Day: January 17, 2003

I’ve been thinking about musings below on fostering dialogue across the pro- and anti- sides of the Iraq debate. In the words of Xander Harris: “I think I’m having a thought. Yes, it’s definitely a thought… no, wait: now I’m having a plan!”
Here’s the idea:
– Have two blogs, one each for the pro- and anti- side, set up as points of coordination for planning a cross blog debate.
– On each coordination blog, solicit input from any & all who are interested to create a list of questions (let’s say, five of them) for the opposite side of the debate to answer. Example: the pro- side might pose the following question to the anti-side: “What, specifically, would U.N. inspectors need to find in Iraq for you to support military action against Saddam Hussein’s regime?”, while the anti-side might in turn ask “Is there any possible result of the current inspections that would convince you to oppose military action against Iraq?”
– Narrow down the list of submitted questions however you like; democratic vote or by fiat by the coordination blogger; whatever.
– Once the lists of questions are finalized, open season begins: anyone who is interested in joining the debate can simply go ahead and post their responses to the appropriate set of questions on their own blog.
– Finally, the coordination blogs can post a roundup of all the various responses to the debate so folks can browse through them all. From there, I think the process becomes natural: the responses will themselves breed counter-responses, and so on.
Thoughts? Suggestions? Interest? If you think this is a worthwhile endeavor, and would be willing to participate, please drop a “yeah” into the Comments section.

Odd moment of the day: submitting a resume to IBM’s website (yes, still unemployed — yes, still looking for help with that) and being asked:
“How did you hear about us?”
Er, by not being asleep for the past thirty years?

From recent AP story on the inspections game, a choice quote from Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency:
War “is the worst case scenario,” ElBaradei said. “If we can avoid that, even spending a few more months to complete our job, that is time well spent.”
No, you jackass. War now is a far, far cry from the worst case scenario, and if you haven’t learned that in the past two years, then there’s just no helping you.
PS – You’re the head of the frickin’ IAEA, do I need to draw you a picture?

Jonah over at Corner drew my attention to www.notinourname.net , which is exactly what it sounds like.
I share his general reaction (“I feel the need to smash their guitar against the wall of the Delta House.”) But I wonder if there isn’t more that could be done to counteract the drivel of half-witted slogans and rhymes that ooze out of the allegedly anti-war movement these days.
Any community of like-minded folks can become an echo-chamber, and that’s a danger which our part of the weblog world (call it the “anti-idiotarian side”; the “warbloggers”, whatever) certainly faces. One risk of this trap is that we fail to listen to arguments from outside the tribe that disagree with our generally held views. But another danger is that we fail to reach out beyond our traditional borders to audiences that don’t already agree with us.
I suppose what I’m saying is, perhaps we need a little less preaching to the choir, and a little more evangelizing.
So what can we do to better spread our gospel ?
First, didn’t somebody in the Blogosphere call for a “In Our Name” campaign a ways back to counteract the “Not in Our Name” crowd? It might be time to revive that idea. (And if anyone remembers who did it, please, speak up: I’d like to give credit where credit is due here). Personally, I’d like to see a nice web-button that could be placed on a weblog or other web page to show support for the war to liberate Iraq. (I generally have a rule on TTLB: no buttons. But I’d make an exception in this case).
Second, why not confront these folks head on? Challenge them to an online debate — they pick a few of their best essayists, we pick a few of ours. Figure out an appropriate format, and have at you! And of course, make sure that the results get prominent play across the Blogosphere and real media — and we know enough to know which folks in Big Media would listen without slanting the coverage.
Third, who is covering the rally in D.C. this weekend? I know what the the Stand Down contingent of the Blogosphere is up to. But what about coverage of the demonstrations from the more, shall we say, skeptical side? Volunteers? (I’m in California; don’t look at me.)
Other ideas for ways to reach out beyond our traditional audiences are welcome. You know where the comment button is…