Oh, Immigration and First Amendment Rights are SUCH cute little pet issues. I carry them around in the mall in a little tote bag and them put them in a pet carrier at night. If they start to bark or make a fuss, I hush them up as quickly as possible, lest anybody think I'm trying to boost my Technorati rank with my cute little oppression puppies!

Is there a medical term for what happens to eyes when they are rolled too quickly and too often? Can we call it Stoller-itis? Cuz I've got the itis really bad right now.

I don't bother with those folks. My first foray into blogs was with the big boyz, the way many people start, and I got slapped down for my "pet issue" almost immediately, and not politely. Nobody was even considerate enough to pretend to care about what I had to say.

I doubt we can ally with them. I don't see it happening. Once you've got power you want to keep it and when you're scrambling for power you'll step on every bowed back you see to get there.

RUFF! RUFF RUFF!

my cynical and world-wise friends are being proven right left and right.

Actually, if you count FDL, the Brad Blog, Indymedia, and the News Blog among the Big Boyz and Girlz, attention is being paid to the May 1 cop wildings -- and more's about to be paid to the underlying issues, as the anti-immigration forces are starting to ramp things up, as David Neiwert (who has been on the front lines of the anti-hater fight for many years now) has noticed. He spots the new racist themes as they're hatched.

As for why Markos Moulitsas Zuniga writes about what he does: Danged if I know. I guess that after about the seventy-fifth person telling you that you need to drop everything else to talk about nothing but biofuels, I can see why they're a little tetchy about people telling them how to run their own blogs, even when it's for a good cause. I wouldn't tell Nez how to run his, no matter how noble my cause was, because I'm sure I'd get more than a habanero in return. (By the way: Why is it that Gateway laptops don't allow for easy ASCII character insertion? Trying to put in accents and tildes is a pain. But I digress.)

kactus i think you are right. i'm beginning to come around. i dont think i need to "keep my eye" on some blogs i've been reading. i think it was just being habituated to my feed list as it began O so loooong ago.

Speaking of Big Boyz, David Neiwert has another post on ICE that's worth your time: http://dneiwert.blogspot.com/2007/05/hiding-our-shame.html

hi, yes, i did link your guest post, phoenix woman. i'm glad you got over there for that. i did link brad blog in my original post, as well. hmmm, i dont count "indymedia" as one of the "big liberal blogs" under discussion, no. but i link them sometimes as a source of reporting. thanks for linking dave.

but i think you see what i mean. as i said in my original post, "enduring" attention. (something like that). you point to a guest post paragraph or two in a cinco de mayo article, a google video in one post, and i'm glad to see it, i hope we see more and more and more. as far as dailykos at this point, it's not really a concern of mine. i pretty much have made my peace with what dailykos is, coo'.

i just want us all to recognize this issue for how fundamental it is, and even as rights apply to alienz. not just "legal" people. we cannot overlook only the "cop wildings" but how we come to such a place where that takes place, and how we all feel about it deep down, and how we are profiting from the lack of attention to it.

as for the rest of your secon paragraph, well, you are free to tell me "how to run my blog." if you feel strongly about something. i am free to disagree. as i always say, as long as a person speaks con el respeto.

did your comment go on the right post?

yes, a good article for sure. i appreciate you linking here. i do read him.

ps phoenix woman, i know this post references the larger point, so i get your comments...it's mostly about the specific "pet issue" phrase i linked, tho.

i agree, dave sees it as you and i do.

(and that while cynicism is earned, so is optimism!)

I feel like I'm being gas-lighted.

Instead, convince and lead the way.

The problem is Matt wouldn't have read your piece if it wasn't on JG. They probably don't read poc blogs.

