Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:18 AM Apr 2016

"The Democratic Stockholm Syndrome"

Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:01 AM - Edit history (2)

by Peter Bloom

The Democratic Stockholm Syndrome
4/20/2016
Published by Common Dreams

New Yorkers voted overwhelmingly for those holding their progress captive



After weeks of hard and increasingly heated campaigning, Hillary Clinton scored a decisive victory over Bernie Sanders in last night’s New York Democratic primary. Despite losing a majority of the state’s counties, she won in huge margins in New York City and the popular vote overall. The triumph was a potential serious blow to Sanders’ progressive momentum and a just as dramatic boom to her now seemingly inevitable march to the nomination.

......snip.......

Yet the fate of Sanders’ candidacy pales in comparison to the future success of the political revolution he is trying to create and ferment. What does losing the Empire state mean to the progressive movement he is helping to inspire? What does it say about its own long march to changing the country and the world?

A key takeaway from the Primary is that regardless of where the movement goes from here – it must recognize the affective hold that establishment Parties and candidates still have on voters, even those committed to and desiring of real change.

............A crucial narrative driving the Sanders’ candidacy is that he and his movement are the real standard-bearers for 21st century progressive values. While this may be substantively true, it misses how and why so many see Centrist Democrats like Clinton as their advocate even when they are so willing to betray them when in power. They represent a now established fantasy of incremental rearguard progress that seeks to inspire not by its idealistic ambition but its clear eyed “realism”.

.....snip......

While supporters justify an establishment politics of “working within the system” as rational and pragmatic, its appeal largely resides as a progressive fantasy. Even after three decades worth of evidence of the profound limitations of such a strategy – it remains emotionally resonant. Hollow victories such as the compromised legislation of Dodd-Frank and Obamacare are celebrated as landmark progressive achievements. Centrist candidates are hailed for their courage in standing up to an “intractable” Republican enemy – doing what little they could to make things better in a political war that has already been lost.

It plays into a belief that all that is needed is to elect more Democrats. That they have the best interest of the country at heart even if they regularly feed from the same corrupt cesspool as their Conservative rivals. That to dream big means to consign the nation to a century of failed idealism rather than hard won compromise.


.........However, there is something else at play as well. She is heralded for her promises to continue the “progressive” legacy set by Obama. Suddenly the President who has pushed for Drone Wars, further Wall Street bailouts and the TPP is a paragon of modern progressivism. The New York triumph of his all but publicly endorsed predecessor Hillary Clinton is a paean of love to the very establishment that many of their voters are demanding to be changed.

For progressives to achieve mass success they must do all they can to break up this abusive relationship.

To not accept the myth that Clinton represents “incremental change” or that she is committed to fighting climate change or that you can trumpet gun control at home and the international arms industry abroad.

This does not mean abandoning the fight to ensure that a more retrogressive Republican alternative does not take power. The reign of a Trump or Cruz would be similar but worse than that of Clinton. Nevertheless, it also means not minimizing the passion felt for the establishment. It may be misplaced but it is real and when mobilized can be potent.

Instead, it demands that even in defeat we continue the struggle to deprogram the victims of the New Democrats. To point out consistently that change only happens from the bottom up.

That one cannot claim to be a progressive and support anti-democratic oligarchic regimes around the world.


That what Democrats and Republicans alike legitimize as national security is really just a bloated corporate security force subsidized by the American taxpayer.


That you may “be with her” but when the moment it is politically expedient she certainly will not “be with you.”



The path the nomination for Bernie Sanders undeniably narrowed yesterday.

The path to revolution and genuine progress depends on breaking America free from its Democratic Stockholm Syndrome.


http://www.commondreams.org/views/2016/04/20/democratic-stockholm-syndrome

********************

EDIT TO ADD

Obviously, the meaning of "Stockholm Syndrome" has been misrepresented on DU & some clarity is called for.

Stockholm syndrome
n.

A psychological syndrome in which a person being held captive begins to identify with and grow sympathetic to his or her captor, simultaneously becoming unsympathetic towards the police or other authorities.

[After Stockholm, where a hostage in a 1973 bank robbery became romantically attached to one of her captors.]

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stockholm+syndrome


It has NOTHING to do with RACE.



