The super-blog launches!
After months of writing, planning, scheming, discussions, meetings, headaches and much more, the super-blog is born. I’d warned you folks about this a while back remember?
Today, the Liberal Conspiracy starts spreading.
Do check it out and add it to your bookmarks / blogfeeds etc (please?). Of course I’ll still carry on with Pickled Politics - I have about 50 people contributing to that so they won’t need me as much. But it’s definitely very exciting for me.
I’ll be on BBC Radio 4’s PM programme in the afternoon discussing it. An article in the Guardian newspaper should be published later this week.
Sunny,
I knew you had something bubbling under, but I am frankly astonished at the quality of the contributors.
Your good self, Unity, Conor Foley, Justin McKeating and Dave Hill all in the same place! That is quite an achievement, congratulations. Which is not to belittle the contributors I haven’t read yet, it is simply that these names ring my bell.
Can I assume that your primary outlet will now be Liberal Conspiracy rather than CiF?
One small point. I’d have preferred the comments policy to have argued that comments should be evidence based, rather than just assuming that the only lunatics in the blogosphere are on the right, viz:
What if your writer is just wrong? Freedom of speech should go both ways, I think.
Stll, an’ all, this is excellent news.
I don’t like the sound of “unwanted commenters”.
Does that mean people who disagree?
Yeh. Sounds a bit like Kos already! The sign of a loony site is where comments are regularly deleted. Such as Kos/Leninology.
Freedom of speech? Sure! As long as you dont disagree! All sounds a bit totalitarian…
Perhaps it will be a refuge for all those poor (diddums) CiF commenters who hate it when the comments go against them.
I agree that a little abuse goes a long way, but like chilli, things can get pretty dull with none!
“We are not obliged to provide space to right-wing loonies to abuse others or throw vitriol at writers.”
Left-wing loonies welcome, though??!
Good luck anyway. Looking forward to seeing how it develops.
ChrisC,
Yup.
This seems to me to be the main problem with running an open forum blog. There are, or ought to be, clear rules of engagement, such as no ‘ad hominem’ attacks, no trolling for a fight, etc, etc. No reasonable person would dispute that.
If it is a given that blogging is about engagement, then allowing comments by even libertarians, ffs, is worthwhile, on the grounds that for every libertarian writing a comment, there are hundreds of folk that read the exchange and can make their own minds up, as to who won, who lost
ChrisC,
Re 4
If they sign up Madeleine Bunting, I’m out!
Still, the folk that have signed up are not scared to defend their points of view in their own ‘comments’. Which is, frankly, what makes them great bloggers. Or genuine bloggers, rather than dead tree journalists with an odd attitude to criticism.
It is not limited to protectionism on the right. There is, at least one, putatatively left wing blogger who doesn’t allow comments.
like the idea..not so in love with the name of the blog though..not sure if i’m a liberal/centre left…anyway, I hope to see some lively debate and questioning…
The site looks wicked! Well done to Robert and Sunny for that.:) A initiative like this is long over due, long may it last and I hope it has the impact on our society it intends.
I’m with Doug on the whole evidence based thing, I think for LC to raise the bar evidence for unconventional or unfamiliar information is a must; no more of this ‘yeah we know Muslims/gays/people rightwingers hate are like this or think that’ without a source link to a study or poll.
how about carrying out some research of it’s own…?? now that would be interesting
Just noticed that Daniel Davies is on the list too. Would this be the same Daniel Davies that has multiple nominations for the best web post ever? I particularily liked this one:
http://d-squareddigest.blogspot.com/2004/05/d-squared-digest-one-minute-mba.html
Bloody excellent it is too. Which also solves a minor question I’ve always had: is D Squared, Daniel Davies, or not? Seems he is.
This just gets better and better.
Yes - that is Daniel Davies aka the socialist stockbroker.
Couldn’t agree more. That’s a big deficit in the new media political world in which we exist. Hopefully bringing bloggers, think tanks and academics together will inspire more work in that area. Any credible campaign must have a strong intellectual foundation based on fact.
The excellent Chris Dillow may set a few cats amongst the liberal pigeons.
Here he is on education spending:
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2007/11/education-spend.html
Money quote:
“So, could it be that there’s a tight limit to what the state can do to increase equality of opportunity?”
I think he describes himself as a left libertarian!
Would this be the same Daniel Davies that has multiple nominations for the best web post ever?
Multiple nominations for biggest web tosser, more like.
Couple of things:
1) This will rapidly turn into a leftist circle-jerk just like Kos is.
2) “A man cannot serve two masters”. LC or PP, Sunny, which is it?
3) If the tone of the website will be set by the opening post by “Dave Hill” (which is a typical Nu-Labour puff-piece full of lies, exaggeration, spin, utter drivel…meh, I could go on and on), then frankly, you’re achieved a depth of parody already that is frankly unsurpassable. Oh wait, you were attempting to be serious?