ALLIES is one letter away from ALIENS

Good one. I'll tell you what a pet issue is. White male issues. Because they are only 35% of the US population. You know, Chris just wrote a post asking if diversity is a progressive issue. Are they trying to get OUR attention?

wow..."is diversity a progressive issue"? that's great. that's almost rovian in its lingual and rhetorical nature. "is rainbow a luminant issue?"

as far as "convince and lead the way," if (hypothetically) that were said in response to a post that did it's very best to present—i.e., "lead the way"—to seeing and taking on the immigrant issue as a Liberal Mainstream or more importantly Human Rights issue, well, that would be like hearing a person knock on your door and replying "if you want to come in, knock on the door already!"

all i feel compelled to do in that particular arena is introduce the idea in a way that intelligent minds and open hearts might hear. i cannot open the hearts or change the mind.

Your pet issue must've been a piranha, 'cause you tore that post apart like fresh meat!

(/priceless creative one liner o' th' day)

I thought your post didn't just touch on the what people were blogging about, but also the how people are blogging about it. It's one thing to explore the issue of immigration in the spoonfed, soundbyted forms of mainstream media, with the coverage of trifling College Republican "be a racist jackass to immigrants" events and protesters screaming at the border patrol folks -- which are all parts of this debate. But it's another thing to give more than lip service to the fact that this is a HUGE civil rights issue and citizenship issue, malformed, shaped by racial insensitivity, misogyny, and xenophobia -- and by remaining oblivious to our violations of human rights on top of American rights, we won't put a dent in trying to resolve the problems forming. We're building an ideological wall around this issue and a lot of "progressive" people aren't doing very much to make the wall topple.

In other words...

Here's the real truth. It's not that nobody cares about your pet issue, it's that it's not a priority for most people.

This is the problem. Why isn't it a priority? What factors shape what becomes a priority of the blarghosphere and what festers untouched? Media blitz? Money? Ad clicks? And why aren't some large bloggers challenging the priorities instead of keeping up with the Kosses? Same reasons?

so well put, sylvia. thank you for that point of focus. you are right, that is part of what i was writing about. great splash of water.

(and THE SUN IS AMAZING today!)

:-D Soak it up, 'mano! That brain of yours is sprouting flowers, wings, and all sorts of crazy cool shit lately!

wow i feel like a jimi hendrix poster.

Jimi Hendrix poster? With the fake-velvet trim and the day-glo paint?

(I still wish I had the old Knack poster my brother sabotaged. He gave the lead singer/baby raper -- whose name I forget -- sinister day-glo eyes with a long tear running like yellow matter custard.)

DRIPPING FROM A DEAD DOG'S EYYYYYE

This is the problem. Why isn't it a priority?

Y'know, I've been dwelling on this a bit, and I think part of it is a feeling of agency. Racism is huge; immigration is huge; both of them are integrat to our system of government and it well nigh depend on systematically disenfranchising other human beings. The USA wouldn't exist without racism and colonialism. I know I'm barely on the iceburg tip of how dependant every aspect of my life is one other people suffering and being taken advantage of, and even that iceburg tip is sometimes overwhelming.

Some of the defensiveness of white progressives is, I think, a realization that one's entire existence is supported on the backs of thousands of people one doesn't even know the names of. I was struck the other day, when buying my lettuce, with the sort of pained wondering of how many people's hands had touched this lettuce, how little were they paid, what trials had they undergone, how were they systematically disenfranchised and colonialized; and then comes the wave of how DARE I exist, draw sustinance even, from the suffering of other people? In what world is this even acceptable to me, as a liberal, to leech off the suffering of who knows how many people so that I can wrap my fried rice in lettuce and eat it for lunch?

And with the fried rice - I got it from a family restaurant, likely owned by immigrants, who were smilingly amazed when I ordered one of the traditional dishes once when I was in their restaurant. What did they give up to come to the US? How are they made to suffer while here, trying to do business? How many hours do they have to work to make a living? How well compensated are they? How many racist and classist assumptions do they have to shoulder while still smiling at me as I buy dinner for two for 20$?

It hurts, you know? Nothing even close to what any of the people who suffer for me hurts, but sometimes pretending I don't realize seems so attractive... even though I know that's the path of the bigot and the coward and the child, sometimes I long for when I couldn't see how my very existance is predicated on other people dying and hurting and being told they are less than human.

