ashamed?
The Heathers post continues to draw attention from the blogsphere. Regular readers know that the bloggers at Dean Nation are not a monolithic bloc. That is by design. Dana has been a strong and clear voice for what I like to call the conscience of the grassroots - an unflinchingly liberal voice who sees great hope for the first time in 3 years. I respect his opinion even when I disagree and I'd rather shut this blog down than censor the viewpoints of my fellow bloggers here.
Being a cheerleader is necessary. We need more of them. It's not through aloof debate that this election will be won - it's through passion and commitment. What will undermine that effort is the tendency to treat the raw enthusiasm that drives many Dean supporters as some kind of crude and unsophisticated impulse, as if admitting and glorifying your bias somehow leaves you tainted. This is a form of condescension that is on display in the response to Dana's post that I find chilling. A perfect example:
He's ashamed of being a Dean supporter? Actually ashamed, as in "refuse to display my bumper sticker for fear of being jeered at in the streets" ashamed? And it's not enough now that we support Dean. Now we have to express that support solely in the form of "persuasive, intelligent" commentary. Presumably "Go Dean!" fails the erudition test. The High Council is now accepting applications for Dean-advocacy permits.
Do Dean supporters cross the line sometimes? Yes, passion isn't as tidy as lofty intellectual detachment. Do Dean supporters have a victim complex? Well, yes, but maybe if Gore supporters had more of a victim complex in 2000 he wouldn't have been gored.
Being a cheerleader is necessary. We need more of them. It's not through aloof debate that this election will be won - it's through passion and commitment. What will undermine that effort is the tendency to treat the raw enthusiasm that drives many Dean supporters as some kind of crude and unsophisticated impulse, as if admitting and glorifying your bias somehow leaves you tainted. This is a form of condescension that is on display in the response to Dana's post that I find chilling. A perfect example:
It's a decentralized campaign. That means that Dean supporters have a responsiblility to write persuasive, intelligent things promoting a candidate.
[...]
This (as well as some commenters on Kos, as well as some other Dean-blogs) make me ashamed of being a Dean supporter.
He's ashamed of being a Dean supporter? Actually ashamed, as in "refuse to display my bumper sticker for fear of being jeered at in the streets" ashamed? And it's not enough now that we support Dean. Now we have to express that support solely in the form of "persuasive, intelligent" commentary. Presumably "Go Dean!" fails the erudition test. The High Council is now accepting applications for Dean-advocacy permits.
Do Dean supporters cross the line sometimes? Yes, passion isn't as tidy as lofty intellectual detachment. Do Dean supporters have a victim complex? Well, yes, but maybe if Gore supporters had more of a victim complex in 2000 he wouldn't have been gored.
Comments