311 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
"The Democratic Stockholm Syndrome" (Original Post) RiverLover Apr 2016 OP
"fermenting a revolution". LOLZ! KittyWampus Apr 2016 #1
You love endless war, wall street gambling with no risk on the taxpayers' backs, fossil fuels killin RiverLover Apr 2016 #4
Spell check is your friend. brush Apr 2016 #6
? which word did I mess up? RiverLover Apr 2016 #12
Pedantry is the last refuge of the bereft of argument and the witless. VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #22
Maybe, but I know the difference between "foment" and "ferment". brush Apr 2016 #26
Post removed Post removed Apr 2016 #33
Careful there, buddy. The last Stockholm Syndrome poster got banned from his insults towards AAs brush Apr 2016 #35
and the bannings will probably continue until morale improves. Hiraeth Apr 2016 #41
Or until posters stop breaking Terms of Service. LanternWaste Apr 2016 #297
I think the definition of ToS depends on the Admin. I leave it to their discretion. Hiraeth Apr 2016 #298
If one can't put fort a cogent argument, they resort to claiming "race baiting", even though you... George II Apr 2016 #77
I know the history on DU and I will agree the term... tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #87
And this is a passive-aggressive way to resurrect it ... nolawarlock Apr 2016 #194
they don't and never did Hiraeth Apr 2016 #38
Jason Isbell fan here A Little Weird Apr 2016 #269
For real Hiraeth Apr 2016 #270
you are apparently ignorant of the definition of "ferment" virtualobserver Apr 2016 #108
It's primary definition is a noun (look it up). The poster used it as a verb. brush Apr 2016 #111
both words are fine in that context...if you "look it up". virtualobserver Apr 2016 #117
I looked it up. He should have use "foment" in that context as "ferment" is primarily used as a noun brush Apr 2016 #120
"primarily" is not a synonym for "exclusively"..... virtualobserver Apr 2016 #129
Yeah, yeah. The poster dug in his heels though when his poor choice was pointed out brush Apr 2016 #133
It like the difference between nauseous and nauseated. wildeyed Apr 2016 #252
I'm with you. Ferment is for wine and sourdough, foment is for revolution. brush Apr 2016 #255
Yes, it is a FERMENTED. wildeyed Apr 2016 #257
What do you feed it with? brush Apr 2016 #259
Flour, usually. wildeyed Apr 2016 #260
Thanks for the info. I'm not a baker but I'm tempted to try it now. brush Apr 2016 #262
It's fun. wildeyed Apr 2016 #263
Nobody says "ferment a revolution". brush Apr 2016 #304
So what. Who cares. pangaia Apr 2016 #303
fer·ment frylock Apr 2016 #212
"Foment a revolution" or "ferment a revolution"? brush Apr 2016 #219
You got schooled. frylock Apr 2016 #220
I think you did. brush Apr 2016 #221
Take it up with Merriam-Webster frylock Apr 2016 #223
Foment a revolution or ferment a revolution? brush Apr 2016 #225
You tried to make this about the definition of one word. frylock Apr 2016 #229
I think not. All you have to do is google brush Apr 2016 #232
So in your world, words have only one definition? frylock Apr 2016 #234
Let's say we both let it go. I gave you several definitions of ferment, both noun and verb brush Apr 2016 #247
I'm good. frylock Apr 2016 #248
No kidding. RiverLover Apr 2016 #27
Don't know much about the history of that phrase around here, huh? brush Apr 2016 #29
Stockholm Syndrome is a phrase that only applies to PoC now, according to DU? RiverLover Apr 2016 #31
Good luck. They will use anything to advance their world view. Banning is the most efficient for rhett o rick Apr 2016 #288
That makes no sense whatsoever. Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #39
"That makes no sense whatsoever." RiverLover Apr 2016 #60
Do wut? Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #64
Hillary is NOT doing any of things... fun n serious Apr 2016 #146
Are you trying to foment an argument? George II Apr 2016 #11
Ferment. . A state of agitation or of turbulent change or development. RiverLover Apr 2016 #16
Isn't "foment" the verb you were looking for? "Ferment" is primarily a noun. Even this . . . brush Apr 2016 #34
I agree that foment would have been better, tabasco Apr 2016 #199
Why do you think people don't know theorigin? The origin in hostage situations is pretty well known. brush Apr 2016 #30
Why? Because it's misused so often around here. Seems every time someone has a different... George II Apr 2016 #44
It was more than that though. It was used to imply that people were too stupid . . . brush Apr 2016 #46
That too, implying (sometimes MORE that just implying) that you're not smart enough to... George II Apr 2016 #79
I didn't read it, does it really say that! LOL boston bean Apr 2016 #20
What a crass thing to say. Your showing your....well you know. haikugal Apr 2016 #121
What??? LOL boston bean Apr 2016 #123
. haikugal Apr 2016 #127
I prefer my revolutions distilled jack_krass Apr 2016 #89
