If anything, the people espousing perspectives from the Right are more likely to believe that they possess the “one catechism worth reading” and preaching (the one with all the answers ) — based on religion, ideology, philosophy, or political science – and therefore are more prone to the type of intolerance that I decry in this posting.

When you see liberals shouting down all discourse, you begin to understand that it’s not just that that they have mistaken beliefs, but that those beliefs have taken on a fervent, religious nature of the kind from centuries ago that allowed for no other opinion.

I was walking through fascist America yesterday, beautiful weather by the way, compared with today, and I noticed the heavy, grey weight on everyone’s faces….

hi, interesting problem, talking about the left in particular and the difference in left/rt reactions politics. I have a longish post on this problem of the breakdown of common discourse here. Unfortunately I don’t offer too many solutions!

Thanks for writing, Evan.   You have shifted the focus from the micro-level of linking or reacting to particular posts on particular issues to the interesting macro-level of the weblog world.  There is no doubt that the web manifests society’s continued fragmentation into information niches, where most people seem to live in an intellectual or political echo-chamber, and seek out opinions like there own for reinforcement and shelter.   Of course, another facet is the pure information overload, making selectivity important in order to fit input into a finite amount of time and memory.   So, it’s not surprising that Hewitt or someone writing a similar book would have a natural tilt toward weblogs with that include their ideological comrades and soulmates.  
I have always enjoyed watching a close sports game, preferring it to a rout, even when my alma mater is involved — so, I really loved the “heart attack Hoyas”, who pulled out last-second victories back in their glory days.  Perhaps that’s why I also enjoy a forum that has differing views to those where people have the same political perspective — and invective.   Piling on is neither challenging nor interesting.   Like you, I try to avoid politically-charged weblogs that offer little useful information or argument, and create far more agita than light.

Good post. This will take some thinking about.

In Hugh Hewitt’s recent book about the blogosphere, he pretty ignores the left side of the blogging spectrum. Does this fit into your analysis? If someone from the left wrote a similar book, he or she might be similarly myopic.

For the reasons you mention, I don’t read too many overtly political weblogs. It’s largely a waste of time, in my opinion.