Grave Choices Ahead for the Netroots

11:30 PM Aug 21, 2005

I'm afraid Friday's post indulged a too-flip conclusion that's worth re-examining.

As is the case with our coterie of progressive philanthropists, it will not do to let the frisson of resistance stand in for an assessment of the terrain.

The netroots has the luxury of opposition status, and opposition to a particularly grotesque junta to boot, which leaves in its wake plenty of blog-fodder and the mirthsome pleasures of watching the right blogosphere defend the First World's very worst chief executive. That's a fine party favor, but it won't long remain tenable to withhold a firm stand on Iraq, and that issue could fracture the Democratic party as easily as -- perhaps more easily than -- the Republican.

The Mess O' Potamia is, in the parlance, worse than a crime, it is a blunder. Plenty of Democrats see reform of the obviously incompetent management at the top as a more palatable solution than withdrawal ... and much of the netroots, though overwhelmingly in favor of withdrawal, is also explicitly committed to Democrats irrespective of ideology and viciously castigates any threat to vote against any Democratic nominee. The 2008 presidential frontrunner, Hillary Clinton, supports escalating the American military presence in Iraq. And there's a lot of hedging on the matter among nonprofits in the Democratic sphere.

Granted, there's plenty of left blogosphere flack for the DLC, Joe Biden and other collaborationist Democrats, but it comes with a distinct flavor of politics stopping at the water's edge. The model of being the shock troops for the remains of the blue party won't hold up to this issue, not if the more hawkish of the 2008 nominees is the Democrat. So there's the test, for the netroots and the grassroots alike: pull troops out of Iraq, and give no politician quarter who stands in the way. It took Nixon to get out of Vietnam. If we're not careful, it'll take Hagel to get out of Iraq.

Add a comment