There’s a man named Lee Siegel who writes for The New Republic, a once great magazine with a long and energetic Progressive tradition. Sadly, a change in ownership and hence a change in style and direction has rendered it more effete and ineffectual than many would have liked.

Back in June Mr Siegel wrote a column in which he coined the now famous term “blogofascism.” We hear a lot about fascism these days – blogofascism, Islamofascism, homosexualfascicm – the list is endless. Let’s review what fascism is, shall we? Go read up for a couple of minutes and then come back, please.

So, fascism is a political movement motivated by economic imperatives. Thus, Islamofascism is out. Can’t be. No national government. The same for homsexualfascism. (These are in fact perfect examples of WPS – Winger Projection Syndrome – as is obvious to anyone with twice the living brain cells that Mr Bush has.)

Mr Siegel described “blogofascism” as "hard fascism with a Microsoft face." Josh Marshall had some thoughts about this:

When I heard about that I figured it was a throwaway line, albeit a bit overdone and self-serious. But no, Siegel's really serious about this. He is in earnest! And on Friday[ed-today] he followed up with a deeper analysis with the weighty title "The Origins of Blogofascism". There's even the beginnings of a sociological analysis and a historical one too. But let's jump right into the mix.

"Moron"; "Wanker" (a favorite blogofascist insult, maybe because of the similarity between the most strident blogging and masturbating); and "Asshole" have been the three most common polemical gambits.

Polemical gambits? Lee, dude, how many times did your butt get kicked in third grade, buddy?

Josh is too kind by half. Mr Siegel is taken with the proto-typical TNR mindset: We are the cultural/political exquisites and we set the tone. As the magazine became more centrist, and more “exclusive” it circulation suffered drastically. In fact, paid circulation fell off by 29% from 2002 to 2003. And it has not enjoyed a resurgence of popularity. This is not to say they don’t produce good writing, because they do now and then. But if one wants to accept the “marketplace” argument of relevancy, well…

Mr Siegel has responded today to the predictable reaction to his diatribe of last month first addressing the “fascism” meme. Predictably, Mike Godwin gets called into the fray:

I violated Godwin's Law a few weeks ago….

I mean Mike Godwin, the American computer law attorney. He drew up his law in 1990. It states that the longer an online discussion, the more likely it is that someone will compare someone else to a Nazi or to Hitler. At that point, tradition commands that the thread shall be shut down. I ran afoul of the law in a very big way. On my own New Republic blog, I called the entire political blogosphere fascistic and coined the term "blogofascism." Everybody went nuts. I was a "douchebag." I was "mentally unbalanced." My writing was "spittle." According to one cognitively inclined blogger, "Lee Siegel has comprehension problems." One reply was especially hurtful: "I don't know what Lee Siegel looks like, but in my mind I picture a confused, angry Burt Reynolds."

Now, that’s cold. Burt Reynolds? Mr Siegel, consult an attorney. And he’s right. Just because he’s wrong there’s no reason to call him a douchebag. Wanker, maybe, because that word doesn’t so much connote physical masturbation these days as it does a sort of mental looseness, a spewing forth of wrong-headed commentary. When one drivels, ‘wanker’ is more polite than ‘diarrhea.’

Words have meaning and we should try to use language properly. To learn how to gut a kill, I prefer Mr Wolcott. Blogofascism is a false construct because there’s no government, no economic imperatives involved.

Mr Siegel is back today, having worked out that it’s better to have an ‘Il Duce” to try to support an inadequate premise.

I don't blame people for getting upset. The word "fascist" summons up historical nightmares, yet it also puts you in mind of the infantile left's hotheaded invective. Both associations were, in fact, my hotheaded point. Godwin's Law didn't come out of nowhere. The left-liberal blogs have become a playground of reckless, bullying invective. (I expect it on the right.) The Iraq war fomented a polarized politics more antagonistic than at any time since the Vietnam war, and that condition crystallized the left-liberal blogosphere's obstreperousness. Like its right-wing counterpart, polarization and rage are its meat and drink. George W. Bush's criminal incompetence is the engine that drives it.

Mr Siegel, you expect it from the right, but when we on the left protest it’s “infantile” and “hotheaded invective”? Don’t be surprised that we’ve had enough of crime and bigotry and theft and bullying and being victimized by adherents of a political philosophy that surely is actionable under the RICO statute. We want our country back. You’re supposed to be at a Progressive magazine. Write like it, please.