It's easy to identify something that is not oneself and suggest solutions, even up to the destruction of that something else. It's a lot harder to identify oneself as the problem and then contemplate one's own destruction as somehow rightious. Sometimes I really think the complicit silence of so many liberals is due to the fear that seeing the injustice in the world will demand some sort of huge, final act. That an awareness of the injustice will drive the just response of giving up yourself and your existance has demanded so many other people give up themselves, and their loved ones, and their cultures, and their effort, and their rights.

I hope this isn't read as an attempt to defend, even though on a certain level it likely is. My existence is, after all, a huge part of the problem. Lots of people could live on what I take for granted. And yet I am too greedy and self-indulgent to want to give any of it up. 8( DOesn't speak well for me as anything other than a hypocrite.

And so, I think people, specifically white liberals, turn a blind eye and hope there are no healers around. It IS a problem for everyone, but only some of us can simultaniously benefit from it and ignore the cost.

I think in some ways it all comes back to the fact that WHITEPROGRESSIVEs, to talk about immigration, have to acknowledge their own perpetuation of white supremacy through "US democracy" as well as acknowledging the fact their ancestors helped eliminate millions of indigenous people in the US. Then they have to admit that the land so many people are saying is being "invaded" by those darned aliens was actually stolen from mexico and the indigenous folks in the US in the first place, and that they really have no right to be "anti-immigrant". Then they'd have to acknowledge that people of color also are entitled to human rights no matter what side of the "border" they are on (of course immigrants from Latin America aren't the only people in the US being denied human rights, but I digress).

Really, it's just too much thinking for us white people (as in me, not you, nez).

Sylvia said: Why isn't it a priority?

David Neiwert pretty much sums it up in the Jesus' General comments:

And frankly, the more I've talked about immigration, the more traffic, and more especially my links for the real A-listers, has tapered off.

That speaks volumes. But David doesn't analyze this. Maybe it doesn't need any analysis. I don't think anyone here has to think very hard to understand why. What I was trying to say by saying I feel gas-lighted is that Nezua apologizing to David felt really wrong to me. I don't personally think Nezua needs to apologize to David for anything. I think David is reading Nezua's words through his own lens and while he has done some good, even great, work, I don't think even he would deny that he has his own perspective and that is informed by his whiteness -- the white lens -- that while it sounds like some huge monocle that we wear that can just be taken off, it isn't that simple at all. It's constantly re-inforced. It's embedded in our ocular nerve and not the kind of thing that can just be taken off.

I'm so upset at what is going on, I really don't know what to do with myself. Forgive me if I can't decompress by enjoying the sun or whatever, I just can't do that for reasons I don't want to go into because it derails things (but if you can, it's been told to me that it's a good thing). But fuck, this is why I can't be politically active anymore -- even to the extent of commenting on blogs -- because I get too involved and it becomes too personal and I can't put any perspective into it and the only thing I can do to save myself is disassociate even further which makes me even less useful than I might be if I was ever useful at all. Every time I write or even read about this, I'm killing a little bit more of myself. But I can't stop because it's too fucking important. I stop and I might as well just be dead anyway.

Something is severely wrong in all of this. I like David a lot and I appreciate his work, but he's not perfect. While his series on Eliminationism makes for a handy "get out of jail free" card, his series on Michelle Malkin, Unhinged: Unhonest contains this statement about why he doesn't call out the left for its intolerance:

And you know, I might speak out against these voices more often if I thought there was any likelihood I'd see conservatives similarly speaking out against their extremist and "unhinged" elements.

That's why you won't read anything on Orcinus examining what y'all (except Black Amazon because she's asked to be left out of this) have been writing and speaking about for ages. My understanding of the higher standard that Nezua is holding David to is this very thing that David has stated he will not do until the conservatives start doing it first.

