There are serious issues connected with the outing of bloggers; several have been discussed here. This is the aspect that got me thinking:
If one is writing in a political forum, how far a field from one’s stated principles can personal behavior stray before hypocrisy bubbles to the surface? (That’s not really a mixed metaphor; the big field is very wet.)
Where do you draw the line? Can one call oneself a progressive and represent Walmart?
Own Halliburton stock? Attend a homophobic church? How far is too far for you?
I had to quit about half of the jobs I’ve ever held because I was pressed by my employer to commit fraud. During the times I was responsible for only myself, this was an easy matter, but while widowed and raising a child alone, I often had to keep a morally repugnant job until I could find another. That put me in the position of ducking, weaving and lying to the boss until I could get out.
If, at that time, I had been writing about moral integrity, shouldn’t I, in the interest of transparency and full disclosure, include this information? If my personal situation informs my opinions, am I being less than honest by holding that fact back?
Help me here; is it the questionable conflict with progressive values, the secrecy about it, or both that is the problem?
Let’s first stand in the shoes of the audience that reads a diary or comment. If the persuasive power of the writing depends in large part on the personal credibility of the author, then an anonymous author’s writings shouldn’t carry much weight. But if the writing itself is well-reasoned and relies on sources that can be verified, the ideas should retain their power regardless of authorship.
But I suppose it’s human nature to slip into becoming a “fan” of certain bloggers, at which point you may find yourself agreeing with an entry because of who wrote it even though you might question the ideas expressed therein more critically if another pseudonym appeared at the bottom. Once the author’s personal aura begins to outweigh the work itself, there’s bound to be a sense of betrayal if you discover that the author isn’t the sort of person you believed her to be.
But does that mean that everyone who writes on a blog has some sort of moral obligation to bare her soul and make confession? I sure hope not. I think the world of political blogs is better off focusing on the ideas and not so much the source. It’s disheartening to see discussion of a brilliant post that’s chock-full of yummy substance bog down over the author’s bona fides.
Now, about whether one can be a progressive and do X or Y. Everybody is going to have a different list of taboos. I tend to cut folks a lot of slack, especially when it has to do with employment, because we all have to make hard choices and we don’t all have unlimited options. There are some extreme examples, of course–if you’re one of the anti-choice picketers at Planned Parenthood, don’t try to tell me you’re a progressive. But if the only jobs in town are at Wal-Mart, and you can’t afford to move yourself and your baby out of your parents’ house, I’m not going to beat you with the ideological purity stick if you decide to work there.
Thank you, Raging.
I had not thought of the “fan” aspect. That is a very astute observation.
And I agree that constant self-revelation can be less than useful and more than a bit annoying, even though I just indulged in it for the sake of argument.
The employment thing is very difficult. Who can find fault with someone for struggling to support his/her children in circumstances with limited choice? I start to question how dirty the money is when the choice to earn less (but enough to sustain the family)is available. And I am haunted by the idea of small cogs in a hideous machine of death. Somebody drove the trains to Bergen-Belsen; somebody who needed a job to support the family. There are no easy answers.
Somebody drove the trains to Bergen-Belsen; somebody who needed a job to support the family. There are no easy answers.
that just gave me shudders… wow! Thank you SusanW!
I hear so many of say of our “troops” “they were just following orders” as if that absolves them. I don’t know much of what has gone on with the blogger being outted excpet that if they ddn’t volunteer the info… then it’s an attack on their privacy and most likely a personal threat to hush them up. I don’t know…
But I do thank you for this discussion. I learn so much from you and Raging.
Back at ya, Janet.
I lurked for a long time admiring your thoughtfulness and turn of phrase. You’ve made me shudder a few times with your insights.
No easy answers indeed. Certainly there comes a point where someone either says, “No, I won’t do that,” or sacrifices any claim to a functioning conscience. But what of the points of decision short of that bright line? Did the person driving the train go wrong when he was a kid and decided to be an engineer when he grew up? How could he have known what it would lead to?
All of us who pay taxes are financing Bush’s pet wars. But the alternatives–making no taxable income at all or refusing to pay–just aren’t viable for most of us. And what of the portion of our taxes that goes to beneficial purposes?
