at play in the fields of decency
While it’s been fun chronicling the ins and outs of Nick and Dave and their small part in the general business of opinion formation in this land of ours, it’s occurred to some amongst the management here that there’s a hell of a lot of decency out there that’s going unappreciated.
Think, for instance, of our very own Henry Jackson Society, otherwise known as the Jive Bunny Project For a New American Century. And while it’s always fun giving our Nick a back rub, what grounds are there for ignoring his occult master, Paul Berman? Decency has its stars, like Christopher Hitchens, and its Pooters, like Michael Totten. Yes, so much to enjoy.
So it’s time, perhaps, to be indecent in a wider field, maybe with a new name.
To underline our commitment to the universal values of liberal democratic societies, we thought we’d throw the idea open to readers and commenters. In accordance with how those principles worked out in relation to a recent war, we may then ignore what you have to say, but don’t let that stop you. Should we be indecent on a larger scale? To whom should we direct our indecency? And what should we call ourselves while we’re doing it? Let's have some answers.
I quite like gross indecency, or maybe indecent assault. And I can’t see the phrase “the greatest intellectual struggle of our time” without laughing, but maybe that’s better as a tagline rather than a title.
Anyway, chuck your suggestions for names and possible target acquisitions in the comments box.
rioja kid
Think, for instance, of our very own Henry Jackson Society, otherwise known as the Jive Bunny Project For a New American Century. And while it’s always fun giving our Nick a back rub, what grounds are there for ignoring his occult master, Paul Berman? Decency has its stars, like Christopher Hitchens, and its Pooters, like Michael Totten. Yes, so much to enjoy.
So it’s time, perhaps, to be indecent in a wider field, maybe with a new name.
To underline our commitment to the universal values of liberal democratic societies, we thought we’d throw the idea open to readers and commenters. In accordance with how those principles worked out in relation to a recent war, we may then ignore what you have to say, but don’t let that stop you. Should we be indecent on a larger scale? To whom should we direct our indecency? And what should we call ourselves while we’re doing it? Let's have some answers.
I quite like gross indecency, or maybe indecent assault. And I can’t see the phrase “the greatest intellectual struggle of our time” without laughing, but maybe that’s better as a tagline rather than a title.
Anyway, chuck your suggestions for names and possible target acquisitions in the comments box.
rioja kid
posted by The Rioja Kid at 2/03/2006 11:44:00 AM
27 Comments:
Please include that lying tool, Rentoul
Thanks for putting this up RK, and all contributors (current and potential), do please pitch in. I would certainly like to take the odd pitch at John Lloyd from time to time, though the old "will to live" issue probably precludes my watching his stuff on any regular basis.
I like "DecentWatch", but it's maybe too obvious...
"Decent into the Abyss"
Perhaps we could incorporate the phrase cyber chutney arse ducks into the title in some way. Hell, maybe we could just call it that. It's usually exactly the thing that you want to say after you grapple with a bout of decentitis.
John Lloyd...Jesus, yeah.
I think this might be a mistake for a few reasons. First, I think British Decent Leftism is a very different creature from American Decent Leftism, and best to stick to what you know.
Even if you stick to UK people, Aaro and Cohen produce so much stuff that it's not obvious you need to add to your workload.
And finally you risk rather overinflating the importance of other members of the Decent Left. The answer of the vast majority of people, even bloggers, to 'Do you read Norm?', would be 'No. Who is Norm?'. John Lloyd's main moment of fame is in the Ft's weekend magazine, which my newsagent often doesn't even bother to include with the paper. Totten is, well, Totten.
However, if you include Paul Berman, then perhaps you could include the guy who started it all, Michael Waltzer http://www2.kenyon.edu/Depts/Religion/Fac/Adler/Politics/Waltzer.htm. Incidentally in his review of this Oliver Kamm coined (for his blog, and others) the term 'Civilised Left'.
I'm rather with Matthew here. Keeping up with Nick and Dave is quite enough work as it is.
Expanding in a Mel P/Anthony Browne/Pollard direction would take us into full-on loony territory and I rather think that Oliver Kamm is actually of that ilk, despite his pretensions to decency.
HP Sauce and Norm are probably too insignificant to be worth bothering with.
Berman might be worth the odd look, but frankly, I can't be arsed to read his crap.
Disagree with Matthew on Walzer-classification though. I reckon you need to have actually supported the Iraq war to qualify as a decent.
I think you should keep the focus on Nick and Dave while feeling free to refer to notable contributions from elsewhere in the World of Decency from time to time. I also don't think you should waste time on anyone too trivial, so exclude all bloggers who aren't also moderately well-known journalists, unless they've said something particularly ridiculous. So what I'm saying is, just copy and paste everything posted by Marcus at Harry's Place.
unfortunately cyber chutney arse ducks is the name of a real Resonance FM show and they might cut up rough. It is a real shame though.
how about a compromise along the lines of:
1. Adopt the convention that anything and everything Decent is from this day forth on topic if a contributor thinks it's worth commenting on.
