I seldom read Bowers. I find his prose mind-numbingly dull. But with patient reading, there's just arm-loads for the amateur psychologist to plow through. After reading this last, I think he may be coming as unhinged as John McCain. More importantly, this masturbatory essay demonstrates some of the central attitudes I find most disturbing about the trends of the lefty blogosphere.
Firstly, he reiterates his loathsome position on the Edwards campaign, which I addressed here. In short his support of any candidate is contingent on their fealty to the netroots; which he now dresses up in a lot of fancy talk about the power of movements. Positions on issues are secondary at best. Responsiveness to the supporting movements, primary. I could almost get behind this thinking -- the idea that a candidate must be willing to embrace his supporters and be a part of something bigger -- if that's what Bowers meant. He does not, for reasons that lie buried in the very convoluted second graph.
I want to be there at the moment when history happens, when the world changes, when consciousness shifts, and when the people rise up and throw off the shackles of the elite, the status quo, and the comfortable. I have wanted that for a long time. Before that happens, I want to be an active member of the small clique, coterie or circle that identified the possibility for massive change and precipitated its manifestation. [emphasis mine]
Meet the new tyrant. Same as the old tyrant. Bowers takes no joy in the "bottom-up" nature of political movements. His passion is for the inner circle that would pull the strings. No wonder the issues don't matter. It's really all about power.