Stocking the Pond v. 2

Dave Neiwert posted about the cultural tone deafness of some elements in the environmental movement, and linked to Robin Solnit’s story about traveling with activists who stumble into a local country and western joint. The hippy activists asked the DJ to play reggae and basically alienated the very people with whom they needed to make alliances. I related to the post on multiple levels, in part because I’ve gone through a personal journey of originally hating country music to enthusiastically cheering at a George Strait concert. The comment thread was great – par for the course at orcinus – and some used it to comment on the cultural place of country music.

Greogory spoke for many (I assume) when he highlighted the objectionable ideological tone of some popular country and western music: “As for country music, an adverse reaction to it is often has less to do with the music than the mindless jingoism that it has come to represent. Music such as Lee Greenwood’s ‘God Bless the USA,’ for example, has done much to poison the well. It would be foolish to deny that a certain category of country music does not represent a deep strain of anti-intellectualism that has been a feature of american [sic] culture for hundreds of years. It is obvious from my music collection that I genuinely like a lot of country music but when I hear the wailing chorus of ‘Ah’m prowd to be an ‘Murkan, where at least ah know ah’m freeeee..." I just cringe.”

Anyway, I jumped in: “The centrality of country music in the creation of cultural hierarchy is actually supported by sociological research. University of Virginia sociologist Bethany Bryson applied sophisticated statistical analysis to opinion data about music likes and dislikes correlated with social class. One of her findings is that *hatred* of country music is a marker of cultural capital among the middle and upper classes.”

Enlighted Layperson asked a pretty rad question soon thereafter: “Am I the only one here so benighted as to actually like country and western?”

I wrote: "Enlightened Layperson -- I actually like C&W, even mainstream stuff that's far out-of-bounds for hip people. I'm a pretty decent two-stepper and I know several line dances. And yes, I've caught crap from my putatively cool California friends who equate line dancing with goose stepping.”

Then, KamatariSeta: “The only Country I really like is Johnny Cash, and I have plenty of admiration for Willie Nelson for some of his social work and the like, but I think we’re getting a little far from the heart of Dave’s post. . . . I’ve had experiences with rural life and rural people, and they have differed with what Jack and others has described, but I think this may be an anomaly. And yes, working with them is important, but ultimately, we may have to accept that, in some cases, we have to simply forge ahead without them.”

Then, phat shared his experiences: “Being a former so-called hipster, it's not just the environmentalists that suffer from this sort of attitude. Granted I’ve been a ‘hipster’ in an exceptionally unhip place (Lincoln, NE) at least in the eyes of the rest of the world. The coastal and bigger city liberals aren't even especially nice to the liberal allies they might have in the ‘heartland.’ I’ve experienced it firsthand. When people in places like Northampton, MA (where I lived for a while when I was younger) ask if Nebraska is ‘anywhere near California’ that point gets driven home.”

Erik explained his view point: “I couldn’t agree more with the post. My dissertation, to be defended next month, is an environmental history of loggers in the Northwest before WWII. I grew up in a logging family during the spotted owl crisis of the 80s and early 90s. Being environmentally minded, I was torn between both sides. Loggers are today (and were 100 years ago) quite environmentally minded. But they also have to make a living. They change the environment through their work, but that doesn't change their feelings toward it. . . .Also, anyone dismissing country music out of hand clearly has poor taste in music. Or maybe a closed mind. His name is Merle Haggard and you need to go listen to him. Right now.” And Haggard is an especially relevant example considering his turn against the Iraq war in 2005.

I shared one of my youthful country and western experiences: “At my Southern California high school (mid/late ‘80s) they would play the popular pop music radio station at lunch, but if the kids failed to clean up after themselves they would play the country station the following day as punishment. Serious. It happened a dozen or so time during the school year.” KamatariSeta’s “heart of Dave’s post” line and de rigeur Cash reference annoyed me, and so I couldn’t resist taking a swipe. “RE: music – 'The only Country I really like is Johnny Cash' -- Yes, Johnny Cash is the only C&W cool people are allowed to consume. Many voice the Johnny Cash exception. It’s like a law or something.”

Erik backed me up: “Temperance is right about Cash--it's all about the image. Cash is great--but those who set him apart from other country music take him totally out of context and ignore the massive amount of horrible music he put out over the years. Truth be told, only a small percentage of what Cash released is good at all, though what is good is really amazing. But because of the image, it's OK for the cool kids to like him. I think it might be a reasonable counterlaw to say that anyone who says that "The only Country I like is Johnny Cash" doesn't know very much about music. Or at least is willfully ignorant.”

KamatariSeta snapped back, “Well, if it’s any consolation, I don’t try to base what I like on genre to begin with. I’m going to like what I like, and I certainly won’t pose as liking the more ‘unhip’ forms of country just to make a political statement about how I don’t look down on rural life.”

I thought about pointing out how this comment was getting away from the heart of Dave’s post, but Dave seemed more than willing to join the country music conversation (and to knock Cash down a peg). Feeling consoled, I sailed away.

