profit in telling the world that they were.

Finally, Driftglass is holding a fundraiser and has been blogging up a storm (and podcasting). Make sure to stay for the prose, but I'm particularly fond of this picture, which until recently was on his masthead (click for a larger view):


As I wrote over at his place, it occurs to me that this creature is the conservative version of the Krell monster. The difference is that it didn't emerge from noble if misguided attempts to increase knowledge and intelligence; the Republicans chose to plunge directly into the lizard brain instead, and what they unleashed was a violently incurious, brutally rapacious and recklessly nihilistic Id that has destroyed civilizations in the past and is hungry to do the same again.

Reflecting on Netroots Nation 2011

I went to Netroots Nation in Minneapolis last weekend (July 16th-19th). It was the first one I've attended. If you're interested, you can go to the Netroots site for the schedule of speakers and panels. The site's blog features videos, as does their YouTube channel.

Going in, I thought the convention would probably be a good morale booster for many of the attendees, particularly those who live in conservative-dominated states. (In Los Angeles, where I currently live, it's not as hard to find some liberal meet-up groups.) However, I wondered if the convention would amount to preaching to the converted. Perhaps that was the case to a small degree, but I was struck by the amount of regional caucuses and activist group meetings, which I found encouraging. I also appreciated the heavy union representation among main stage speakers. For many attendees, going to Netroots Nation wasn't for an ego-boost, it was for gettin' stuff done. A few panels focused on the fight against far-right measures from state legislators and governors (in Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, Florida...). Special emphasis was given to the populist challenges to Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, who's extremely plutocratic, Koch-backed, and has engaged in radical overreach that he did not disclose to voters during his campaign for office. Because Wisconsin's right next to Minnesota, many Wisconsinites made the trek. Meanwhile, conference goers were able to attend a few jobs rallies in Minneapolis.

What with airfare, lodging and registration itself, going to Netroots Nation can be a bit expensive for working stiffs. At least one speaker noted that the average Netroots attendee tends to be well-educated, middle-class, and white. Netroots seemed to be making efforts to increase diversity, though, and was definitely far more diverse than conservative conferences such as CPAC and Right Online. Meanwhile, the group Democracy for America has been offering scholarships to help people attend the past couple of years. (This year, they offered fifty scholarships, including one to Blue Gal.) Downtown Minneapolis is also extremely walkable. Netroots Nation also hosted a "day of service" event on Sunday, in addition to the other rallies, so while there were plenty of parties, there were plenty of opportunities for social responsibility besides the socializing.

All the panels I attended were good, some excellent. I went to ones on messaging, reckless Republicans in state legislatures, combating corporate power after Citizens United, corporate courts, our progressive history, saving public education, countering hate speech against workers, challenging media narratives on right-wing extremism, and comedy, video and activism. Typically, there were at least one or two other panels I would have also liked to attend in the same slot. Most panels were taped, so I hope those are eventually posted. (Currently, it seems the only videos posted are panel highlights, and the keynote speeches.) I was generally familiar with the facts and the stories behind the panels' discussions, but several speakers made extremely sharp points about "framing" various issues. The quality of Q&A time varied. Some people asked great questions, some made comments instead (but they were good comments), and a few would launch into long, repetitive speeches, monopolizing the time.

As for the speakers for the main hall speaker events, all the union folks were great. A few international bloggers were featured. Understandably, there was a strong Midwestern presence, and frequent mentions of the much missed Paul Wellstone. Most of the speakers focused on jobs, the middle class, and making the American Dream achievable for the majority of Americans again. Many also spoke about not depending on Obama for progress, and continuing to pressure him and Congress to enact good policies. Russ Feingold was good, and spoke on campaign finance reform. I liked the content of Al Franken's speech on the good that government can do, but he was surprisingly low energy. (Early morning? Jet lag?) Debbie Wasserman Schultz had a natural manner. Howard Dean and Van Jones seemed a bit more generic to me. Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison gave a rousing speech, which you can see here.

