As a member of what has become known as the "far left" those who attack me here don't anger me
No, attacks on the "far left" on DU make me depressed and discouraged, less likely to be engaged rather than more, less likely to care what's happening rather than more. I've already left DU for months, it just wasn't worth the deepening sense of depression I was feeling. I went over to Discussionist and argued with right wingers who also screeched "far left" at me but at least there I wasn't supposed to be on the same team so I didn't find it so much depressing as amusing. But I grew weary at Discussionist of continually having "shape of the Earth? Opinions differ." type of arguments so I eventually ended up back here at DU.
I spent over a decade listening to right wingers screeching about the "far left" on my radio while I was commuting until I finally realized that all they were trying to do was piss me off at which point I quit listening to them.
"Far left" is a conservative Republican meme that has been pumped into the national consciousness through quite literally thousands of radio stations and a full time 24/7/365 cable propaganda outlet. It's a phrase from Ronald Reagan and Newt Gingrich designed specifically to drive a wedge into the non-conservative Republican bloc in America.
Once again, I don't get angry when I hear "far left" on DU, I get more cynical and more depressed and more likely simply to wash my hands of politics altogether and pursue other interests of which I have several that make me actually feel positive rather than negative emotions.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Far left is a a description I'm proud to claim. 
Being a leftist is damn right (pun intended)and it always has been.
They can be a lot more fun.
Zappa spoke the truth in those statements
I don't see how that answers the question.
there is no real democracy.
It's very simple. Buy the mainstream media, control your mainstream media, use the mainstream media to create culture and public opinion, and use it for your purposes.
Buy the government, control the government, and use it to control the populace for your purposes.
It's not rocket science.
The folks referred to by conservatives as "far left" are generally democrats who advocate for possible effective avenues of changing our system of government from oligarchy to some genuine form of democracy.
Many of these conservatives even consider leaders like Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren to be "far left", when, in fact, they are simply plain old democrats.
No offense meant, cbayer, but if you are, for some reason, not aware of this obvious reality, we cannot conduct a conversation as peers. The frustration expressed by Fumesucker in the OP is the same frustration expressed by most democrats in general, certainly the majority of democrats on DU. If such a large number of "Big D" Democrats are so unaware of global political realities that they refer to folks like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and DUers like Fumesucker, and the other democrats among us who see that the system is obviously rigged against us, there is no real hope for instituting democracy in the US, except through focused and effective direct action from outside the system.
The oligarchs will not allow democracy to manifest while they control the information and the political process; it's simply against their personal, and class, material interests.
The polarization of wealth, and the degree of inequality and injustice experienced by the middle/working class, are accelerating exponentially at unprecedented rates.
I vote for Democrats because they are always better than republicans. Would I vote for a democrat instead of a Democratic Corporatist, if the democrat had a real chance of winning an election? Absolutely.
Yes, we are on the same team in that we will vote for Democrats in that they are almost always the lesser of two evils. I am a mixed race LGBT female. Not electing Democrats has many more clear and present life threatening consequences for me than electing them does.
The trap laid by the oligarchs is simple, but clever and effective: Either vote for the MSM supported corporatist candidate who will support some human rights, and probably institute some environmental protections, or vote for the MSM supported corporatist candidate who will crush human rights and destroy the environment with reckless abandon.
The controlled dissemination of information, and the institutionalized beliefs that conservative media has instilled into the general American consciousness, and the campaign finance system ensures that few democratic candidates (and only on a local or regional level) except for those chosen by the oligarchs can be elected in our two party system.
Under these circumstances, we clearly do not live in a Democracy, when democracy is considered in its basic definition:
Power in the US is not vested in the people, and we do not rule directly or through freely elected representatives.
I don't have nomenclature issues. Governments in other nations that are horribly oppressive and non-democratic do not prove that the US system is democratic, only that it is less oppressive and less horrible for most people. Unfortunately, the US is getting farther and farther from being a democracy with each passing day, and the obvious result of this process will be a feudal system, where the majority of the populace are serfs or indentured servants in the service of wealthy private interests.
