myself, i think the main problem we have in open source politics is the lack of clear leadership. or rather, not all of us agree on who is/should be/will be "leaders." watching the blogosphere's reaction to Kos' new fame in the SCLM was rather telling. there's a reason why organizing the left is often compared to herding cats.
i'm not really sure how we can address this problem. some people will always look to some open source people, no matter how effective or right they may ultimately prove to be. further, there are still a lot in the blogosphere who enjoy talk and not much else; my take on lots of the panels and confabs at kos includes one opinion that they were as useful and had the same impact as many undergrad BS sessions. talk is cheap, and we do it for free on the internet.
if open source politics is to be the New Way, that's all good for democracy. it's only common sense that americans are truly for the most part "progressives," even if many of them don't know or accept that label. it's also true that the weight of history and habit lie heavy upon us, and without clear leadership, a lot of what we say and do will be little more than preaching to the choir. the failure of open source politics in the netroots to elect all the downballot progressives is my primary example in this.
so my question becomes: how can the open source movement identify leaders, and get people to follow a clear set of instructions? sitemeter popularity alone should be the criteria.
hey there, FN! good to see you over here. nice essay. i was thinking of the fatherless kids i tutored a while back today, and i hope that they are doing well without him, even as i know they're probably not.
i'm an atrios regular, but this was posted in the comments and i'm happy enough to have registered here to comment about it.
please,please, i beg you: continue to post on this subject.
far too many, in the beltway and beyond, believe that cable news is important, relelvant, meaningful, etc., in the lives of "most" americans. as these numbers show, they are not. it's the echo chamber effect, and when we let slip the blinders, we see that for crying out loud! blogs get more readers than Candy Crowfeet or whatever, and no matter how the numbers are crunched, at least we're all text and discourse, where CNN etc are nothing but image and propaganda. which is more effective, in the long term sense?
i could write more on this but it's late for me. but please, keep this alive. this kind of info is important, for all of us.