Worthwhile concept. Think I prefer some other coinage, 
maybe "electronic populism" ( since it can also be community TV
or alternative radio or independent film ) but the idea is on target
Whatever way you look at things, computers ( portable or desk centered  )
will necessarily be a decisive component of vast political changes.
 
I've been thinking, to make the most of this, Radical Centrists need
a distinctive "voice" in the blogosphere / cyberspace.
 
If we are mostly simply expressing our opinions, while that is  anything
but a "bad" activity,  then we just  are one more kind of opinion  source.
If our opinions resonate with someone, or a group, well and good,
but objectively why pay attention to RC.org or to any of us individually  ?
 
I have a friend hereabouts who, among other things, is a Lithuanian
nationalist. That is, although he is a US citizen he carries the  torch
for his homeland and for pan-European views generally. But I  have
read some of the people he regards as worth reading on this theme
and I simply am not impressed. His other suggestions for reading,
on a range of topics, have been very good,  but not when
the theme is nationalism.
 
Yes, I think that Lithuanian identity is a good idea , especially  since
for most of the 20th century the country was dominated by Russians.
But that is where that kind of nationalism ends for me. And the  appeal
of nationalist writers has zero resonance. Their "pitches" all
come down to some equivalent of   yay, rah,  rah,  ___________
fill in the blank with your country of choice.
 
 
Ideologies of Left and Right are not that bad, some, in fact, allow  for
a good deal of intellectual development,  but when all is said  they
still end up as cheerleader philosophies.
 
Yay, rah, rah Democrats or yay, rah, rah Republicans.
 
How about as our basic model, or anyway one important way to
express RC views, we pattern our views on how public opinion
pollsters operate ?  Yes, Rasmussen or Barone, etc,  are partisan  in
many of their personal outlooks, but that is NOT the source of
their reputations.   That derives directly from their  objectivity
about politics and election outcomes.
 
This is equally the case for pollsters who have Leftist views.
You can almost ask, "so what ?" about their private political  preferences.
Those that are good get the election results correct to within 2 %.
Those that are good provide useful analyses of those election  results
or provide useful suggestions to candidates running for  office.
 
Seems to me, we ought to cultivate an objective "style" in what we  say.
Well, I think we have been doing this already, and not just  recently,
in ways this has been true since 2004.  But looking forward
we might want to keep this in mind as a sort of 
"essential operating principle."
 
So that we become known for :
providing genuinely useful political ideas to people.
 
What do you think ?
 
Billy
 
 
============================================
 
 
 
4/13/2012   [email protected]_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   writes:

For  better AND worse...


_http://mashable.com/2012/04/11/digital-populism-online-politics-activism/_ 
(http://mashable.com/2012/04/11/digital-populism-online-politics-activism/) 



 
How Digital Populism Is Reshaping the Body  Politic
 
Ethan Riegelhaupt is senior vice president for corporate and  public 
affairs at _Edelman_ (http://www.edelman.com/) . Previously, he  served as vice 
president for speech writing and internal communications at The  New York 
Times Company. He was also a senior staff member for New York Gov.  Mario M. 
Cuomo. 
We love the Internet because it supports our overwhelming desire to have a  
larger influence over what happens in our lives. This fundamental longing 
to  control our destiny has inspired every successful political movement in 
the  last 250 years, whether it was the American Revolution or the fight 
against  Communism in Eastern Europe.  
Now, a few decades later, our need to exert real influence over the larger  
activities of life continues. We see countless examples of individuals, 
much  like ourselves, employing digital tools to create sparks, ignite fires, 
and  shine bright lights on alleged injustices, misdeeds, or desired changes. 
 People all over the planet use their computers and smart phones to 
confront  organizations, forcing them to pay closer attention to what they are 
saying,  thinking, and doing. 
The _Trayvon Martin_ (http://mashable.com/follow/topics/trayvon-martin)   
tragedy is an excellent case in point. As _Brian Stelter reported_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/26/business/media/for-martins-case-a-long-route-to-nati
onal-attention.html?_r=3)  in The New York Times, the  story gained 
traction when people started talking on _Facebook_ 
(http://mashable.com/category/facebook/)  and _Twitter_ 
(http://mashable.com/tag/twitter/)  about what 
George Zimmerman, the alleged shooter,  did on the night of February 26 in 
Sanford, Florida. It took a few weeks  before the mainstream media began to pay 
attention. But they did, and the case  became a national fixation.  
In a _recent piece_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/23/opinion/krugman-paranoia-strikes-deeper.html)
 , Paul Krugman, a Times Op-Ed  columnist, referred 
to Richard Hofstadter’s famous 1964 essay, The  Paranoid Style in American 
Politics arguing that people in this country  see conspiracies everywhere. 
While this dark mindset still exists, the Martin  case demonstrates that the 
Internet can serve as a sane political and social  counterbalance. 
Far more importantly, the Internet has become a catalyst for concerted  
behavior, enabling individuals throughout the world to make the transition  
from commenting and speaking to doing and acting. This has exponentially  
enhanced anyone’s ability to alter and shape the course of events. 
Out of all this activity, we see the emergence of what may well be the most 
 important political development of the 21st century: digital populism. It 
is  global in scope with a flavor of the New England town square and speaks 
to the  intrinsic need for personal expression, mass action, and ongoing  
engagement. 
It is worth noting that digital populism is a hotly contested concept,  
generating lengthy exchanges regarding what it means, what it has already  
achieved, and whether it will be a truly disruptive political force.  
Naturally, 
this debate became quite heated in the midst of the _Arab Spring_ 
(http://mashable.com/follow/topics/arab-spring)  when the  Egyptian and 
Tunisian 
governments were overthrown.  
To avoid becoming overly utopian or romantic about this era, we must  
maintain a historical perspective. After all, mass action around a common  
objective is not a new phenomenon. Nevertheless, it is abundantly apparent  
that 
the Internet is profoundly shaping a new politics of inclusion that  invites 
all to contribute to the ongoing narrative.  
It is something that will certainly shape the U.S. political narrative this 
 campaign season, and it won’t be the first time. In 2008, 
then-presidential  candidate, Barack Obama, provided a textbook example of how 
to use online 
 tools to rally supporters, raise money, and convey his positions.  
Four years later, the _President’s  campaign_ 
(http://mashable.com/2012/03/22/obama-online-visits/)  is undoubtedly becoming 
even more proficient at 
using the web to  mobilize its millions of supporters and to engage in 
old-school grassroots  campaigning, providing another example of the Internet 
fusing the old and  new. 
But candidates will not be the only ones relying on the web to create  ch
ange; citizens will too. The public is no longer content to sit and watch  
what is happening. Instead, they will continue to use the Internet to learn  
more about positions, question candidates, and become far more involved in  
issues that affect their lives. 
This is the essence of digital populism and the new politics of inclusion.  
It makes sense because personal empowerment is what we have wanted since 
the  dawn of time. Call it human nature. 




-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community  
<[email protected]>
Google Group: _http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism_ 
(http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism) 
Radical  Centrism website and blog: _http://RadicalCentrism.org_ 
(http://radicalcentrism.org/) 



-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to