Don’t Feed the Bloggers!

Should have gone without saying, and have been perfectly obvious to Conor P. Williams before he set out, that a closed-comments post (actually now two posts) against blog-commenting could only be taken as aggravated trolling, or trolling with special circumstances. Williams, in short, does not understand that his post is just another presumably worthless “comment,” only in a different format, otherwise merely an utterly unnecessary and self-defeating explication of the frequently repeated, as dismally self-unaware slogan “Don’t Read Comments!”1 In creating a new post for responses to Williams’ “paradoxical” offering, his colleague Tod Kelly ruined the image of a perfectly ridiculous performance: premonition of the Final Blog Post, by a blogger who, in manufacturing his own appropriately contemptuous refusal of response, trolls himself in two ways at once, achieving absolutely nothing, just like all the rest of us, only more so. In the ensuing unwanted discussion – which would have occurred somewhere else, but more disconnectedly or perhaps more restrictively or privately, as Williams says he prefers – the commenters seemed to sense that they had been, once again, insulted by their blogger, whose theme is an argument against himself through their derogation, but at a self-displacing place like “Ordinary Times,” formerly “The League of Ordinary Gentlemen,” there is no responsibility (possible only within an accountable and transparent, comprehended and reversible system of communication), rather only a deteriorating façade separating ever less from its negation: everything, or anything at all.


  1. …which even has its own self-voiding twitter account []

Home Page  Public Email  Twitter  Facebook  YouTube  Github   

Writing since ancient times, blogging, e-commercing, and site installing-designing-maintaining since 2001; WordPress theme and plugin configuring and developing since 2004 or so; a lifelong freelancer, not associated nor to be associated with any company, publication, party, university, church, or other institution. 

5 comments on “Don’t Feed the Bloggers!

Commenting at CK MacLeod's

We are determined to encourage thoughtful discussion, so please be respectful to others. We also provide a set of Commenting Options - comment/commenter highlighting and ignoring, and commenter archives that you can access by clicking the commenter options button (). Go to our Commenting Guidelines page for more details, including how to report offensive and spam commenting.

    • You DARE to disfigure my beautiful post with your lowly comment?! I suppose you expect me to read and reply to it! I will not, sir, I will not. I have better, more important things to do than to be caught dead in a blog comment thread.

      Never visited Culture 11, and I’m not sure if its archives are still on-line. takes you here: Maybe you can tell me whether it’s fitting.

  1. I know I’m nothing but a lowly muskrat, well Popular Science is doing it, so it’s catchy, he can go completely TimeSelect, and no riffraff will darken his door.

3 Pings/Trackbacks for "Don’t Feed the Bloggers!"
  1. […] commenters seriously, I’m still not a fan of the DRC theme, as I’ve indicated before both on this blog and on […]

  2. […] As we have observed before, all posts – as by further reasonable extension all articles, essays, treatises, books, Facebook updates, multimedia Snapchat ephemera, and retweeted links to images of the more photogenic galaxies – are commentary by other means. [↩] […]

  3. […] As we have observed before, all posts – as by further reasonable extension all articles, essays, treatises, books, Facebook updates, multimedia Snapchat ephemera, and retweeted links to images of the more photogenic galaxies – are commentary by other means. [↩] […]

Commenter Ignore Button by CK's Plug-Ins

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



Noted & Quoted

TV pundits and op-ed writers of every major newspaper epitomize how the Democratic establishment has already reached a consensus: the 2020 nominee must be a centrist, a Joe Biden, Cory Booker or Kamala Harris–type, preferably. They say that Joe Biden should "run because [his] populist image fits the Democrats’ most successful political strategy of the past generation" (David Leonhardt, New York Times), and though Biden "would be far from an ideal president," he "looks most like the person who could beat Trump" (David Ignatius, Washington Post). Likewise, the same elite pundit class is working overtime to torpedo left-Democratic candidates like Sanders.

For someone who was not acquainted with Piketty's paper, the argument for a centrist Democrat might sound compelling. If the country has tilted to the right, should we elect a candidate closer to the middle than the fringe? If the electorate resembles a left-to-right line, and each voter has a bracketed range of acceptability in which they vote, this would make perfect sense. The only problem is that it doesn't work like that, as Piketty shows.

The reason is that nominating centrist Democrats who don't speak to class issues will result in a great swathe of voters simply not voting. Conversely, right-wing candidates who speak to class issues, but who do so by harnessing a false consciousness — i.e. blaming immigrants and minorities for capitalism's ills, rather than capitalists — will win those same voters who would have voted for a more class-conscious left candidate. Piketty calls this a "bifurcated" voting situation, meaning many voters will connect either with far-right xenophobic nationalists or left-egalitarian internationalists, but perhaps nothing in-between.

Comment →

Understanding Trump’s charisma offers important clues to understanding the problems that the Democrats need to address. Most important, the Democratic candidate must convey a sense that he or she will fulfil the promise of 2008: not piecemeal reform but a genuine, full-scale change in America’s way of thinking. It’s also crucial to recognise that, like Britain, America is at a turning point and must go in one direction or another. Finally, the candidate must speak to Americans’ sense of self-respect linked to social justice and inclusion. While Weber’s analysis of charisma arose from the German situation, it has special relevance to the United States of America, the first mass democracy, whose Constitution invented the institution of the presidency as a recognition of the indispensable role that unique individuals play in history.

Comment →

[E]ven Fox didn’t tout Bartiromo’s big scoops on Trump’s legislative agenda, because 10 months into the Trump presidency, nobody is so foolish as to believe that him saying, “We’re doing a big infrastructure bill,” means that the Trump administration is, in fact, doing a big infrastructure bill. The president just mouths off at turns ignorantly and dishonestly, and nobody pays much attention to it unless he says something unusually inflammatory.On some level, it’s a little bit funny. On another level, Puerto Rico is still languishing in the dark without power (and in many cases without safe drinking water) with no end in sight. Trump is less popular at this point in his administration than any previous president despite a generally benign economic climate, and shows no sign of changing course. Perhaps it will all work out for the best, and someday we’ll look back and chuckle about the time when we had a president who didn’t know anything about anything that was happening and could never be counted on to make coherent, factual statements on any subject. But traditionally, we haven’t elected presidents like that — for what have always seemed like pretty good reasons — and the risks of compounding disaster are still very much out there.

Comment →
CK's WP Plugins


Extraordinary Comments

CK's WP Plugins