« A Third Way for Democrats | Main | Two Cheers for Apple »

May 12, 2006

Ah, Nuance

As we all know, the Democratic party is the party of nuance and thorough understanding of the issues, as opposed to the Republicans who are just troglodytes who can barely understand polysyllabic words. Matt Yglesias provides a marvelous example of this in a discussion of the controversial NSA phone logging issue when he explains that "nobody with a single shred of honesty or basic human dignity would be working for George W. Bush at this point".

Wow. The nuance and careful parsing of that statement floors me. A simpler man might have been tempted to assume that the world is a more complex place, but Yglesias' understanding of the real truth demonstrates his mental acumen and dizzying brilliance like a beacon unto the rest of us beknighted souls.

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I envy people like Yglesias, for whom the world is oh-so-very simple. Republicans? Bad. Democrats? Good. No need for thinking or analyzing anything when you have access to such truths. Nor is there any requirement to engage those who disagree with you, since they're lacking in honesty and basic human dignity. Indeed, when facing such paragons of venality and evil, you're freed of any moral strictures on your own actions, since how can you be wrong when you're fighting such evil?

I'm exaggerating, of course. I'm such Yglesias considers himself a guy who's up on all the nuances and who has come to this conclusion based strictly on the facts. But however he's reached his conclusion, it leaves one thing clear: there's no room for compromise or debate. And there are things that shouldn't be up for debate, make no mistake. But the blogosphere and debate in general seem to place entirely too many issues into that category. And that matters, because it eliminates all too many chances for discussion. When one side treats you as Yglesias does the Bush administration, it doesn't convince people on the other side to come to your side. It instead tends to make them dig in their heels and fight against any compromise of their own; that's simple human nature. Commentary like Yglesias' may thrill the base, but it doesn't do a damn thing to resolve any questions.

Maybe that's the point. Maybe Yglesias doesn't care about convincing people, only of whipping the Democratic base into a frenzy in anticipation of high turnout pushing Congress into the Democrats' hands. I suppose that's a technique, and perhaps it will even work. But if that is the goal, it's a shame, because Yglesias' post raises a damn good point that deserves reasoned discussion, discussion that his snide remarks are likely to short-circuit.