Daily Kos' Angry Mouse (Kaili Joy Gray) interviewed White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer on the main stage. It was a pretty frustrating affair, and sometimes seemed pointless, since as an official flack, Pfeiffer just wouldn't give straight answers to some questions, and she pressed him hard. Pfeiffer would have had an easier time, of course, if Washington politics weren't so screwed up, with common sense measures denounced as radical, far-left socialism. However, the netroots' discontent with Obama and the Dem leadership is less about a lack of success than the lack of effort on some issues. It's about poor negotiation and often accepting right-wing framing. (Why not emphasize jobs versus the deficit, for example?) Political realities are one thing, but they can be reshaped somewhat, and Obama's reticence makes less sense when good policy happens to coincide with good politics (which isn't uncommon). In any case, I appreciated that the Pfeiffer interview was often adversarial, and not a suck-up job. I wasn't as crazy about Angry Mouse's frequent, audible sighing and her saying that she and we were all sick of hearing about the Lilly Ledbetter Act – rather than saying, okay, the Lilly Ledbetter Act was great, but what's your next move? However, Angry Mouse has explained her perspective more fully in this piece, and she did catch and press Pfeiffer on Obama's equivocation on gay marriage. As Dave Weigel wrote, "[Pfeiffer's] main goal was to take some hits without generating new, bad storylines for the White House or an impression that it was bowing to liberals. He succeed." Alas that hippie-punching is still the reigning dynamic inside the Beltway, and kudos to Angry Mouse for giving it a go.

Netroots Nation has been stalked from city to city the past few years by Right Online, a copycat conservative conference, well funded by the Koch brothers through their Americans for Prosperity Foundation. That funding made registration for Right Online much cheaper than Netroots Nation, but they still had a smaller turnout (apparently about 1,500 compared to Netroots' 2,500+). It's unsurprising that a Koch-funded conference would also devote time to backing a Koch-backed politician, Scott Walker. Apparently, working class conservatives hate unions so much, they'll fight against their own interests with just a little goading from the latest plutocratic shill. It's a perfect example of a joke that circulated (with some variations) a couple of months back:

A unionized public employee, a member of the Tea Party and a CEO are sitting at a table. In the middle of the table there is a plate with a dozen cookies on it. The CEO reaches across and takes 11 cookies, then looks at the tea partier and says, "Look out for that union guy – he wants your cookie."

(I think that joke captures the bulk of the left and right blogospheres, and forty years of movement conservatism, but more on that in another post, perhaps.)

Supposedly, Netroots included a non-compete clause when bidding for their new location (Providence, Rhode Island for 2012), so if that holds, Right Online will have to try to steal attention from Netroots in a different city.

There wasn't much coverage of Netroots Nation in the media, which is really inexcusable, since it's arguably the major liberal/progressive event of the year (certainly one of them, this being another), and comparative right-wing gatherings get coverage even by non-Fox outlets. David Neiwert wrote a piece about this for Crooks and Liars, and noted that the Twin Cities' paper, the Star Tribune (admittedly a generally lousy paper) wrote two fairly positive pieces on Right Online, but only devoted one paragraph to Netroots Nation. (Dave Weigel of Slate did write some pieces on both conferences, which start here – you can then scroll through the "next" tab.) Andrew Breitbart tried to crash Netroots Nation, which is apparently an annual occurrence, and was chased off. Naturally, this was videotaped. This incident was much discussed at Netroots, particularly at the excellent Media, Comedy and Activism panel. While Breitbart is a liar, provocateur and an immense asshole, I agreed with the panelists that shouting at him was the wrong way to handle the situation, and just looked bad to people who didn't know Breitbart. (It's that old saying, "Never argue with a fool, because people might not be able to tell the difference.") An angry reaction was exactly what Breitbart wanted. Being polite, or being comedic (Lizz Winstead had some good ideas), would have been far more effective.

As for other events, the Laughing Liberally comedy show was pretty good. Elon James White (of the fun Blacking It Up podcast, and This Week in Blackness) had the most off-color material but the best delivery. He was also a friendly guy. I missed the karaoke and the political quiz events.

The booths at the conference offered plenty of buttons and stickers. I also got a book autographed by Tom Tomorrow. I've cited pieces by the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) and the Center for Media and Democracy/PR Watch in the past, and both had booths, staffed by very friendly people who were happy to hear their material was being used. The Fair Tax folks were there, too, trying to hoodwink liberals into backing their atrocious, plutocratic plan. I did take their literature, because I always like to see how people are selling their bullshit, but passed on an extensive discussion. Teachers, manufacturing and unions were well represented.

