Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: "Greenwald is an advocate, not a journalist" This is important to remember. [View all]Maedhros
(10,007 posts)152. The LIbertarian Conspiracy Theory falls apart.
Greenwald is not a Libertarian:
http://ggsidedocs.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/frequently-told-lies-ftls.html
Ever since I began writing about politics back in 2005, people have tried to apply pretty much every political label to me. It's almost always a shorthand method to discredit someone without having to engage the substance of their arguments. It's the classic ad hominem fallacy: you don't need to listen to or deal with his arguments because he's an X.
Back then - when I was writing every day to criticize the Bush administration - Bush followers tried to apply the label "far leftist" to me. Now that I spend most of my energy writing critically about the Obama administration, Obama followers try to claim I'm a "right-wing libertarian".
These labels are hard to refute primarily because they've become impoverished of any meaning. They're just mindless slurs used to try to discredit one's political adversaries. Most of the people who hurl the "libertarian" label at me have no idea what the term even means. Ask anyone who makes this claim to identify the views I've expressed - with links and quotes - that constitute libertarianism.
I don't really care what labels get applied to me. But - beyond the anti-war and pro-civil-liberties writing I do on a daily basis - here are views I've publicly advocated. Decide for yourself if the "libertarian" label applies:
* opposing all cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (here and here);
* repeatedly calling for the prosecution of Wall Street (here, here and here);
* advocating for robust public financing to eliminate the domination by the rich in political campaigns, writing: "corporate influence over our political process is easily one of the top sicknesses afflicting our political culture" (here and here);
* condemning income and wealth inequality as the by-product of corruption (here and here);
* attacking oligarchs - led by the Koch Brothers - for self-pitying complaints about the government and criticizing policies that favor the rich at the expense of ordinary Americans (here);
* arguing in favor of a public option for health care reform (repeatedly);
* criticizing the appointment of too many Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street officials to positions of power (here, here and here);
* repeatedly condemning the influence of corporate factions in public policy making (here and here);
* praising and defending the Occupy Wall Street movement as early and vocally as anyone (here, here and here)
* using my blog to raise substantial money for the campaigns of Russ Feingold and left-wing/anti-war Democrats Normon Solomon, Franke Wilmer and Cecil Bothwell, and defending Dennis Kucinich from Democratic Party attacks;
* co-founding a new group along with Daniel Ellsberg, Laura Poitras, John Cusack, Xeni Jardin, JP Barlow and others to protect press freedom and independent journalism (see the New York Times report on this here);
* co-founding and working extensively on a PAC to work with labor unions and liberal advocacy groups to recruit progressive primary challengers to conservative Democratic incumbents (see the New York Times report on this here);
To apply a "right-wing libertarian" label to someone with those views and that activism is patently idiotic. Just ask any actual libertarian whether those views are compatible with being a libertarian. Or just read this October, 2012 post - written on Volokh, a libertarian blog - entitled "Glenn Greenwald, Man of the Left", which claims I harbor "left-wing views on economic policy" and am "a run-of-the-mill left-winger of the sort who can be heard 24/7 on the likes of Pacifica radio" because of my opposition to cuts in Social Security and Medicare.
There is no doubt that I share many views with actual libertarians, including: opposition to a massive surveillance state, support for marriage equality for LGBT citizens, restraints on government power to imprison or kill people without due process, opposition to the death penalty and the generally oppressive US penal state, contempt for the sadistic and racist drug war, disgust toward corporatism and crony capitalism, and opposition to aggressive wars and the ability of presidents to wage them without Congressional authority. It's also true that I supported the Citizens United decision on free speech grounds: along with people like the ACLU and Eliot Spitzer (the only politician to put real fear in the heart of Wall Street executives in the last decade and probably the politician most hated by actual libertarians).
Liberals and libertarians share the same views on many issues, particularly involving war, civil liberties, penal policies, and government abuse of power. That is why people like Alan Grayson and Dennis Kucinich worked so closely with Ron Paul to Audit the Fed and restore civil liberties.
But "libertarianism" has an actual meaning: it's not just a slur to mean: anyone who criticizes President Obama but disagrees with Rush Limbaugh. Anyone who applies this label to me in light of my actual views and work is either very ignorant or very dishonest - or, most likely, both.
Back then - when I was writing every day to criticize the Bush administration - Bush followers tried to apply the label "far leftist" to me. Now that I spend most of my energy writing critically about the Obama administration, Obama followers try to claim I'm a "right-wing libertarian".