These are very deep questions you’ve raised.
I have a daughter in her early thirties. A few weeks ago she asked, “How do I live in the world, Mom?”
All people of conscience (and I count the Frog Pond as a home to that sadder but wiser group) wrestle with the limits of responsibility and degrees of complicity. We choose with each passing second. It isn’t comfortable or easy, but it is alive. It’s the examined life, the one worth living.
If one is writing in a political forum, how far a field from one’s stated principles can personal behavior stray before hypocrisy bubbles to the surface? (That’s not really a mixed metaphor; the big field is very wet.)
It’s a bit of a swamp. đ
People don’t really state their “principles.” Words like “liberal,” “progressive,” and “Democrat” may be used, but they are not defined in any universal way. So it is easy to make presumptions.
As to how people live and what they write…that one is more difficult to judge. Some people seem to have no internal conflicts, perhap see no disconnects or discrepancies. Politicians on the national level don’t seem to struggle with this.
But then, bloggers aren’t politicians, so perhaps they are held to a different standard – higher? đ
What do I believe and how closely do I live it? Maybe that is what we all should be asking.
I agree with you that politicians seem to be experts at compartmentalization, so much so that the questionable means to lofty ends eat away at their good intentions, assuming they had any to begin with.
Strangely, it doesn’t work the other way around; the studied intent to sell America (and the rest of the world, these days) to corporate interests doesn’t seem to have any appriciable unintended good consequences for the rest of us.
Yep, “liberal”, “progressive” and other terms are just useful shorthand. Real life humans are much more nuanced creatures, not so easily categorized.
But it beats disclosing our every inconsistency. đ
All we can do is do the best we can.
I used to be ‘nuanced’ – not anymore.
I’d rather be ‘what you see is what you get’.
People don’t really state their “principles.” Words like “liberal,” “progressive,” and “Democrat” may be used, but they are not defined in any universal way. So it is easy to make presumptions.
The world has been beating me over the head with that truth the past few days.
I would say survival comes first before politics and self consciousness. But, if you kept that repugnant job simply because it paid more jack so you and your kids coould be more comfortable or have a new TV or whatever, you are little better than all the reptublican chuckleheaded boredom consumers who comprise (at last count) 99% of America.
I have had my share of repugnant jobs but finally clawed my way to the top of the ladder (mainly because I built my own ladder–no one would have ever thought to promote me–me, one of the most repugnant and worthless souls in the USA).
And yes, my kids are comfortable ( spoiled rotten actually) and I have seven new TVz….
Wonderful, SusanW.
How do we live our beliefs? Imperfectly.
We strive for creativity, campassion, generosity, courage. We often fall short. Fortunately, for most of us, our lives are long and we have plenty of opportunities to take stock, laugh at our shortcomings, pick ourselves up and try to do better.
My personal feeling is that if one is going to preach or persuade others, it is helpful to either be living in concert with one’s own values or to be honest about the fact that one isn’t. But wisdom doesn’t necessarily come from paragons of virtue, it also comes from regular, inconsitent, at times hypocritical, folks as well.
I get a lot of information at BT, but conversations such as this one that you sparked, make this a really special place to me.
Thank you, Kali. I have gained so much being here. The level of thoughtfulness at Booman Tribune is a constant surprise and delight.
“…it is helpful to either be living in concert with one’s own values or to be honest about the fact that one isn’t.”
This rings true to me. I would love to believe that I have an internal prime directive that values life above all else. For years I told myself that was true. Remember the boat people ? At that time I had the means to give more than usual to good causes, and I was very happy to have saved some lives until I confronted the “How much is enough?” question. I had to own that I was not willing to give all that I could, even if it was to save life. I argued with myself that giving all sounds very nice, but carries the risk of becoming dependent on others for their charity. Well, I certainly wouldn’t want that, because, in yet another character flaw, I’d much rather be Lady Bountiful and not own nuttin’ to nobody.
I also had to admit that I spend money which could help the needy on frivolous things I don’t really need. The only good that came out of this humbling self discovery was a rock solid conviction that I will never let myself get a pass on my selfishness by discounting the misery of the world. I am aware, constantly, that 27,000 little children under five die of starvation related causes every day. I feed some of them. I don’t do enough. I don’t do as much as I could. But I do own it. I make informed decisions and take resonsibility for those choices.
