There are many self-identified groupings on DU.

[MineralMan]

Not all are 100% compatible with each other. From single-issue groups and gender-based groups to groups who like a particular candidate or recreational activity, those groups are sometimes offended by a lack of recognition, dislike, or misconceptions from other groups. It's a source of conflict here on DU and out in the real world.

I doubt that will ever change. It's too bad, though, when it gets in the way of discussing how we can work politically together to promote a more progressive society in general. That's what I'm on DU to do. I know that many others feel the same way.

For me, it's an election year, and that's why I'm here on DU.

GOTV 2014!

[hrmjustin]

1. I think as we get closer to election day we will pull together.

[MineralMan]

3. I hope that's true. I hope we can keep our eyes

on the goals and avoid the kind of personal confrontations that lead to disunity.

[hrmjustin]

4. Agreed!

[Riftaxe]

40. Perhaps...

After the primary

[ScreamingMeemie]

2. For some, maybe, but not for me.

And I would say a rather large majority of DU does not self-identify with one group over another. I think there are some loud voices, and yes some despicable people... but the world is full of those.

I'm here because I've always been here (with breaks here and there). It's what I know. But groups? Self identifying? Nahhhhh.

[MineralMan]

5. OK. You see it differently than I do, I guess.

Chacun à son goût.

[ScreamingMeemie]

7. I guess. But it really isn't to each his own.

It's kind of a blanket statement.

[MineralMan]

10. A good blanket provides much comfort

on a cold night, but not as much as a warm partner.

[ScreamingMeemie]

11. And a generalization merely stokes the fires.

Enjoy your warm bed.

[MineralMan]

12. Yah, ok, then.

[Le Taz Hot]

41. I was going to say, "I'm with you,"

but I'm afraid the OP might construe us as some kind of a clique so I'll just say, "I agree with what you say."

[ScreamingMeemie]

50. Hehehe...

[snooper2]

6. I'm here to bash teabaggers and fundies and to promote

Videos!

It's DU3!


and with that- (pay attention to the cops right hand at the end )

[Inkfreak]

8. As a member of the Drug Policy Forum

I'd like to extend my hand in friendship to Cooking & Baking..cause I like to get high and look for recipes.

[MineralMan]

9. Well, there is that. I know that I'm always looking for

a good pan of brownies, even though I stopped smoking it decades ago.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. I'm with Tom.

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics, or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." Thomas Jefferson to Francis Hopkinson, 1789.

Think for yourself and act accordingly.

[MineralMan]

14. I always do, and will continue in that.

However, I always appreciate working with others on mutual goals. I find that very satisfying and it works nicely. That's why I'm here, you see.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

15. So do I.

[MineralMan]

16. I don't doubt it.

[Silent3]

17. Even "GOTV 2014!" isn't a unifying concept on DU

There are groups who consider not voting at all, or voting for obscure candidate, the right thing to do. They are accused of throwing away their votes, enabling Republicans, etc.

There are groups who will work hard for nearly any democrat who makes it to a general election. They are accused of selling out, perpetuating "the problem", etc.

[MineralMan]

20. For me, that's my slogan.

If others feel differently, then I won't be expecting them to work on the same team. They will have other priorities, and we may contend with each other from time to time. DU is, as I said, full of smaller groups and contingencies.

[Kaleva]

18. The shaved pubic hair group is focused like a lazer on the 2014 elections!

[MineralMan]

21. Ah, OK. I don't inquire into such matters

with regard to politics.

[woo me with science]

19. Propaganda is not a "group."

States that build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines.

The goal of the propaganda is not to convince anyone of anything.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3359801

Their purpose is to thoroughly hijack, pollute and therefore eliminate public spaces where real discussion and organization can occur. Occupy is disbanded with clubs and pepper spray. Dissent and organization online are disrupted with surveillance and propaganda.

It is no accident that propaganda brigades post new threads on discussion boards far out of proportion to their presence in the community, and that they nearly *always* demand the last word in any interchange.

The goal is to disrupt the important public space for liberal thought, discussion, and organization that these boards offer, and to keep the participants busy instead batting off the corporate lies and talking points.