And there is a real serious problem with that line of thinking. And I don't think I need to explain it to anyone because it's extremely obvious.

I don't even know what to say anymore. I'm certain what I'm saying is going to raise all sorts of shit and I'm deeply sorry about that. David, if this makes you angry, please don't get mad at Nezua or anyone else, get mad at me. You can ask Nezua for my email and send me a nasty letter if you need to do that, but please don't add to my messing up Nezua's place by trying to set the record straight here. Just denounce me as insane (I'm legally and clinically mentally ill, so that's not a problem) and go back to building your bridges.

Nezua, I'm sorry for stinking up your fine place with this, but this is how I feel about it and I'm very upset and discouraged and I feel a great injustice is being done to you and many others and I don't know how to stop it. This is my attempt and I'm sure it will backfire. I only hope that it will not backfire on you because you don't deserve it. I'm the one to blame for saying this.

no, no, no. you both left very powerful comments. thank you both for those.

it's okay, DI. i understand. i am like you. i feel everything very very intensely and get very upset.

i apologized because i don't want to fight him and it's not about him, and if i missed some posts, then i should have included them. and i don't want the thread to become about whether dave is a bad person, of course he's not. but i guess the thread will go where it will anyway. if people want a way to negate the implications of the post, they will! i cannot argue them out of that. the larger points remain for those who wish to see them.

I've been over there in a couple of threads (not this particular one of Stoller's, though), making small points. I, personally, think that this sudden refocusing on "diversity in the blogosphere" is partially an attempt to preempt, and pre spin away, the coming results of the blog ads survey which this year includes race as a survey choice. For the first time, I believe.

Well, and also (in my cynical way) I think it's an effort to increase ad and market share as, with the traffic numbers of the white progressive sites trending down and the discovery of the PEW reports showing that, yes indeed, there ARE lots of people of color online, many of whom are interested in politics and so on, the prior strategy of mainly targeting white, upper income males and pushing out others (in one way or another) is not looking so smart in the long run.

Me, I'm making sure they know that there are vibrant, progressive, political, academic, multicultural blog communities out there, run by people of color who have no real interest anymore (if they ever did) in joining the white progressive communities, except maybe as expert guest posters or something.

Anyway, I've put no links yet (I even removed my site from my signature) cuz I knew part of the set "OMG, shut down the colored folks!" strategy and game they all play is to state outright, or imply, that "they just want attention" or "they are whining about not being linked" and so on - as evidenced by Stoller's post (which I do think was in reaction to yours - and the attention it's getting). Well, when they are not furrowing their brows and implying that the reason there are not more people of color posting on the white sites is that many are too intimidated, poor, and illiterate to work a blog and "we must work together to do something about that - because We Care.", that is.

Sigh, I am already tired of these people (where, oh where has my patience for this stuff gone?), but I think some folks are having their eyes opened as to just who and what their "progressive movement" consists of and I think will be ready to take baby steps and venture out to see what some in the colorsphere are doing and saying.

We'll see!

DI, I am just catching up on your comments... well, and everyone's and the posts and so on in various places... and I, for one, have been appreciating them very much.

Dead Inside: Take care of yourself, ok? I'm probably being presumptious, but... people are valuable, even when they screw up, or don't like themselves, or are mentally ill. You're valuable, even when you can't figure out how to say anything, or worry you'll screw things up, or say things the wrong way.

You are valuable and worth taking care of, so please, take care of yourself.

I've gotta admit that after the Mayday marches last year, when almost none of the "big guys or gals" Truthout, Kos, FDL etc wrote much about them, I went through a few days of dolor de panza - kinda feeling like when Sojourner Truth said to those white feminists - "ain't I a woman?" - like aren't WE part of this movement? It begs the question, really, is there a movement in the US? Have we really not progressed beyond the same paralyzing issues of race and class that stagnated the labor movement after WWII? Is the women’s movement really so obsessed with the individual rights of women that we have forgotten about the rights of poor working women (presently so brown) as a class? I mean those women who take care of rich white women’s children, clean hotel rooms, pick strawberries, wash the dishes, and clean up after everyone else’s messes…

And the mainstream white environmental movement, obsessed in its narcissistic, xenophobic protectionism which sees our passage to the north and our fertility as a threat to combat – and completely misses the bigger picture: the one about corporate domination of the world’s resources, including the exploitation of the third world’s labor force as the real demon in the picture.