Now, I know that my self examination does nothing to relieve suffering; no hungry child gives a damn how guilty I feel today, but I have not committed what I believe is the greater wrong of justifying my selfishness by pretending that misery and want are not real, nor have I blamed the less fortunate for their own suffering. My choices are mine alone, and I must live with them.
Susanw, this just sounds so grown-up – and I do not mean that in any joking way:
Now, I know that my self examination does nothing to relieve suffering; no hungry child gives a damn how guilty I feel today, but I have not committed what I believe is the greater wrong of justifying my selfishness by pretending that misery and want are not real, nor have I blamed the less fortunate for their own suffering. My choices are mine alone, and I must live with them.
And it’s only taken me sixty years to do it.
At this rate, I’ll have live to 260 for real wisdom and goodness. But that’s OK; I’m also working on getting taller so I won’t be fat.
It’s neither isolated from how we live our lives, nor entirely dependent for validity on how we live our lives. What I write (and where, and for whom) is just another action in the world, another contribution to the map of reality. It’s an action in the world just like my writing a check to charity, or buying local produce instead of fast food for my children. None of those actions must be backed up with total consistency in my other choices in order to be counted as valid and worthwhile; why hold writing to that impossible standard?
Writing, for a writer, is also a way to imagine the possible before it becomes possible. Even if it never may become possible, it is a step forward. If I can imagine a life of integrity or a solution to an ethical problem, that’s one step towards righting an ongoing wrong in my own life. If nothing I write is allowed to exceed my present capabilities, then this imaginative power is stifled, and I may go in circles instead of moving forward. Paralysis may help me to avoid the sin of inconsistency, but that’s not the same thing as being virtuous.
You bring out some very good points, particularly, the writer’s purpose in writing. Thanks.
That was BEAUTIFUL, songbh. The last paragraph made me cry. I cannot be the writer you are, but I can read, thnk and act with the spirit of your words. Thank you.
I think you are the writer that I am not.
Thank you for this diary, and your reply.
You are the writer you are. I love to read you because your voice is so distinctive. I always know it’s you before I scroll down far enough to read your signature.
I’m not just blushing. I’m stunned.
I had no idea my infrequent and random comments here could possibly amount to “a voice” in any reader’s eyes. I always see myself as barely past the edge of lurkdom.
Thank you. You have no idea what your praise means to me.
Help me here; is it the questionable conflict with progressive values, the secrecy about it, or both that is the problem?
Afaic, the challenge is answered when one can honestly measure the peace they experience that comes with a truly clear conscience. And that clarity of conscience ought not be measured by anyone but the individual themself – who is solely able to take true stock of their life and circumstances to determine if they live by the principles they espouse.
That’s my 2 cents, fwiw.
It’s worth a lot more than $.02. Thanks, Catnip.
And I’d believe it coming from you.
Unfortunately, the people in power today seem to judge their consciences as clear even when you and I recoil in horror at their actions.
Still, each of us has to live in her own skin, and nobody else can do it.
There are a lot of ways to avoid one’s intuition and conscience and, barring the fact that one may be incapable of reading those assets (ie. those who are sociopaths, psychopaths or otherwise mentally incapable), they may believe their conscience is clear, but it always comes out in some form in the end – by a physical, emotional or spiritual crisis. That’s why those who stand on the moral high ground often have such large falls into disgrace and despair.
You diary and, especially the way it is written, bring forth the ‘story behind the story’ and I think that’s invaluable.
Humility is a difficult path.
(And thank you for the personal compliment. I really do appreciate that.)
It’s hard to live in a house of cards.
This is very thought-provoking. Thanks.
I went to your blog to read what you had to say in regards to “nuance.”
As a lifelong liberal, I embrace the simple principles of fairness, equality, justice, human and civil rights, tolerance, thoughtfulness, inclusiveness, compassion and an open mind.
I really appreciate that you have distilled these from your life experiences. Do you ever find these principles conflict? Do you give more weight to some principles than to others?
The only times these principles conflict is when I don’t have the willingness to practice them. They all deserve the same weight. If they differ, it’s because of my flaws.