States that build surveillance machines also build propaganda machines:

The government figured out sockpuppet managment but not "persona management."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023358242

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies (spooks, feds, etc.)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4159454

Seventeen techniques for truth suppression.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4249741

Just do some Googling on astroturfing - big organizations have some sophisticated tools.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=1208351

The influx will continue
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4216987

The influx of corporate propaganda-spouting personas is steady and unnatural:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3189367

"It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it."

-Upton Sinclair

[MineralMan]

22. That's quite true.

Did someone say that it was?

[upaloopa]

23. DU has gotten away from political debate to become

a food fight site. If you ignore the flame OP purveyors and trash the food fights not much is left.

[Silent3]

24. Actually, I see plently of links to interesting articles here...

...that I might not otherwise stumble upon.

[MineralMan]

25. Actually, there's a lot left. Try trashing a few topics

like that, and you'll see that plenty's left. Each of us can choose which threads we read and reply to. The threads with the most replies are not always the threads that are the most important. That's for sure.

[upaloopa]

42. I have been here longer than my profile shows

I have left several times and changed my name when I rejoined. Actually I have been here just after the selection of W.
The food fights started with Hilary vs Obama and have taken on other topics.
We never use to have so many fights.
I know you have been here a long time also.
On edit, I have been on so many ignore lists that most folks never see my posts.
I tend to call out bull shit and then I get ignored.
I'm banned from some groups because they have one trick pony members which I am not.

[MineralMan]

43. Well, OK, then...

Non Sequitur.

[upaloopa]

49. Ah the old DU kiss of death

[Warren DeMontague]

32. It's really not a new phenomenon.

I mean, I think the whole point of meta was to encapsulate the "food fight" into one place, but it backfired and only made the situation worse.

[Niceguy1]

26. I think it is more of a clash between single issue people

Who feel strongly about one or two main issues with other who do not. There are allnof people who are accused of not supporting whatever they stand for due to the fact that they don't feel as strongly about it as they do.

[MineralMan]

27. Yes, I mentioned single-issue groups in the OP.

That's part of it. But there are many other things that cause people to group up on a site like DU. The whole alternative health care thing is one of them. Gender issues are another. But, you're right, there are also single issue folks on DU. They feel like their particular issue is the most pressing one and, from their perspective, that's true. It could be global climate change, population, nuclear power generation, or eating meat.

The single issue is so important to some people that they want it to be discussed on a constant basis, and post links to things that bring the issue to the forefront. Anyone who doesn't take it as seriously or who has something else as the highest priority is sometimes seen as an enemy.

This happens in all sorts of large groups. DU is no exception. It's almost impossible to get a huge group of people together to make common cause with each other, because there will always be some who think that there is a particular issue that is more important than all other issues.

Factionalization is the reason for a lack of action by many large groups, and even some smaller ones. I remember watching the Sierra Club more or less self destruct due to factions fighting with each other, thus limiting the overall organization's capability of acting as a powerful interest group. I don't believe it has ever recovered from that.

Religions are another example, with a continuing tendency in, say Christianity, to splinter into smaller and smaller denominations over disputes over doctrine. The result is that the only surviving massive denomination of Christianity is Roman Catholicism, which has its own factions.

My goals are very broad, politically, and I recognize the slow nature of change. That puts a lot of people at odds with me, who do not see gradual change as a positive tactic. And yet, I don't see any evidence that change can be accelerated in the United States. Our history has been one of gradual changes, not quick ones. I don't believe there is any way to alter that, so I work toward things, rather than demanding a wholesale shift to a more socialistic state, even though I'm a philosophical socialist. And there it is.

[lumberjack_jeff]

28. Okay...

[FSogol]

29. Wiley on election year

[Xyzse]

30. Perhaps there are groupings...

All I care about is winning 2014.
I think my area in MD is secure... Here I come Virginia!

[MineralMan]

31. Good for you! My own Congressional district and

state legislative districts are secure for progressive incumbents. I'll be branching out to other districts where there is an opportunity for a Democrat to unseat a Republican. That's my style of activism. Working toward change.

[Xyzse]

33. It should be interesting. I mean, I am generally in Virginia every weekend nowadays.

It works well for me.