These labels are hard to refute primarily because they've become impoverished of any meaning. They're just mindless slurs used to try to discredit one's political adversaries. Most of the people who hurl the "libertarian" label at me have no idea what the term even means. Ask anyone who makes this claim to identify the views I've expressed - with links and quotes - that constitute libertarianism.
I don't really care what labels get applied to me. But - beyond the anti-war and pro-civil-liberties writing I do on a daily basis - here are views I've publicly advocated. Decide for yourself if the "libertarian" label applies:
* opposing all cuts to Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid (here and here);
* repeatedly calling for the prosecution of Wall Street (here, here and here);
* advocating for robust public financing to eliminate the domination by the rich in political campaigns, writing: "corporate influence over our political process is easily one of the top sicknesses afflicting our political culture" (here and here);
* condemning income and wealth inequality as the by-product of corruption (here and here);
* attacking oligarchs - led by the Koch Brothers - for self-pitying complaints about the government and criticizing policies that favor the rich at the expense of ordinary Americans (here);
* arguing in favor of a public option for health care reform (repeatedly);
* criticizing the appointment of too many Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street officials to positions of power (here, here and here);
* repeatedly condemning the influence of corporate factions in public policy making (here and here);
* praising and defending the Occupy Wall Street movement as early and vocally as anyone (here, here and here)
* using my blog to raise substantial money for the campaigns of Russ Feingold and left-wing/anti-war Democrats Normon Solomon, Franke Wilmer and Cecil Bothwell, and defending Dennis Kucinich from Democratic Party attacks;
* co-founding a new group along with Daniel Ellsberg, Laura Poitras, John Cusack, Xeni Jardin, JP Barlow and others to protect press freedom and independent journalism (see the New York Times report on this here);
* co-founding and working extensively on a PAC to work with labor unions and liberal advocacy groups to recruit progressive primary challengers to conservative Democratic incumbents (see the New York Times report on this here);
To apply a "right-wing libertarian" label to someone with those views and that activism is patently idiotic. Just ask any actual libertarian whether those views are compatible with being a libertarian. Or just read this October, 2012 post - written on Volokh, a libertarian blog - entitled "Glenn Greenwald, Man of the Left", which claims I harbor "left-wing views on economic policy" and am "a run-of-the-mill left-winger of the sort who can be heard 24/7 on the likes of Pacifica radio" because of my opposition to cuts in Social Security and Medicare.
There is no doubt that I share many views with actual libertarians, including: opposition to a massive surveillance state, support for marriage equality for LGBT citizens, restraints on government power to imprison or kill people without due process, opposition to the death penalty and the generally oppressive US penal state, contempt for the sadistic and racist drug war, disgust toward corporatism and crony capitalism, and opposition to aggressive wars and the ability of presidents to wage them without Congressional authority. It's also true that I supported the Citizens United decision on free speech grounds: along with people like the ACLU and Eliot Spitzer (the only politician to put real fear in the heart of Wall Street executives in the last decade and probably the politician most hated by actual libertarians).
Liberals and libertarians share the same views on many issues, particularly involving war, civil liberties, penal policies, and government abuse of power. That is why people like Alan Grayson and Dennis Kucinich worked so closely with Ron Paul to Audit the Fed and restore civil liberties.
But "libertarianism" has an actual meaning: it's not just a slur to mean: anyone who criticizes President Obama but disagrees with Rush Limbaugh. Anyone who applies this label to me in light of my actual views and work is either very ignorant or very dishonest - or, most likely, both.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
172 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
"Greenwald is an advocate, not a journalist" This is important to remember. [View all]
Catherina
Jun 2013
OP
I love that Glenn is rattling the party sycophants and the big media tools in one fell swoop
Maven
Jun 2013
#2
Does Greenwald *really* want to open up the Iraq can of worms, given what he was doing in 2003?
Recursion
Jun 2013
#4
Probably 55. But one doesn't ( I don't) expect as much from Hillary. For obvious reasons. n/t
Smarmie Doofus
Jun 2013
#74
How old was Hillary? And has she had the courage to admit how wrong she was as Greenwald did
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#125
Actually, I agree. It is somewhat disconcerting that he didn't oppose Iraq from the get-go...
Smarmie Doofus
Jun 2013
#133
That's what I thought, but figured I might have missed something. Thanks. n/t
cui bono
Jun 2013
#130
The President has not only confirmed 'Snowden's lies' but has explained them.