And the anti-war movement? While the Pentagon spends millions to recruit poor Latino children out of under-funded, violence ridden, decaying public high schools and send them off to die, the anti-war movement could barely muster as many bodies and anger against this insane war as those in Los Angeles on May day last year....Dolor de panza for sure,

But the Pepto Bismol for me was this realization: It doesn't matter whether or not they think diversity is a pet issue - because we're taking over the movement anyway. Just by the sheer force of our numbers, through immigration AND fertility, we're going to take it over. And the labor movement, and the environmentalist movement, and the feminist movements and all the other self-defined fragmented parts of the American left, shrinking and aging will realize that as an issue of survival, the movement will be revitalized only through the life energy of the young, because WE are the working class. It is WE brown masses who will be defining the movement, and despite our present lack of representation and resources our numbers alone will set the agenda for social progress.

Let's get to work....

Just denounce me as insane (I'm legally and clinically mentally ill, so that's not a problem)

and

I'm probably being presumptious, but... people are valuable, even when they screw up...

just my take (and kindness is good, i'm all for making sure someone is okay): i felt DI's quote as empowering, as preempting any sort of derogatory comment (perhaps chosen to reference a bundle of previously-heard reactions) that might come in response, and also shrugging off the value of ad hominem attacks in general or labels used to invalidate a valid point.

that's just how i saw it. but i agree, if anyone at all needs to back off any drama, I sure would be one who understood.

But the Pepto Bismol for me was this realization: It doesn't matter whether or not they think diversity is a pet issue - because we're taking over the movement anyway.

yes. thank you. i'm understanding. with my post, with the comments that ensue, the posts that ensue, with words like yours. of course, its true. in ideal, we all need each other, as i said in the post. but in practical matters, we cannot allow ourselves to rely on anyone else to care about these things as much as they should be cared about. that's la dura verdad. it is us.

DI, I've been in a similar emotional predicament as you're in; stay strong and do what you need to do to keep yourself at equilibrium. If you need distance, do distance; if you need to talk, you have an audience here who supports you. Just take care of yourself. You're definitely valuable, like Deoridhe says, and we want you to feel appreciated, loved, and welcome. 'Cause you are.

Nez, as one of your cynical world-weary blogmigos (oh, and hi Nanette!), I was just waiting for the phrase "pet issue" to come up. Ha! I'm with Sylvia: it's not just about whether or not "big blogs" (yuck) talk about immigration as part of Democratic Party electoral politics; it's about how the discussion is framed; it's about immigrant voices, brown voices, brown perspectives and frameworks of thought and language, not only being academically addressed but being genuinely seen as fully equal human beings and involved within the circle of American discourse. When "big blogs" address the "pet issues" of people of color and/or immigrants, it's invariably framed as a show of enlightened WHITEPROGRESSIVE virtue for which THEY (we) should be grateful. And any reasoned or nuanced critique from brown folks inevitably leads to dismissive defensive privilege-soaked huffiness about how misguided people of color are for "attacking their own progressive allies instead of the real conservative enemy", often accompanied by lots of personal history establishing racial virtue, or even angry demands for deferential gratitude and bloated accusations of envy and so forth. So it goes. One way or another, I say brown folks are on the move, with whomever wants to come along.

well, i'm doing what i have to, and you help by being you and bringing your experience. thanks, man. for real.