This message was self-deleted by its author tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #91
He needs a Thesaurus - but his father told him COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #209
Maybe get one yourself. frylock Apr 2016 #214
Keep beating that dead horse. Why not recognize the truth- COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #277
Actually, you are the one who is incorrect here. They can be & are used interchangeably. RiverLover Apr 2016 #279
Beat..beat...beat....this horse is going to get up, i swear. Beat... beat... COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #281
Why not just admit that you need to smack up your vocab game? frylock Apr 2016 #282
No. When in doubt I generally don't go to the very last possible COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #283
Here's the deal. You fucked up. frylock Apr 2016 #284
Bye. COLGATE4 Apr 2016 #285
The revolution he is trying to create and ferment -- LOL betsuni Apr 2016 #2
I'll have... JSup Apr 2016 #57
fer·ment frylock Apr 2016 #215
Haven't we had enough of these Stockholm Syndrome insults? brush Apr 2016 #3
I certainly thought so... But I guess "no". Agschmid Apr 2016 #7
+1... SidDithers Apr 2016 #8
if you CHOOSE to be insulted, by all means, have at it. Hiraeth Apr 2016 #43
Which is probably why were seeing this nonsense again. JoePhilly Apr 2016 #56
Well ... they are proving they are not psychically damaged by supporting ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #93
How can any writer, who doesn't know the difference between ferment and foment, be taken seriously? SidDithers Apr 2016 #5
The writer is a "lecturer in the Department of People sufrommich Apr 2016 #13
Low verbal IQ eh? Its common, don't feel bad. RiverLover Apr 2016 #19
https://www.google.ca/#q=ferment+definition polly7 Apr 2016 #58
Right? In trying to show how smart they are, they proved beyond a shadow of a doubt RiverLover Apr 2016 #75
Check it again. Ferment's primary definition is a noun. Foment is the verb that should have . . . brush Apr 2016 #107
"ferment" is a verb too. hello? Read above or below for the definition. RiverLover Apr 2016 #112
As I said, it's primary use is as a noun. brush Apr 2016 #115
I've never used it as a noun in my life, there are much better terms. polly7 Apr 2016 #118
Oh, people are laughing all right. He should have use "foment". brush Apr 2016 #125
In your opinion. In mine, he used the exact right term and most polly7 Apr 2016 #130
I love the fact northernsouthern Apr 2016 #196
OMG. You're just digging in further into your own crap. He used ferment correctly. RiverLover Apr 2016 #124
Well, you learned something new today, didn't you? frylock Apr 2016 #217
Lollololololololol! northernsouthern Apr 2016 #186
Laughing at yourself — I like it. brush Apr 2016 #190
Exactly northernsouthern Apr 2016 #191
I r smart! frylock Apr 2016 #218
Um... Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #305
+1! tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #97
Yep. At this point, all they have is doubling down on their own silliness. Hassin Bin Sober Apr 2016 #189
They need this guy in their camp. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #198
Right? frylock Apr 2016 #222
Um... Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #307
Oh, goody! Ferment-gate lives on! frylock Apr 2016 #308
Too funny Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #309
I know, right?! Derpa derpa derp. frylock Apr 2016 #216
Fermented revolution? Tarc Apr 2016 #9
Make mine a red, I prefer that over the whites. brush Apr 2016 #32
LOL ... Nicely played ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #88
See response #58 above nt tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #100
Yes, congrats on dipping down to the uncommon, 2nd defnition Tarc Apr 2016 #141
No, it was the first definition in the very first link. polly7 Apr 2016 #144
You've spent a lot of time telling people to "see post 58!" for an alleged triviality Tarc Apr 2016 #147
I've never even posted that. polly7 Apr 2016 #148
Ah, I assumed you were the first poster replying back again, never looked at the username Tarc Apr 2016 #149
You were talking with that other poster about MY post. polly7 Apr 2016 #150
Hard to tell one complaining Sanders supporter from another these days Tarc Apr 2016 #151
LMAO. nt. polly7 Apr 2016 #152
Racist shit. nt LexVegas Apr 2016 #10
How in the hell is this racist? You know what is racist & sexist & harms those causes? RiverLover Apr 2016 #14
What are you trying to ferment here? nt LexVegas Apr 2016 #17
See reply #58 nt tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #113
Because somehow in the HRC camp, they've gotten Stormfront and Tumblr to peacefully coexist VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #23
That h supporter is not deep enough to understand artislife Apr 2016 #242
+1... SidDithers Apr 2016 #15
It has nothing to do with skin color. RiverLover Apr 2016 #21