[marions ghost]

34. people today

are so thin-skinned and polarized. It is hard to find a sense of community. If you say anything against anyone's pet beliefs they just can't handle it. I read and hear stuff I dont agree with all the time. But I dont jump down people's throats about it, like I'm just waiting to be offended.

Live & let live. Engage or ignore. But ratcheting down the fight or flight would be good for all of us.

[MineralMan]

35. There are common goals that we all share.

There is an election. I'm in favor of working toward common goals during election years. It's that simple for me.

[marions ghost]

37. I'm in favor of that anytime

but first we have to define our common goals...

Seriously I hear ya. Yes we dont want to fight over small stuff out of frustration.

[MineralMan]

38. We also have to define what is progress toward goals.

Right now, the progress I'm looking for is replacing Republican control of Congress with Democratic majorities sizable enough to thwart regressive movement. I don't expect more than that for 2014. If, however, we can accomplish that, it will set the stage for change that will help assure even more movement in 2016.

I don't expect to solve all problems in one cycle. I never have, because I've never seen it happen. I don't think it's possible. So, I'm all about doing strategic things that set the stage.

That's not a popular point of view on DU, sometimes.

[marions ghost]

47. 2014 is critical

to set up for 2016. Agreed. But we need Dem candidates that are truly progressive this time. People who really will fight back. However I think the odds are still stacked against us--because even when we play fair, the big money rolls out and funds the oligarchs. I don't think the two-party system works the way we think it should. So I understand how people find it hard to get behind elections as a solution. It's a stopgap, a finger in the dike that we must not ignore. But whether it really will bring about the long term changes that will thwart the takeover of this country by greedy and corrupt corporate interests and ensure the serfdom of the rest of us--we don't know if that's achievable anymore, through elections. But of course we must try. If we win and get majorities, those elected must make strong moves against the corporate tyrants --but they may fail. The forces against us are relentless and powerful. That's where the fear comes from--the knowledge that no matter what you do, the bullies and the unethical will always have the football. They cheat to win. The system is broken and people lose faith in strategy that does not incorporate new ways of thinking.

[MineralMan]

48. I'm afraid that is not going to happen.

Every Congressional election is a local election, and the demographics of each district are reflected in its candidates.

I live in a progressive district and have progressive legislators. My district borders on Michele Bachmann's district. My congressional representative would lose in a landslide in that district. However, someone who votes with the Democratic caucus can be elected in that district, and I'll be working on that in 2014. Better that than another Republican. We can take that seat, but we cannot elect a truly progressive Democrat in that district. Which would you prefer? I'd prefer a Congress member who votes with the Democratic caucus than a Republican in that district anytime.

I have to deal with realities.

[marions ghost]

53. Go for it

Yes of course we must support Dems wherever --but if we progressives don't also have a strategy of becoming a stronger, more influential "base" (whatever you want to call it) we are not going to achieve any lasting reforms. We have to become more cohesive as a subgroup since we don't have a third party or preferential voting option right now. If we don't do that we are doomed to struggling against the corporate machine and it will grind us under.

[Comrade Grumpy]

36. I'm sorry, but I'm too busy being offended to worry about trivial things like elections.

[MineralMan]

39. Well, it's always possible to take offense. There's plenty of it

just lying around. Help yourself.

[Shankapotomus]

44. Kill the wise one!

Rabble!Rabble!

[Fumesucker]

45. I'm starting to think the wise one is the one who keeps his lips sealed

He said at 35,000 odd posts, some of them very odd indeed.

[Drew Richards]

46. Forgetaboutit you got man in your name...we will never get along OPPRESSOR!

Oops forgot the thingy...

[gwheezie]

51. I'm new here and have no idea who anyone is

so I am blissfully ignorant, however my general feeling is to not bash fellow liberals and dems. I draw the line at racism, sexism and homophobic comments but otherwise I spent the entire 08 election season avoiding the Obama/Hillary factions. I would have voted for either of them,and actually voted for both of them, one in my primary and the other in the GE and right now all I want is for dems to keep the senate in 14 and grab the house back.

[Shrike47]

52. I think you're right, MM.