Legal Commentary

Activism vs. Punditry

By Big Tent Democrat

In a number of posts yesterday and today, I have been highly critical of Chris Bowers. On some points, I was over the top, and I think I owe Chris an apology. I should not have mentioned his past connections to the Sestak campaign. Chris is a sincere person who acts in ways he thinks is best. I accept that his support for Sestak had nothing to do with the position he took.

That said, I strongly feel that Chris' actions are indefensible for an activist. This is an old argument for me. I had it with Chris' old blogging partner Matt Stoller - when you take on the mantle of activist, you can not wear the hat of pundit. To me, Chris has changed his hat from activist to pundit regarding the health care bill. In my view, it is a hat change that can not work.

Of course, I also disagree with with Chris' punditry. But my larger point here is about understanding the role of the activist, the blogger activist, in this case. It is to help shore up the Left Flank of the Party. I am no activist. And I am hardly Left. I do not whip people to call their Congresspersons or frankly, to do anything. I am in the peanut gallery. What activists do matters. What I do does not. Yet, I care very much that the effective activists, like Chris, not lose sight of their mission and not compromise it in order to engage in meaningless punditry. There are enough of us out here wanking. Stick to the important work.

Speaking for me only

Full post as published by TalkLeft on December 03, 2009 (boomark / email).