oh, I don’t know…

maybe it’s because “push for democracy” is the cynically themed third string excuse trotted out after all the other garbage was revealed for what it is [see DSMs];

maybe because the “push for democracy” seems remarkably selective in its application;

maybe because blowing up, invading, and occupying a country under false pretenses is hard to swallow as legitimate means to “push for democracy.”

The right is as utopian as the left, though in a somewhat different way.

The left seems quite happy to sacrifice the good for the perfect. Why more on the left haven’t embraced Bush’s push for increased democracy in the world, as flawed as his methods are, I’ll never understand.

Sacrificing the good also seems to apply to themselves. They are better at unity than they used to be, but they still love to feed upon their own.

The right, ironically, resembles the true believers in the Soviet Union or any other collective exercise in utopianism. They have relatively noble goals: democracy everywhere in a world free of terror, but they’re willing to sink the country in a quagmire of a war, torture prisoners, reduce civil liberties, all in the quest for their ideals.

Like any true believer, they believe the world should be working in unison towards this goal, and any criticism from the outside must be silenced, any criticism from within comes at pain of excommunication.

And their blogs reflect their respective blindness. Let’s hear it for Libertarian blogs where the, useless but oh-so-satisfying, theme is usually a pox on both their houses.

There is also the fact that there is a lot of linking going on which doesn’t merely cross the division I just denied exists but transcends it. How many of you would ignore a link to something yummy from the Carnival of Recipes based on who posted it?

The left are the reality-based community. as such they are committed to sifting all the evidence and bashing out the arguments til they settle on the truth.

The right decide on what they want things to be, and then stick to that story. Hence, there is less to be said except “yup” or “heh. indeed.” depending on socioeconomicl class.

I don’t believe that one bit, but if we’re running with lazy stereotypes…

The Left/Liberals measure everything thru a utopian lens. As nothing in the world comes anywhere near a utopian solution, there is plenty of complaining and accusing to do. Someone’s Koran was mishandled becomes a huge issue…

The Right/Conservatives measure things from the way they are. The only things to discuss are substantial changes that affect the ways things are.

It’s all in how you view it.

I’m not sure how significant the data are that the post is talking about. It could be that they are measuring apples against oranges, as many of the commenters here suggest. The net is still relatively young, but because of the nature of computerized activity, there are lots of data getting thrown off. We may or may not have figured out yet which data are most significant/reliable/useful. I suspect we haven’t; after all, Nielsen is still trying to get better data on usage of that paleolithic technology we call television. But hey, it’s grist for academics and others, so grind out those papers, boys and girls

While I’m sympathetic to the author, I have to say I believe this is flawed logic. It misses how the system seems to work in practice. A new right-wing blog gains a following by serving the aristocracy.

Basically, the left side has lots of meetings and communes, while the right side has apprenticeships and fiefdoms. It’s different. But no reason to think that some questionable numbers mean much.

I’d also say that the right-wing side coordinates much better with their bigger media allies, but that may just be an artifact of having many more bigger media allies.