So yeah, go and play in your little liberal sandbox where you can convince yourself of the unconvincable by simply repeating it ad-nauseum to yourselves. It won’t change reality though.
Looks good.
I also agree about ‘unwanted commenters’ and the assumption that they will be ‘right-wing nutters!’ ther are a lot of nutters of every shade and description. And to be fair, it was the “nutters” who made the original Guardian blogs -actually quite an interesting place. the fact is ‘trolls’ exist and I would rather know what it is they are on about, than just ’shushing’ them.
Though I am particularily scathing of it, I do wish you the best of luck with it. However, it will be doomed to failure whilst Labour is in power. There’s nothing like opposition to enrouse the righteous anger necessary for blogging.
And people can ignore them if they want, they don’t actually derail discussions. ( and if the discussion was going to be derailed, then so be it. you can have plenty of discussions on the net, we’re hardly running out of steam or discussions) i don’t understand why we have to have this ‘control’ thing in the blogosphere as well.
The problem is, with so many contributors all on a ‘leftist’ tip, some more extreme than others, and policy of deleting comments that they take issue with. It only take one or two hypersensitive types. Could be a real shame. Far-leftists often delete anyone to the right of Ken Livingstone…
Morgoth will you be commenting on LC?
Good luck Sunny.
Beware of turning into a miserable, staid site.
From the site:
Surely this is centralisation, rather than de-centralisation.
All this talk about consensus and stopping infighting is dangerous (for the left) too. Ideas benefit from being constantly challenged. Without this, you would all still believe in nationalisation and Stalin. Without the challenging of old orthordoxies on the left, the environmental movement would never have arisen.
Will the deletions be “open” like the CiF “deleted by moderator” entries?
Morgoth @ 14,
Err, no. Daniel Davies is quite excellent and Dave Hill is always worth a read. What he says about 2007 -v- 1967 is completely valid.
It could be argued that, despite being nominally ‘in power’, Liberal Conspiracists have never been so far removed from it.
OK, maybe that is a slight exaggeration, but no more so than your own. I’d forgotten about the blessed Margaret, who must have been conjoured up from the inner circles of Hell, just to annoy me.
Well, left-wing nutters will be deleted along with right-wing utters. You’ll notice that none of the usual socialists or SWP crew are involved.
I’m sure we’ll have plenty of fun without having to deal with silly comments all the time.
As for where my writing will be concentrated…. well I’m junking some earlier projects and focusing more on PP, LC and CIF.
The abuse has already started - though (predictably perhaps) from the bloggers!
Dave Hill apparently believes that anyone who disagrees with him must be “seething with bitterness” and a “bad loser”…
Morgoth will you be commenting on LC?
Probably not.
Then again, I don’t comment on ConservativeHome either.
I’ve cut back my commenting on blogs primarily because its boring as heck - going over the same argument time and time again isn’t fun. The red mist/righteous anger that used to descent whenever some muppet made a comment that would force me to respond is fading.
The only blogs I currently comment on are this one, Harry’s Place and A Tangled Web, and its mainly force of habit or boredom that makes me come visit (that and the fact that I’ve been reading/interacting with the same people for so long now that they’re almost considered “friends”). I do read NRO Corner, LGF, Right-Thinking and WoWInsider, but apart from that, blogging and teh internets is fundamentality unexciting.
To be honest, when was the last time anyone changed their minds because of what was written on a blog? Can anyone honestly raise their hand and say “yes, I’ve changed my mind”?*
I’ll keep writing my own blog, primarily because it is a bit of a creative outlet for things I think that need to be said, but apart from that, ennui is winning. The only time I think I’ll be commenting on LC is if they touch upon my real specialist subjects (Supernova Remnants mainly) but apart from that, meh. Even if it means that Grade A Halfwit Daniel Davies goes unchallenged on some points, so be it. I can live with that nowadays. At the end of the day, blogging is meaningless verbiage at best and verbal masturbation at worst, innit?
Sunny, BTW, I do applaud your partial retreat from collectivist, identity-label politics incidentally.
*I can actually. The postings on Harry’s Place about Iraqi Trade Unions made me realise that, although they are frankly, practically scum of the earth (don’t get me started on Bob Crowe etc), some (small) amount of Unionisation is necessary for a civil society to function in certain locales.
Dave Hill apparently believes that anyone who disagrees with him must be “seething with bitterness” and a “bad loser”…
He should be more honest and just call people who disagree with him various anglo-saxon aphorisms on female genitalia.
banning sarcasm?
And what’s the policy re your Kismet Hardy’s of this world who.. well.. often just muck about, albeit entertaingly?
Maybe we should call it “Big Blogger” rather than super-blog — or does that risk deletion
and is there a policy on poor spelling and grammer mi bloggerisimo?
entertainingly… hardies…
Morgoth,
Supernova Remnants? Really?
Now that is interesting.
good luck. i hope LC does justice to all the work you expended on it. i’ll reserve judgement until ive read some articles..but love the conspiracy tag. i’m with morgoth (surprise in itself) on whether blogs influence thinking or any change..i.e the bigger picture.
although..needless to say, while the lefties unite via LC, the right will too..against it.
