At TPM Cafe, Matt Stoller kicked off a discussion about the nature of the Netroots. May chose to contrast it to the 1960s New Left. I don't see it that way. First, I am a Centrist Democrat who believes in a Big Tent and frankly, do not agree with many of my friends in the Netroots. A few examples: I think Atrios is wrong about Desert Storm; I never got so worked up about the Bankruptcy bill; I am a free trader. But I think I am part of the same Netroots as Stoller. So what are the ties that bind?

Ed Kilgore hints at some of it:

Matt differs from a number of other progressive netroots prophets (most notably Markos Moulitsas) in emphasizing the ideological, as opposed to simply partisan, nature of the "movement."

. . . Matt's brief note on the relationship of the netroots with the Kerry presidential campaign also doesn't quite get around to mentioning that the unhappiness of bloggers with KE04 was more than echoed by DC establishment Democrats. . . . So it's all a bit more complicated than the usual netroots versus Establishment--or left versus center--analysis tends to admit.

As anyone who reads progressive blogs or subscribes to progressive sites will readily acknowledge, the single largest political change enabled by the Internet revolution has been centrifugal, not centripital. Almost overnight, hundreds, maybe thousands, of well-informed and articulate advocates whose views would in the past have been consigned to the cranky confines of Letters to the Editor columns have been given a platform that rivals newspapers and magazines in readership and influence. . . .

Ed is right as far as he goes, but he downplays the key component that has been the glue of the Netroots - the very real rejection of the Establishment Media and Democratic Party by the Netroots. More.