Perhaps, in reality, we are already there.
It has been said that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over, and expecting a different result. This definition is somewhat appropriate for our political process: Some keep engaging in the same political process, and expect things to get better. Meanwhile, in the overall scope of things, things are definitely getting worse. Every day, wealthy private interests gain more control over our lives, and our and choices.
The problem with the Overton Window theory with regard to our situation in the US is that not enough people are allowed inside the window to make the necessary changes necessary for those outside the window, because those inside the window are employed by the multi-national wealthy corporation that owns the building.
I'm all for working together. A well planned and prepared focused, coordinated mass general strike with enough support might make the oligarchs consider relinquishing control of the government to those to whom it rightfully belongs.
The people.
I believe that people like you are necessary. I don't disagree with you about what the problems are or what needs to be fixed.
What I object to is the vilification of those who essentially share positions but occupy different places on the spectrum.
Perhaps I misunderstood the Overton Window, but i think that it's not about who is inside and who is outside. It is about the range of ideas that are considered acceptable by the majority of the people. Current policy resides in the center and reaches out in both directions.
While I think a well coordinated massive national strike would probably be effective in some ways, I am not at all optimistic that it will happen. When you begin to advocate for things in the radical and unthinkable parts of the box, recruitment becomes more difficult.
So, as much as some find it reprehensible, I think there is a place for moderate pragmatism. While people like yourself advocate for positions towards the extremes, those who make up the vast majority have to be convinced.
... general strikes of the kind you mentioned there in your last full paragraph. 
It's been moving to the right on economics at least since I was a young man and I'm a grandfather today and with a small amount of luck I'll see great grandkids before too long.
The way the Overton Window has been moved to the right is by the far right constantly screaming about the far left and they have a huge megaphone as I mentioned in the OP, a megaphone that the left absolutely does not have.
If you are headed for reefs on the starboard side you don't save your vessel by putting the rudder amidships and that's what some DUers seem to want and constantly criticize anyone who would prefer the helmsman put the rudder to port.
Anyhow, I'll get back to my knapping again.
Very interesting. I think it has moved to the right on some issues and to the left on others, no?
I recognize that it is critical to have people who push things outside the window in order to apply continuous pressure in the direction you want to go in. I'm not saying that those that do that should go away, but if that is all that you have, there is very likely going to be a reactionary swing in the other direction, imo.
So not everyone needs to be doing that. It's ok to have a little counter pressure and a great deal of moderate participation.
Constantly criticizing others who are holding a different position is not very constructive in general, particularly when those people really do share your general values and goals. Perhaps the left is missing a megaphone precisely because of the diversity of opinion that seems so glaringly absent in the right.
Enjoy your knapping. We are heading out to test the recently repaired auto-pilot and dump the tanks.
Thanks for the hug, friend.
I tend to be a moderate on business - but extremely far left on social issues . . . being for 'myself' is sometimes frowned upon at DU - at best dismissed with a wave an a plea to legalize weed. 
than debate the substance of your positions, are consciously trying to provoke that sense of despair and the consequent quietism you evoke here.
The fact that 1% of the country's population controls (aka: "owns"
40% of its wealth and that 10% of the country's population controls 80% of its wealth cannot be defended on moral or ethical grounds. So that fact must be suppressed by ad hominem. That red-baiting shit has been going on here for over 100 years.
I respond that the USSR defeated Hitler while the U.S. and UK were playing at war in North Africa. Oh yeah, and the USSR put the first man and first woman into space. Those 'facts' usually serve to quiet the screeching a bit.
Here's a conversation-stopper quote you should feel free to deploy as necessary:
~Big Bill Haywood of the IWW
And referenced the IWW!
Your posts are always worth reading. 
mainly, imo, because the left and liberalism were so successful in the '30s and '60s.
The corporate right is terrified that something like that will happen again in America. If they can demonize left/liberal analyses and solutions, they've nullified any real alternatives to their free market/authoritarian worldview and even get us to play their game by their rules (which means: we lose).