Douglas, I’m the author of Supernovae, Supernova Remnants, and Young Earth Creationism FAQ over at TalkOrigins.
From the site: The goal is to bring about a Britain that is freer, fairer and therefore happier for more of those living here than it is now.
Sunny, this is excellent and long overdue. My only concern would be that just debating on the web and nothing else can sometimes make us armchair in- activists (bloggers of the world unite?). This allows SWPers, islamists, BNP and other nutters to fill the vacuum on the street. Surely we are about ACTION & CHANGE, not just a talking shop. Sunny, how about getting one of your Guardian mates to sponsor a conference to push this liberal-left agenda so it goes wider than just the blog community?
I-thang-you…
It goes without saying I don’t have a bad word to say about any of the writers I’ve recruited on LC.
It goes without saying I don’t have a bad word to say about any of the writers I’ve recruited on LC.
Until the first row erupts, and then the sectariana will start.
Parvinder,
Well, no. 2 of our mission statements is all about action
I have to agree with Douglas, evidence is key.
j0nz, did you get that?
Also another thing that would help, is that threads are not closed, unless absolutely necessary.
In general jousting in a thread is a part of the debate; trying to establish peoples credentials is a part of the game and thread left hanging can lead to dissatisfaction.
Morgoth @ 33,
Excellent article you did there. And I didn’t expect to ever write that
Should be required reading for the literalists.
32, the right will unite against it,
seeing as they seem to be seting themselves up to mirror the current polarity that exists, i suppose so too.
hopefully, there would be some room for actual collaboration rather than setting up boundaries, but hey. that would be expecting too much from the online medium now wouldn’t it - expecting it to be able to allow us to get past our existing barriers and boxes, if we want to perpetuate such dichotomies, what is the medium to do about it?
“hopefully, there would be some room for actual collaboration rather than setting up boundaries”
Sonia, this has already happened in the form of New Labour. Labour is the natural party of the middle classes, and the Tories are the pressure group.
That’s a really good way of characterising it Refresh…
Leon, I’ve long believed this to be the New Labour project. It would have been all done and dusted had it not been for Blair’s wars.
“Labour is the natural party of the middle classes”
Eh? I think not!
(posting from someone’s office)
There is a grey area to be treaded of course but there’s no argument over the fact that I have no tolerance for stupid, silly, abusive, sarcastic etc comments. There’s no intellectual reason why I should tolerate such rubbish.
Will we then become a bunc of lefties not being able to agree on anything, or a Stalinist organisation dictating a party line where everyone has to agree?
The answer is neither. I don’t dictate any party lines but neither do I want it to be a venture where the left fights with the far-left and forgets that the main ideas that need to be challenged are on the right.
Interesting Sunny, you have greater quibble with conservatives rather than far-left who often come across as anti-semitic, who support vile totalitarian regimes, and support terrorist action for the ‘revolution’ (change of the current regime ‘by any means necessary’)
Though I am intrigued as to what ideas need to be challenged on the right.1
Sunny:
Good performance on the PM programme. You were articulate and sounded relaxed.
If anyone missed it you can listen to it here:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/ipm/
The second clip is Guido. It’s interesting too.
Oh dear.
Are you really saying that you have more in common with the far left than the mainstream right?
More in common with, I don’t know, George Galloway than with David Cameron?
Not so much Liberal Left as Liberal (font
LEFT (font 32)?
Surely not?!
Oops I mean to say liberal (tiny font) LEFT (big font)!
I think the rejoinder at the end put it perfectly: why bother having leftist blogs when the left has the BBC.
Morgoth #33,
Good article.
Heard the PM thing on the way back from work - good work. Am surprised Eddie Mair was so nice to you Sunny. He is on record as saying that bloggers do not deserve airspace on the BBC - if you don’t believe me see
http://www.labourhome.org/story/2007/11/2/95552/7246
[...] an eye on LiberalConspiracy.org - the new ‘liberal-left‘ ‘hub‘/’super-blog‘ launched today by pickled politician Sunny Hundal. It sets out to be a ‘political [...]
Which ones?
Good luck with your new project Sunny.
TFI
Perhaps people have an interesting idea of collaboration - it seems to be the same old one, you come to us. Otherwise its not collaboration! Yes it will be interesting to have one site that draws together different bloggers, its an extra offer. but its hardly as if by people not going to that site, they are not collaborating. The vision i want - is for collaboration between individuals - not just collaboration within a wider, central group. I’m not saying participating within the wider group detracts - however, it is important to realise that it is the networking of individuals that is significant, not the ‘group’ formation per se.
that’s what i find interesting about the net.
good points from Rumbold
and ‘defined’ groups end up constraining individuals, as we all know! or they try and define them to a certain extent. perhaps that’s not a problem for some people, but it is for me, im not at all easily defined
Earth Satelite…
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article, but it sounds interesting…