2. Not taking on any more regular Watching commitments, as some of the suggested candidates don't half churn it out.
3. Changing the name of the site to "Aaronovitch Watch (incorporating "World of Decency")" - I think we get a fair bit of traffic from the link of Aaro's site.
4. Something else. Probably publicise the blog a bit more so that it gets a bit of prominence in the conversation of Decentism.
I take CC and Matthew's points but I actually rather like this blog and think that it has potential beyond the current niche. Also watching Decency rather than specific journalists would lift the burden of having to find something interesting to say about a lot of the stuff Nick C comes out with which isn't really Watchable.
Sounds reasonable, but I would hate to see the Nick Cohen 'funny Observer bit, and his sub-Richard Littlejohn London rants in the Evening Standard get no coverage. I suspect not only are they very amusing to see written about, but they are probably more important in the transition to Melanie Phillips than you think.
Captain Cabernet raises the important question of whether one can be a Decentist, having opposed the war in Iraq.
Now while I think I agree that Michael Walzer isn't a Decentist, or at least not straightforwardly so, I think it must be for other reasons, as I think that there's one Decentist who did the war: Alan Johnson.
He's involved in so many Decentist projects -- unite-against-terror, Demokratiya, guestposter at Harry's Place, maybe even Labour Friends of Iraq, not sure -- and he's also one of the very few people to use the decent left label about his own politics that I think it'd be perverse to exclude him from the Decent crowd.
But on the wider matter at hand, I agree with the substance of BB's recent comment, at 4.36pm above.
No, the MP Alan Johnson definitely supported the war, and the Decent Alan Johnson opposed it. The thing to note with the Decent position is that it isn't the same as the pro-war position, though it certainly evolved from it; it's more about 'supporting democracy' and 'uniting against terror' than it is about specific opinions held in March 2003. Actually, a history of decentism, or at least a longer explanation of the term, might be a good way to christen the renamed blog...
It's about advocating particular means of 'supporting democracy' and 'uniting against terror', of course (ie, military action, mostly). I would have expanded on that but I was writing the post on a mobile phone. Anyway, the point is that the Decent project has clearly expanded well beyond the Iraq hawks, though they probably still make up most of the membership.
BTW, since expansion beyond the core of DA and NC is the subject of this thread as well as the correct definition of decency, it seems ok to point to this latest post on Normblog by the lamentable Jeff Weintraub. It displays one of the central tropes of decency which is:
"OK, so we may be in the position we're in because of serial fuck-ups by 'our' side, but now we are where we are there's no decent choice but to back 'our' side to the hilt."
The examples in Weintraub are Hamas's election victory and FIS's election victory in Algeria.
Ah, now I get it. Decents only support elections and democracy when they produce the right result. Hence the famous Totten/Dupe argument. "I didn't invade Iraq so they could elect who they damn well liked or whatever."
So the consensus seems to be stick to Nick and Dave, with an additional roving commission towards decents and decentisms that shed more light on the syndrome.
Absolutely concur about avoiding bloggers, btw. Should have put that in the original.
Decentism in general is a bit of a work in progress. Right now it weems to be a matter of style more than anything else. It reminds me a bit of late sixties hippy activism - as though by stating the same principles over and over again, you actually can levitate the Pentagon.
Aaro comes at it from a slightly different angle, in that his mission is to generally show that authority and conventional wisdom is right and that dangers lie in opposing it: ex post decent, rather than ex ante, like Nick.
Maybe you should include John Rentoul, but as every one of his columns can be shortened to 'Gosh, isn't Tony Blair wonderful?' it'd get repetitive after a while.
How about Indecent Proposals?
I also think that the Henry "Scoop" Jackson society have to be on-topic, whether they are bloggers, journalists or something else.
I'm not sure we'll be able properly to take the measure of Decency if we forbid ourselves from considering any websites that Alan Johnson may launch in the future, either.
picking up from fatbongo’s point, perhaps the Vicar of Bray is in fact the intellectual father of Decentism, rather than Paul Berman or Michael Waltzer?
I think the European working hours directive would preclude the posters here from discussing all the websites Alan 'Not the Minister' Johnson launches, though I suppose it doesn't stop you covering some.
I think another competition would be to find a better word that Decentism...
Oh no, Sonic, I like "Decentism."
In Terry Pratchett's Monstrous Regiment there's a cod Biblical story about one of the gods who sends an angel to find a good man in a certain area, and the angel can't find anyone who'll say that he's a good man, so the god blasts everyone. It occurs to him later than good men don't go around telling everyone how good they are -- that's an essential part of goodness. ...
Fair enough, on the wider issue if anyone would like to contribute to my Hitchenswatch site (http://christopherhitchenswatch.blogspot.com/) feel free. It could do with a new angle.
Quite frankly I don't understand a word you chaps are saying half the time. That doesn't mean I don't enjoy it mind you.
Aside from your core function, I don't see why you have to make a commitment to turn your attention onto a target full time. Why can't you take ad-hoc potshots if they poke their heads over the parapet and you get the urge?
if this game is still turned on i wd like to propose something within the ambit of the hitchist lexicon: which is the "SOI-DECENTS"
i thought of it on the bus just now
Post a Comment
<< Home