Nez, yeah it seems to me that you're doing a helluva lot more than you have to; you're kickin serious ass round here! Here's to that! *clink*

*clink*
::sunshine glint off rim of bottle::

In response to Stoller's comment, whenever I hear a word like "priority" I think "heirarchy" - and know that the whole discussion is being framed in the wrong way. Riane Eisler, in her book "The Chalice and the Blade" explores the time prior to the establishment of Judaism and Islam, when archeology shows our Western cultures were based on partnership rather than dominance and heirarchy. I think there is a lot of wisdom in this kind of thinking.

Nezua, I hope you continue to explore the "nexus" you posted about previously. I'd love to join in more of that kind of discussion and think it is an example of the kind of partnership approach that we need to develop as an alternative to priorities, dominance and heirarchies.

thank you, yes. i will think further on that, am turning it over, seeing where it leads me. i appreciate your feedback.

Hi Kai! I want to visit China... a stay in a Buddhist nunnery sounds really good right about now.

So it goes. One way or another, I say brown folks are on the move, with whomever wants to come along.

Absolutely. My feeling as well - different from before, too.

Damn, Nez, this place is hopping these days. And I'm afraid I'm not spending nearly enough time on blogs to completely figure out why, but I'm glad there's so much invovlement here. As for this post--I don't and haven't read any of the "big blogs" you're discussing, so I don't really have opinions about them as individuals or individual bloggers, but as far as the type goes--I think you've pretty much captured it with the WHITEPROGRESSIVE thing. It's an identity, a brand, almost a shtick. They can't admit that there's an important civil/human rights struggle going on out there that they've been largely blind to or silent about, because that destroys their whole brand. So instead, the routine dehumanization and intimidation of literally millions of undocumented workers (and, hell, millions of citizens) by the full force of the police apparatus and media culture of the most powerful nation on earth becomes "a pet issue." An ever-widening and intensifying excrescence of blatant race hate and paranoia mongering becomes something about which people are "whining."

A lot of this has been addressed before, and probably with more insight and information than I can offer. But obviously a lot of blogs have become co-opted or taken over by or assimilated to the whole dynamic/power structure of media and political power and influence they supposedly challenge. Prestige and, in some cases, money drive the whole process, along with "access" to various mid-level Democratic apparatchiks and hacks. But I think part of the solution is not to hope that WHITEPROGRESSIVES are going to be swayed by the purely ethical or moral arguments, but maybe move instead to show people what complete and utter bullshit their ideas about illegal immigration are. The whole idea that immigrants are somehow a "drain" on "our" "system" (seriously, is there a single word or concept in the entirely of the usual framing or articulation of the "debate" about immigration that isn't completely soaked in horseshit?) when in fact they're essential to the functioning of "our" economy, and really comprise almost the entirety of entire industries--that needs to be made more well-known. I think an argument about fairness will appeal to a lot more people, people who don't necessarily play progressives on teh internets. How exactly these ideas are arguments get wider circulation, I don't know (I tried to do a little of it here ).

The other pragmatic key, in my, again not especially well-informed, opinion is to push for some kind of amnesty, however partial or unjust. I don't know if you saw that amusing film shot by Max Blumenthal at CPAC, but a Tancredo supporter himself said that "one more amnesty" would mean the end of their political movement.

On the other hand, there's my nightmare scenario, which I find debilitatingly depressing. A constant process of "raids" and deportations undertaken by an increasingly blatantly racist state, operating secure in teh knowledge that there will always be more immigrants crossing into the country. Endless supply and endless demand for racist, repressive barbarism, which would no doubt spread like a cancer through American society and politics. Imagine a future where, as you prepare for monsoon season in MN, you feel nostalgia for Karl Rove.

But, seriously, dude, let's get back to teh important question--who do you think the netroots should support in Nevada's 14th district's primaries in 2008?

But, seriously, dude, let's get back to teh important question--who do you think the netroots should support in Nevada's 14th district's primaries in 2008?

Are you sure you haven't been reading any of the big blogs, MyDD in particular?

Listen up, DI. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, that includes you! Sometimes I just want to reach through the monitor and give you a hug and say, "You are human too!" because I wonder if you think you are not. Besides, I'm being a little self serving, I hope this makes you post comments more, because I do like to hear what you have to say.