-- temperance

O’Reilly Does TCT

Bill O’Reilly engaged in a galling act of comment trawling recently, and accused Arianna Huffington of Nazism for not moderating her comment threads harder. When Nancy Reagan went into the hospital, a HuffPost commenter wrote “Like her evil husband, she has lived far too long. Here’s hoping she dies in the tub.” That’s the only example O’Reilly had to offer and, from that, he barked “don’t you think Americans should start holding people like Arianna Huffington accountable for this? . . what’s the difference between the Ku Klux Klan and Arianna Huffington? What’s the difference?”

O’Reilly’s stance was so absurd that his guest Mary Katherine Ham, managing editor of ultra-conservative Townhall.com, said, “You're going to – you’re going to make me defend Arianna Huffington!” (MediaMatters has the transcript).

In a follow-up session, O’Reilly dug in. He quoted from a letter by Israel Gopstein, a man who lost several family members in the Holocaust: “the meaning of their deaths means more than a comparison to a meaningless blog.” O’Reilly patiently explained that the Nazis used newspapers and leaflets “ to build up enormous hatred towards your family. Today we’re seeing the same thing on the net here in America, there is no difference.” Israel, you fool! Why can’t you the obvious comparison between commenters and Nazis?

This is a perfect example of comment trawling in the original Drumian sense. An individual used an anonymous blog comment to castigate the blogger. It’s a practice whose effectiveness relies on the audience’s ignorance of blogging, commenting, and moderating, which is why Ham wasn’t willing to play along despite her ideological similarities to O’Reilly. As more and more people involve themselves in internet communities this kind of comment trawling will lose its rhetorical force. More people will realize that the opinions of commenters only represent the opinions of commenters.

This blog is centered on the idea that comment trawling is a valuable practice, but I want to distinguish what I do from the kind of comment trawling that O’Reilly’s Nazi smear represents. And I don’t want to concede the term to the bad guys; I want to reclaim the term. So, I’ve decided that “traditional comment trawling” (TCT) – what O’Reilly engaged in here – should be thought of as separate from comment trawling as I practice on this blog.

-- temperance

Osama loves McCain, Hitler would watch Fox, and other fun facts

One of the conservative movement’s more odious rhetorical practices involves speculating about how our national enemies support Democratic candidates. A Fox News Interactive Poll recently asked “Who does Usama bin Laden want to be the next president?” According to the poll, 30% believe that Osama wants Obama to win. We saw a version of this last year when Deputy Secretary of State Richard L. Armitage – speaking on foreign soil – said that terrorists in Iraq “are trying to influence the election against President Bush.” Dennis “the weasel” Hastert chirped that al Qaeda, “would very much like to defeat President Bush.” Tom Cole (who once compared the privatization of social security to the Civil Rights Act) similarly declared, “If George Bush loses the election, Osama bin Laden wins the election.”

Turn around is fair play, so I want to publicize Dave Neiwert’s highly scientific survey revealing that 9 in 10 people believe that Hitler would watch Fox News as his network of choice.

Likewise, Justin Webb has a piece on the BBC News site titled Al-Qaeda's choice. He writes that Al-Qaeda “want suffering - among others and their own people alike. They would surely surmise that McCain will give them what they want. . . . I think al-Qaeda would back McCain.”

I wondered, how would this argument play in the wingnut-o-sphere?

Weasel Zippers had a fun thread on the matter. The author of the Weasel Zipper post was offended by the BBC item and criticized the BBC’s “insanely hard-left slant.” Many of the commenters agreed.

The conflation of masculinity and anti-Arab eliminationism is not uniquely American, except in the U.K. they use the word “bloody.” Rubin writes, “The Socialist within the BBC are doing their bloody best to bleed every drop of testosterone from the British Culture, and replacing it with the fluff of Homo-Sissy-Hood*. *LOL*” Downstream, keyboard commando Daddy-O tells us to “Fight! Grow balls, toughen that spine, and fight! ...I for one would rather die doing some good for myself and my children, than allowing evil to continue without resistance.” Of course, I appreciated incomplete hellhole’s post pointing out the obvious contradiction in Rubin and Daddy-O’s call to arms: “i am not sure when the land of the free and home of the brave became a country of fat wimps afraid of their own shadows, but somehow it happened. someone explain to me how the chest-thumpers of the right are apparently afraid of every shadow in their bedroom. why don't you hear liberals campaigning on fear? oh, right, because we're not afraid!”

Warpublican review posted the best comment on the thread:

“of course al Qeada wants McCain - the last Warpublican has been unwilling (or unable) to capture him for seven years - and, let's face it, Bush has been the best recruitment tool for buin laden since the State of Israel. The problem with the right wing is that they can’t keep their fear mongering straight - do the Muslims WANT to die for Islam - or not? If they really want peace, then Obama is the man - if they want their seven virgins, then McCain - and his 10,00 year occupation, wins the day...”

-- temperance