Liberal Conspiracy and Comment is Free organised a “do” this week under the heading “Blog Nation“. The reactions I have seen have prompted some thoughts on blogs as campaign tools, and how bloggers may work together - or not.

The aim of the evening was threefold:

“To discuss issues relating to political blogging on the left, learn about online activism already taking place, socialise and meet others you’ve been reading on the web. It is about bringing together the liberal-left blogging community.”

I’m interested in how these coalitions come together around different questions, and the impact of caucuses on campaigns that require a broader base.

Friends, Rivals and Enemies working together?

I want to pick up a point made by JimJay in his reaction to the workshop :

One speaker made the point that on a demo it’s perfectly possible for people who hate each other to come together for a common purpose in a united fashion, but with blogging this seems to happen far less. The left blogosphere for instance is made up of largely hostile blogs who have no history of any online cooperation on the issues. I shouldn’t exaggerate this point, of course, but its something that’s worth grappling with I think - how do “rival” blogs work together over issues that they agree on.

For me, the context is that the *really* important campaigns of the next two or three years, such as free expression, and finding a way out of the web of laws that are restricting our liberty, are truly cross-spectrum. These campaigns may actually be damaged by the building of successful campaigning movements on either the “Liberal-Left” or the “Liberal-Right” if we make the mistake of identifying “them” and “us” too universally.

Those building such coalitions need to do it in such a way that they can take part in wider campaigns. I expect that I would be working against many of those present at Blog Nation on the matter of - for example - insistence on evenhandedness in Trade Union political affiliation, but on the other hand I have worked alongside many of them and others on the centre-right on initiatives such as Usmanov-Schillings, Iraqi Translators and now Zimbabwe. This degree of flexibility in alliances seems to me to be essential; yesterday’s enemies need to be able to be tomorrow’s friends - that is, after all, how Parliament often operates.

Thomas commented on the post promoting Blog Nation at Liberal Conspiracy:

I don’t think it is helpful to call net-based networking left or right wing because there is equality of access at a potentially universal level and there is therefore no question of inclusivity or exclusivity to divide the contributors and participants.

Building Dynamic Coalitions

The title of this series alludes to the unexpected allies we find along the way when we start working flexibly. An example is that when blog sites were closed down by the lawyers Schillings on behalf of Alisher Usmanov during autumn 2007 political bloggers suddenly found ourselves working alongside many of the Arsenal football bloggers after Mr Usmanov’s ‘involvement’ in the club (they are still watching ).

I’m interested in how these coalitions can be built dynamically around each issue or campaign as we develop a view and a consensus. These are my questions:

• How do we find the coalition around any issue, and any particular viewpoint on that issue?
• How do we prevent cross-spectrum coalitions from being undermined by narrower caucuses such as Blog Nation, which may also be appropriate for different occasion?
• Do fixed coalitions have a place in politics online, and to what extent?

I’ll be writing further articles looking at each of these questions in the next few days.

This post has been crossposted from the Total Politics Campaigns blog (without the photos).