I'm loving this thread. The post and the comments are all RAWKIN'!

Here were the offending posts

A Quick Note On Diversity In the Blogosphere http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/6/155916/3680

More On Diversity: Blogging Is A Niche
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/7/41255/24436

Diversity and the Blogosphere: Practical Difficulties
http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/5/7/173615/3450

in which he says progressive blogging is a niche and not every kind of person can do it. To which someone replied, Blacks Don't Play Golf Either.

Donna, he was kidding.

And then some wiseass said, keep up the modern Jim Crow rhetoric.

I do read some big blogs, Donna (I read Pandagon and Feministe daily, for instance, and I believe they're both big by most people's standards). But I don't read most of (all?) the blogs that have been mentioned in this discussion, and don't want to seem to be attacking anyone whom I don't actually read. I'm not sure who I'm making fun of with that comment. But I do know that there's star-fucking aplenty in the blogosphere, and that there's a whole class of blogs that are primarily, maybe exclusively, dedicated to that.

I don't really understand much of the larger context of some of these articles you write, but idea that everybody is susceptible to logic, if only the argument is properly constructed and with good intentions, is surely the oldest myth in the right wing handbook.

It's interesting how politics is the same all over.

Seems to me from the cursory reading I've done (as a white, conservative/centrist, has-little-clue-what-'progressive'-means sort of person) that there's three groups here:

-the 'big guys', with paid staff
-the 'large blogs', volunteer run, usually a group
-the 'little blogs', some person writing about their passion

The first is almost like a media outlet. The second is more like a club. The third is some person doing the best they can. These three groups have different agendas and different responsibilities to themselves and their readers.

I read DI's comments and I understand where she's coming from. There's only so much you can process/channel/whatever before you become unable to function/go to work/feed your kids. Sort of like caregiver fatigue or burnout. BTDT.

The 'big guys', however, (and to some extent, the 'large blogs') have others that can slack them, so that's not the issue. It almost sounds like they bit off more than they can chew. Atlas, Archimedes and the like.

There are so many issues with America that I don't think any one blog (certainly not the 'little' ones) can deal with all of them and retain sanity. And there seems to be disagreement on which are 'the really big important ones' and which ones are 'pet issues'. Yikes. Talk about bad choice of words there.

It sounds like Nezua's post stirred up a lot of feelings and discussions, which in themselves are good things, because if you don't talk about something it won't get fixed. Remembering that even though someone doesn't say things exactly like you would or think exactly like you do doesn't necessarily mean they're malicious. Maybe uninformed, or having a bad day, or said something without thinking.

But I'm looking at this from the outside. There may be other things I don't understand about this. I'm sure you all will enlighten me.

Jeff, you were kidding here

But, seriously, dude, let's get back to teh important question--who do you think the netroots should support in Nevada's 14th district's primaries in 2008?

Nanette, that's sad:

Well, and also (in my cynical way) I think it's an effort to increase ad and market share as, with the traffic numbers of the white progressive sites trending down and the discovery of the PEW reports showing that, yes indeed, there ARE lots of people of color online, many of whom are interested in politics and so on, the prior strategy of mainly targeting white, upper income males and pushing out others (in one way or another) is not looking so smart in the long run.

Sylvia:

"I don't think even he would deny that he has his own perspective and that is informed by his whiteness -- the white lens -- that while it sounds like some huge monocle that we wear that can just be taken off, it isn't that simple at all."

Spot on. People sometimes forget that my primary approach to these issues comes out of confronting white supremacists, largely because of my personal background in Idaho and Montana. I come from southern Idaho where there was one black kid and one Jew in our class; I knew about Native Americans who lived on the reservation nearby, but I never met any until I was in college. So my personal background in dealing with minorities is very limited.

