Essence of blogging. The challenge of the blogosphere leapt out in one line of David Rees’s response to Michael Ignatieff’s recent recantation of support for the Iraq war. Blogger Rees cited an Ignatieff passage on how the noble expectations of war boosters failed to materialize, which ended by saying war opponents “avoided all these mistakes.” “Yeah,” Rees blogged, “you’re right, they did. Do you know why? Because they’re not retarded.”

That’s it. The blogosphere is the schoolyard at recess—in the best sense. The great equalizer, where kids who play the game and get ahead in class, are cut down to size. A figure like Michael Ignatieff could spend his life without hearing anyone blow him a raspberry—as opposed to respectfully disagreeing, thereby affirming his gravitas. It’s anti-respect for authority, the court jester, the kid in The King’s New Clothes. It’s not telling truth to power: It’s telling power to screw itself. This is the radical democratic element in blogging: that possessors of power, including the power of opinion, don’t necessarily merit their status at all. You cut them no slack and what you say, or hiss, gets out there. The wielders of power are not used to this treatment.

Suppose the anti-respect movement succeeded. Then what would replace respectability? Is this a zero-sum game in which new opinionators would just move into the positions from which the pompous asses and “retards” were turfed? I find it distressing the extent to which this kind of prestige seems on bloggers’ minds. You can see Daily Kos’s founder Markos Moulitsas Zúniga practically pee himself when he’s on The Colbert Report. Perhaps he’s aware that people still spend far more media time with TV and radio (70 per cent) than the Internet (5 per cent). Sometimes the blogosphere feels like a reality show called Who Wants To Be the Next Super Pundit?

I imagine a Kos-like response would be: Everybody gets to be the next super pundit, we are about the democratic right of all to express their views. I think this is less rebellious than it seems because in the end it would merely replace the opinions of a few with the opinions of many. The biggest problem, it seems to me, isn’t elitism (which is a problem); it’s individualism.

IMHO, as they say, what’s missing from the discussion is the issue of common sense versus individual opinion. A revolutionary change would not replace a few opinions with more and different individual views; it would arrive at opinions in a new, non-egocentric way, where people could meet without previously developed, hard positions, and work together on an issue. Such things happen, and they are usually practically oriented: Should we go on strike? Should we change the way things are done at the school?

So the key myth isn’t elitism, it’s individualism, the idea that some lone genius will come up with the answers.

Cleansing the term: A U.S. general let the cat out of the bag this week when he called massacres in Kurdish Iraq, ethnic cleansing and “almost” genocide, as if the two are much the same. But ethnic cleansing is far more widespread and ancient. In the sense of transfer of identifiable populations, it’s almost coterminous with modern history. Why move people if you want to kill them rather than just rob them? (Unless you lack the death technology, in which case, forced marches, as in the Armenian genocide, will accomplish both.) Most partitions involve ethnic cleansing, as the UN knew when it partitioned Palestine in 1947 and Britain did when it divided India exactly 60 years ago. Iraq is being ethnically cleansed with two million internal and two million external refugees; as Yugoslavia was ethnically cleansed in the 1990s, with the collusion of NATO, in the holy name of whatever it was called at the time. Maybe eliding the two categories helps cover up the nature of these more ostensibly respectable cases. They don’t deserve the fig leaf.

rick_salutin_small_24_1_1_1_1_0

Rick Salutin

Rick Salutin is a Canadian novelist, playwright and critic. He is a strong advocate of left wing causes and writes a regular column in the Toronto Star.