Here's an interesting paragraph from an article in The Nation recently ("We Need Syriza in Illinois" :
The corporate right has a worldview, and, as Edelman’s speech demonstrates, it also has a power analysis from which all strategy flows. In the 1930s, the progressive movement’s analysis of power rested squarely on the faith that workers in large numbers—organized workers—could challenge unfettered corporate power and improve social conditions. And for many generations, through their unions, that is what they did. Now, progressives in and outside of unions have replaced power structure analysis with short-term tactical maneuvers that rely on something fashionably known as narrative change, done best through paid social media, devoid of vision and without the active participation of large numbers of workers. Worse still, despite our defeats in Wisconsin, our own movement continues to throw large numbers of women and African-Americans under the bus by characterizing public service workers as somehow different from, and of lesser importance than, the heroes of the twentieth century’s labor struggles, the largely white male labor force of heavy industry.
http://www.thenation.com/article/198073/we-need-syriza-illinois#
I don't get angry. I just resign myself to finally understanding that things will never change meaningfully in this nation, when advocating for things like a normal living standard, gender equality, egalitarianism, end to the corporatocracy, money out of politics, action against climate change, universal health care, etc. is treated as "not normal" or "far left." No, these are common sense, pragmatic and moral things to do. If you want "far left," let things continue like they are; that's how revolutions are made (and I'm not talking about revolution in the strict violent uprising sense, thought that could happen, as well, but revolutionary change can take form in many ways). Yes, then, you'll see the "far left" come out in me!
Yes, what you said. How is advocating any of those things extreme or in any way controversial?
And heck, I'm used to it by now. The right wing has been insulting the left for years, so if centrists on this site want to join in, its no biggie.
In another thread, I said it really pisses people like right wingers and Democratic centrists/conservatives off that progressives are invariably right on the issues. 
That is why it is very rare to see them try and debate progressives on the issues, instead, its all about juvenile and moronic personal attacks. Which really shouldn't be paid any attention to, it's like giving serious attention to a snotty kid who says things like - "You poopie head!" 
In other words, these insults are on the exact same level. Far from intelligence, or meaningful debate.
Don't let it get you down.
All of it becomes discouraging over time, which I'm sure is the plan. What is so aggravating is that we are in the majority ("far lefties" , as you allude to, but most people don't know they agree with us. Where on Earth would they get the needed information from a readily available source? It's sad.
What is actually moderately leftist views expressed here are often viewed as "extreme"..
There is a certain wanting of a more higher (for the lack of a better term), level of discourse with regard to socio-economic issues, current geo-political events, but most especially to our own highly corrupt political "system" as concerns Elections, National Security State, and so on.
What gives me hope, are the scores of highly informed members here engaging and sharing information despite the assassin attempts to derail and disrupt by Neo-Conservatives here, posing as "Liberals". 
I let myself get annoyed by this shit. I know I shouldn't, I can't help it...
Anyway, thanks for the OP.
To me far left is the extreme fringe of liberalism whereas being a liberal is more "left of center" on social/economic issues. I've always been a mix of moderate/liberal Dem on certain issues but I'd never consider myself far off to the left.
But regardless of what I think about the labels, you're free to feel how you feel OP and not give a damn about what others say so good on you.
that almost any left leaning thoughts are considered fringe. Yesterday Scott Walker compared Unions to ISIS.
Signing up with another account just to tsk tsk Fume...oh my!
What are we if we don't reach out to those in need? Try to heal the scars left by things like, to quote the Rude Pundit, "Negro communist Muslim president who hates America must want to kill all the white people and take their guns in order to burn the Constitution and install a Sharia law caliphate in the country."
Gun humpers are going crazy over this! 
Seriously, you guys just give up trying with your real accounts?
Remember where the symbol for the Democratic Donkey comes from.
The only question is was it a sock, or just a typical right winger?
I missed the message before it was deleted, so I can only speculate.
Between this and the "Greenwald is holding a trophy" EPIC thread, it has been hilarious here lately. Watching the freak-outs, that is.
Sorry, but stand up for what you believe.
I know I'm new. But there's a reason the word "ass" is in my username.
