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

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
44. Perhaps Mr. Greenwald can explain it to you:
Wed Oct 16, 2013, 03:34 PM
Oct 2013
http://ggsidedocs.blogspot.com/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.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

I'm not a GG fan mimi85 Oct 2013 #1
it is a signal that honest investigative journalism will survive xiamiam Oct 2013 #3
Absolutely Hutzpa Oct 2013 #8
Omidyar has said straight up this will be a "general" news site, Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #11
Whether he said that or not Hutzpa Oct 2013 #33
"ghetto superstar"? ugh... Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #35
I hope he doesn't use Huffpo as a model Hutzpa Oct 2013 #41
And GG's scam continues. tridim Oct 2013 #2
$250 million down a rat hole. FSogol Oct 2013 #9
It's not a scam, just a partnership that benefits both parties Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #26
What's the difference between a teabagger and a Greenwald hater? last1standing Oct 2013 #4
What's the difference between Greenwald and a Libertarian? randome Oct 2013 #7
One is a human being and the other is an ideology. last1standing Oct 2013 #10
Perhaps Mr. Greenwald can explain it to you: Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #44
"...They're just mindless slurs used to try to discredit one's political adversaries..." Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #46
And worse!? The horror! What could possibly be worse? Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #49
The point of it is as a *journalist*, he's not even supposed to Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #50
Late to this party mimi85 Oct 2013 #51
Love it Hutzpa Oct 2013 #5
What is their business plan? Ad revenues? Subscription to premium Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #6
It is going to be a platform for Libertarian and anti-Democratic party screeds. stevenleser Oct 2013 #12
Go tell that on Fox News. Maybe they'll bite there. leveymg Oct 2013 #14
Nope, I will mention it on my show though. Thanks for the idea. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #16
Would love to hear how that goes Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #24
So far, it seems like a trainwreck. stevenleser Oct 2013 #36
your show? lol..couldn't figure another way to slip that in? xiamiam Oct 2013 #47
Thanks for mentioning it again! nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #48
This message was self-deleted by its author seaglass Oct 2013 #40
Yep. Omidyar is sooooo anti-Democratic that Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #15
All that proves is that Greenwald snowed him. No pun intended. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #17
What an evil genius that Greenwald is! Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #20
Glad you are catching on. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #21
Nope. You'll never draw me into your Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #25
LMAO. You mean reality? It's not as self-serving as fantasy, I'll give you that. stevenleser Oct 2013 #27
Keep going... With your every post you make my point. Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #30
If that's so, I'm glad we're on the same page. nt stevenleser Oct 2013 #31
Kinda like Fox News bahrbearian Oct 2013 #32
LOL, you are like a dog with a bone. Didnt enough people criticize you for this last time? stevenleser Oct 2013 #38
Comments from the BOG don't mean as much as you think. bahrbearian Oct 2013 #45
Same here, but Omidyar does have a pretty good track record on supporting Democrats over Repubs n/t FSogol Oct 2013 #13
Based on what I've read so far, it will be something like Gawker Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #18
If that's all it ends up being... Kind of underwhelming. Pretzel_Warrior Oct 2013 #22
I thought the best model would have been a political/investigative "Grantland" Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #29
Both Pierre and Glenn defend teabaggers like Justin Amash constantly... BluegrassStateBlues Oct 2013 #34
Oh, this should be good...nt SidDithers Oct 2013 #19
Time to shake up the status quo?...I can't wait. Big Money for Media Chaos and Whistleblowers? libdem4life Oct 2013 #23
They aren't "all powerful" Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #39
That is a really interesting development... ljm2002 Oct 2013 #28
Pierre shouldn't gamble anymore than flamingdem Oct 2013 #37
If Greenwald does his thing, Omidyar should at least break even Blue_Tires Oct 2013 #42
He's worth an estimated 8.5 billion Luminous Animal Oct 2013 #43
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Pierre Omidyar Ready To S...»Reply #44