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#142
I cannot help but notice a very particular tone to the comments of those in opposition to your
MADem
Jun 2013
#171
The "evolving view" isn't his problem. It's the "high horse" that gives him deserved trouble. nt
MADem
Jun 2013
#119
I don't think someone who lives in the public eye can be an asshole on twitter--or anywhere else--
MADem
Jun 2013
#138
How can one quote a small portion of the preface to "How Would A Patriot Act"
Maedhros
Jun 2013
#140
Good grief, and I ask this question quite sincerely--are you dull of comprehension, or are you
MADem
Jun 2013
#146
Well, to return to my Whitey Bulger analogy, just because Whitey tells you that he was
MADem
Jun 2013
#167
What was he doing? He was a private citizen. He hadn't written a book, he hadn't appeared on TV &
Luminous Animal
Jun 2013
#63
Yes, why wouldn't he? He was one of the few people who initially supported Bush's war who when
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#116
To the conservative mind, all whistle blowers are criminals. All challenges to authoritarian leader
rhett o rick
Jun 2013
#6
To the racist mind, all Black men are niggers. And they should be challenged every time . . .
Major Hogwash
Jun 2013
#11
You used the N word OMG! Scream raaaaaaaaaaaaaaaacism!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
xtraxritical
Jun 2013
#24
I don't understand what your comment has to do with what the person you are responding to said. n/t
totodeinhere
Jun 2013
#33
BINGO. This whole "what side are you on" debate comes down to people who...
NoodleyAppendage
Jun 2013
#89
Well said,. the victims behave sadly like victims, looking for an oppressor.
Civilization2
Jun 2013
#98
Authoritarians come in every political flavor in the spectrum. I think it's a reflection of
patrice
Jun 2013
#156
"Yellow journalism" is what it used to be called. *That's* what he really does.
baldguy
Jun 2013
#60
Gregary? You are being kind. He is a dancing partner of Karl Rove, accurately described
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#114
Well, you are free to show me where I am wrong. Absent that, I assume you agree. It would be
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#121
News is what somebody somewhere wants to suppress; all the rest is advertising. - Lord Northcliffe
Tierra_y_Libertad
Jun 2013
#12
Twitter, not tweeter old man. And what you typed up is NOT what was in the exchange
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#55
This is bizarre-- I've been repeatedly asked/ordered by BOGers to put them on ignore, too.
Marr
Jun 2013
#106
I know, me too. I guess the ignore button is hard to find or something. And the old 'stalking'
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#123
Okay, since you're calling it a tweeter account I guess that you don't realize
cui bono
Jun 2013
#94
He pointed out a fact, unless you forgot the news media participation in the push for Bush's
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#120
Your whole theory that folks need to silently get kicked in the nuts to show they are sincre
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#53
I thought I told you to stop presuming to order me about. This is a discussion board if you
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#64
it's a discussion board, to discuss issues. You can keep your orders and your words about
Bluenorthwest
Jun 2013
#79
It wasn't Greenwald who made it about Greenwald. It's everyone casting aspersions at Greenwald
dorkulon
Jun 2013
#132
I think it's funny when the Obama blind defenders morph into bush defenders. Classic!
morningfog
Jun 2013
#92
The better question is "Why did so many of our politicians pretend not to know this?"
Catherina
Jun 2013
#69
Just because he's not doing the aluminum tube thing doesn't mean he isn't doing its equivalent
patrice
Jun 2013
#78
I don't doubt that what ES says is true. My comparison is about how the information is being used,
patrice
Jun 2013
#150
He's helping Snowden who is a Ron Paul devotee, but I do stand corrected as to his personal views.nt
patrice
Jun 2013
#154
Hillary believed in the aluminum tubes also and used that as a basis to vote for the Iraq war
Fumesucker
Jun 2013
#87
You (and others) have seized upon one passage from "How Would A Patriot Act?"
Maedhros
Jun 2013
#118
I guess you don't qualify as a "journalist" unless you shill for a major corporate media outlet ..
Ganja Ninja
Jun 2013
#99
Snowden is not a whistle blower in the technical sense. He didn't follow the rules in order
SlimJimmy
Jun 2013
#104
When a state's system has broken down, there often is no way a whistleblowers can "follow rules"...
cascadiance
Jun 2013
#115
The problem we have, as I see it, is that the current whistle blower statutes need
SlimJimmy
Jun 2013
#131
What you say is precisely why we need a system of better protection for whistleblowers...
cascadiance
Jun 2013
#135
I generally agree with what you've said, but I particularly liked the part I
SlimJimmy
Jun 2013
#137
Exactly. Looks like he's hearing from the people on his Twitter account. No wonder the MSM has
sabrina 1
Jun 2013
#147