I've also tried to take stock of the limitations on my viewpoint imposed by my whiteness, and to come to terms with what it has actually meant. In my case, for instance, I explored my family history enough to figure out that one of my great-grandfathers (on the Mormon side) was one of the land-grabbers who partook in the unilateral theft of Shoshone-Bannock reservation lands in 1902. That means, naturally, that some of my own personal social advantages -- I'm not from a wealthy family by any means, but solidly middle class, upgraded from working class -- were a product of this theft.

Now, obviously, there isn't a lot I can do about it now. The land has long since passed -- I discovered this, incidentally, while I was working as a reporter on the Sho-Ban reservation in the 1980s. I worked on three different reservations over the course of my reporting career (Sho-Ban, Nez Perce, and Flathead) and came away with an abiding respect for tribal issues.

One of the things I took out of that experience was a thirst for exploring the historical background of racial issues (which in the case of Native Americans is something really quite profound), partly because I understood firsthand, from my experience on the res, that understanding that history and coming to terms with it is absolutely essential for coming to grips with the here and now. Knowing how we got here is the first step in figuring out how we get to where we need to be.

So my own white lens, as it were, is perhaps reflected in the resulting perspective -- namely, that it is fruitless to pass on the sins of the grandfathers, as it were, but that doesn't let those of us who benefited from their behavior off the hook, either. It's contingent on us, I believe, to try to make it right, and to do so in good faith.

Unfortunately, not a lot of racial bridge-building actually is done in good faith, mainly because so many white folks remain so ignorant of why they got where they are. I keep harping on the "Sundown Towns" phenomenon because whites are so prone to dismissing the continuing residential racial segregation of America as somehow "natural" when it is in fact the end product of a systematic program of eradication, one whose legacy has never been overcome largely because we are so purposefully ignorant of it. And that's only a small piece of the larger puzzle, but a telling example.

So anyway, this is why I get flabbergasted at anyone suggesting that somehow I represent the left blogosphere on racial issues because what I do is such a narrow aspect of the racial puzzle. And the voices of people of color have to be part of that. But really, I'm just a guy working out of his garage who is doing the best he can, and I recognize I may not always have it right. But burdening me with being the face of white progressives on race just doesn't fit.

Incidentally, I think you are misreading what I was saying about criticizing ugly behavior on the left. I'm just not gonna attack somebody for using foul language, which is not my style, against the likes of Michelle Malkin, who likes to whine about "unhinged" behavior from the left -- not until I see righties criticize their own far right flank for the same behavior and worse. I have no compunction about criticizing (and in fact frequently do) folks on the left who engage in racist or anti-Semitic talk. This may be another reason I'm not all that popular, despite your perceptions that I am.

What really stepped on my sensitive nerve was the charge that I am "safe." Maybe being white and discussing race makes me safe, I dunno. But believe me, it has never felt particularly safe, doing what I do; you're talking to someone who winds up on neo-Nazi hit lists. I've also become something of a pariah professionally for what I write -- and yes, I think quite a bit about the ramifications of my gradual decline in popularity relative to my increasing emphasis on immigration.

A lot of it has to do with the overwhelming whiteness of the blogosphere -- but how can you address that without putting everyone on the defensive and alienating everyone in sight? (I think this was the thrust of Nez's post, and it was also spot on.) Besides, who the hell am I to point that out? Another white guy? Right!

Moreover, a chunk of my psyche avoids self-aggrandizement and whining -- and a good way to be perceived as doing either is to start complaining that no one links to you. So I just keep trying to make the best case I can by doing the best work I can. I'm more interested in actually influencing people than I am in shaming them into action, because the latter never works.

Yes, Donna Darko, I was definitely kidding. I just skimmed those MyDD posts, but I don't agree wtih the idea that Nez's post was about "diversity." I think he's largely right that the treatment of immigrants is a human rights issue, not some marginal topic of interest or importance only to a particular ethnic group. I think "diversity" rather misses the point.

DD, I knew that heraclitus was joking, I was too. It's just that MyDD fits that joke so well, come election time they will be covering just about every sing