The Right Coast

February 15, 2004
More on Crooked Timber
By Mike Rappaport

My post about Crooked Timber appears to have been a bit misunderstood. Kieran mistakenly, although understandably, says that I do not like Crooked Timber. Not true; I enjoy Crooked Timber and placed it on our blogroll myself some months ago. [If this is how you speak about blogs you like, how do you speak about blogs you don’t?--ed.] Others have viewed my post as some sort of attack piece attempting to show that various Crooked Timber posts were mistaken. Also not true: even dumb right wing academics can find better substantive criticisms than, for example, that someone happens to know a lot about far left history.

My main point, which I stated in the first and last paragraphs of the post, is that Crooked Timber is the blog which is most representative of the academy. And like academia, Crooked Timber is consistently left, which to those on the right can become tiresome.

My comments on the various Crooked Timber posts were intended to emphasize the varying ways that leftism works its way into Crooked Timber posts: a post using an unfair insult to conservatives as the jumping off point to criticize them, a post that defended the superiority of the European Welfare States, a post that assumed a context of hostility towards Donald Rumsfeld, and a post acknowledging a special interest in the history of the far left. None of the posts was necessarily mistaken; all of them were consistently leftist.

Of course, there is nothing wrong with Crooked Timber being leftist or any blog having a political perspective. Fortunately, the blogosphere is politically diverse. Rather, it is the consistent leftism of the academy that is the problem. But if those outside of the academy want to see what it is like, I stand by my observation: the best place in the blogosphere to find out is Crooked Timber.