My badge just showed my first name, not my pseudonym/nom de blog, although I would mention that to people as appropriate. If I ever attend another Netroots, I might go with the pseudonym. I'm a part-time blogger and have had to blog even less than usual this year, so I figured I was fairly under the radar, known in some circles, but very far from "blog famous" – which is itself several grades lower than actual fame. In any case, I was largely anonymous at Netroots. I found most people were very friendly, but some were surprisingly standoffish, even after receiving a compliment like, "good panel." I'm sure bloggers suffer from social awkwardness more than ordinary mortals, some activists can be single-minded, but some people gave the vibe, "if you're not famous, I'm not interested." This is familiar to anyone living in Hollywood-land (and you can find it anywhere, to some degree). However, most people were nice.

One of my excuses to go to Netroots Nation was the number of college friends I have in Minnesota that I hadn't seen in person for years. I flew out a day early and stayed fairly late on Sunday to catch up with a few of them. (I also visited the Walker Art Center and Sculpture Garden.) There was a sizable California contingent at Netroots, so I saw some familiar faces, especially the prolific and amiable David Dayen. I'm sorry I missed the Balloon Juice meet-up, but there wasn't much advance notice. However, it was lovely to meet Blue Gal and Driftglass, and a number of other bloggers in person for the first time. Blue Gal and Driftglass' podcast reflecting on Netroots Nation is here, and they also did three short pieces while at Netroots itself. But surely most readers of this blog are already regular listeners of BG/DG's Professional Left podcast. In any case, seeing friends old and new was the best part of my trip.

That's it for now. Peace, art, activism, and happy blogging.

Portrait of the Fascist as a Young Captain

(Sergi López as Captain Vidal.)
Kia at Gall and Gumption has written an excellent piece on Guillermo del Toro's 2006 film, Pan’s Labyrinth (Labyrinth of the Faun/ El Laberinto del fauno). The bulk of it is an in-depth psychological profile of the brutal Captain Vidal, the wicked stepfather of the film's young heroine, Ofelia. Here's a taste:

To the Captain and to the numberless others who rule like him every personal affront or grievance undergoes a transmutation, it’s framed as something that happens not to them personally, as individuals, but to the cause. This is of course convenient if you have any power at all – the power to rat someone out to the police, the power to go rummaging in their secrets and a public platform for exposing them, the power to withhold a job or a ration card or a promotion or a signature. The exercise of malice and envy and contempt becomes a necessity of virtue. This transformation of the personal into the political is convenient in another way: it keeps up the supply of enemies (and the system depends on the steady supply of enemies) by creating new pretexts for identifying them, and it offers opportunities for the display of righteous zeal.

To destroy your own guilt is nearly impossible; it requires a return of the rejected self that people demonstrate again and again that they cannot do. It is easier to destroy innocence, to destroy the idea of innocence first, which enables the destruction of actual innocents. For this result, contempt is necessary, and there is always a lot of that floating around in search of a worthy object. Once you have overcome your guilt at the suffering of others from poverty, deprivation, and injustice, contempt for them comes naturally: they have imposed on your good nature, and they will do it again at the least opportunity. So it becomes necessary to distinguish between the deserving poor and the undeserving, and for the latter more deprivation, more hardship, is the best remedy. When it comes to that, even the deserving poor had best be kept strictly in line and taught not to expect too much. This is why, in Jane Eyre, Mr. Brockehurst and his well-fed, well-dressed daughters could visit Lowood School and looking upon its ranks of half-starved, beaten-down, dispirited orphans and daughters of impoverished clergymen, see nothing but their own goodness.

They are also, of course, destroying witnesses and evidence against the day when it all collapses. On that day, forced at the point of a gun to admit that crimes were committed, the guilty retreat into a sort of twilight of willful amnesia about their part in the crime: they didn’t know what was going on, that they had no choice, and they always acted with the best of intentions and never had any other kind. Their exact relation to the machinery of crime will be hard to define, although it will always somehow be clear to them that they were victims, too, and that they are now doubly victims because they find that the world does not think as well of them as they wish to think of themselves.

There's far more, and do read the rest. Needless to say, the profile applies to many an authoritarian, and not solely the character of Captain Vidal.

I counted Pan's Labyrinth as one of the top four films of 2006. It's the second film reviewed here. I'm overdue for watching it again.