Wednesday, May 1, 2013


I've noticed that the handful of bloggers with whom I have been in intermittent contact, and who started around the same time I did (three years ago or so), have either discontinued or drastically scaled back their offerings.

It makes me wonder whether I am missing something. Has there been a decisive change in the digital environment or a subtle shift in the zeitgeist?

Or is it just a function of individuals only having a very finite stock of (worthwhile) things to say? Of course, people have always kept diaries, but diaries are not addressed to others and so the entries don't need to justify themselves in the way public comments (arguably) do.

But I suspect it's more a matter of people having found better things to do than having run out of worthwhile things to say!

I realize that social networks seem to be growing at the expense of blogs – or at least at the expense of blog commenting.

Speaking of which, I have been having problems again with comment spam and have changed the settings so that now comments on Conservative Tendency will be checked by me before they go up to make sure no more junk gets through.

I will be posting a couple of videos featuring David Albert and Thomas Nagel respectively on the other blog soon.


  1. For myself, I just went through a phase of being apathetic towards the main subjects of my blog (religion and politics). I'm slowly getting myself out of that apathy, but it is, as I said, slow going.

    I cannot speak for the others.

    1. I can relate to what you say.

      For the non-religious, religion is never going to be anything like what it is for the believer.

      And politics (and political discussion) only gets really interesting in times of crisis, I would say. (We may well be in one now, but it's a slow-motion crisis.)

      Also, I rapidly tire of polemics.

  2. Guilty. I find I enjoy the gadfly business -- landing my two cents on other people's blogs when so inspired. Social media -- facebook etc -- not a distraction.
    Always interested in what's on your mind.
    And lately I've been marveling at Professor R P Wolff (linked from my blog) at age 80, garrulously rehashing his lifetime of writings (& e-publishing the whole shebang as 99 cent Kindle books), posting to his blog every single day. Obviously he's retired and has the time, but still ...
    Meanwhile my mission in blogville is under review

    1. Mine too.

      Your Professor Wolff, as well as being a big name, is a part of a large movement (the American Marxist left, or whatever) and this participation with others magnifies his influence or significance. For lesser figures this group effect is even more significant, I would say, and you see people clumping together all the time.

      Lone gadflies have a much tougher time. Vulnerable to being swatted, and easily ignored.

      I would clump if I could.

  3. Wolff is a piece of work. Old hat Marxist academic who infiltrated UMass in the 60s, set up one of the first "afro american studies" programs, and really truly believes in a better future through socialism. He's a dinosaur but he's created a couple of generations of progeny who are capable of occupying Wall Street and electing the most socialist president since LBJ. Not to mention a legion of ... you guessed it ... Marxist academics.

    I do admire the guy -- for his energy, not for his politics. I get a lot of hits on my blog whenever I leave a comment there but I have no hooks when they get here.

    I apologize for dithering so much. It's an energy thing.

  4. By the way I always did admire that Pigs Fly picture.