Sure it doesn't... SidDithers Apr 2016 #25
Wow. RiverLover Apr 2016 #28
Is everything now racist or sexist to Hill supporters? Nt tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #116
No, just the stuff that's racist and sexist..nt SidDithers Apr 2016 #153
+1000 mcar Apr 2016 #213
;) sheshe2 Apr 2016 #271
+1000 stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #202
This message was self-deleted by its author boston bean Apr 2016 #18
Oh brother Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #24
+1 n/t JTFrog Apr 2016 #162
it's not necessary to be a low information narcissist to write for Common Dreams, but it sure helps. geek tragedy Apr 2016 #36
A revolutionary wine or is it whine? rbrnmw Apr 2016 #53
See response #58 and educate yourself nt tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #119
It has EVERYTHING to do with race and gender. EVERYTHING. Godhumor Apr 2016 #37
You're forgetting the other major group Bernie wins - YOUNG PEOPLE. You Hillary supporters are MillennialDem Apr 2016 #42
Pretty sure I never implied you had Stockholm Syndrome for supporting Sanders n/t Godhumor Apr 2016 #51
And I never said Hillary supporters had Stockholm Syndrome. I said you're telling us MillennialDem Apr 2016 #55
Demagoguery is all they know. VulgarPoet Apr 2016 #52
It has fuck-all to do with race and gender. Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #50
Again, implication is the demographic groups that are leading Clinton to the nomination Godhumor Apr 2016 #54
The implication would only apply to a small cross-section of said groups. Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #62
Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT. fleur-de-lisa Apr 2016 #66
Thanks for the heads up! Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #67
This makes sense northernsouthern Apr 2016 #96
I get that demographic divides are difficult to understand and accept Godhumor Apr 2016 #109
Thanks for the compliment. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #139
Very well said. brush Apr 2016 #99
Last I looked, plenty of white men voted for Hillary.. tex-wyo-dem Apr 2016 #136
Thanks for trying to educate some folks. Good luck with it. K&R Hiraeth Apr 2016 #40
It would seem to be a textbook case Doctor_J Apr 2016 #45
face it... a lot of them just want a female prez. It's that simple. nt antigop Apr 2016 #49
Absolutely. Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #65
^^^This. and that reason alone can have disastrous consequences. Hillary is not the right woman desmiller Apr 2016 #227
and neither was Carly Fiorina! k8conant Apr 2016 #278
Definitely not Carly Fiorina. My mother called her "Horse face." desmiller Apr 2016 #287
Those are some excellent observations. Its insanity run amok. /nt RiverLover Apr 2016 #61
Been say'n this for a long time. n/t HereSince1628 Apr 2016 #47
47 replies...I can see 8. LOL Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #48
Yep. RiverLover Apr 2016 #63
There it is again... CrowCityDem Apr 2016 #59
Here's one thing Obama has on Clinton: Trickle Down economics WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #68
Great post. RiverLover Apr 2016 #73
I was young and naive, too. I look back now and consider myself an WhaTHellsgoingonhere Apr 2016 #82
But it was much harder back then to put two and two together. We had no Internet. Arugula Latte Apr 2016 #230
Very true. RiverLover Apr 2016 #273
The stockholm argument is for simpletons and to give certian people feelings..... NCTraveler Apr 2016 #69
I can't wait till skinner calls it! hrmjustin Apr 2016 #70
Damn. 100% spot on. Nt HooptieWagon Apr 2016 #71
This is the kind of shit that makes people hope a purge is on the horizon. JTFrog Apr 2016 #72
Oh good, more Obama bashing. auntpurl Apr 2016 #74
Nearly 90 Percent Of People Killed In Recent Drone Strikes Were Not The Target RiverLover Apr 2016 #78
I AM a moderate. auntpurl Apr 2016 #80
So I guess you don't mind thousands of people just living their lives like you & I being murdered RiverLover Apr 2016 #83
That's a characterisation, not a fact. auntpurl Apr 2016 #86
Its a fact: RiverLover Apr 2016 #92
Unilateral intervention is (nearly) always bad auntpurl Apr 2016 #94
Our being there, killing people, is creating the global threat. RiverLover Apr 2016 #98
Bilge. Starry Messenger Apr 2016 #76
Millions didn't even get to vote. onecaliberal Apr 2016 #81
It seems many are becoming desensitized to this. I'm glad you aren't one of them RiverLover Apr 2016 #103
Disinterest in fairness is an indicator of the condition, a symptom of it, in fact. CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #105
Thanks, CentralCoaster! RiverLover Apr 2016 #137
Many people died in the struggle for voting rights, I will never forget that, anyone who thinks it's onecaliberal Apr 2016 #142
Recommended. That is indeed the correct definition of Stockholm syndrome. Autumn Apr 2016 #84
Me too. Patty Hearst. RiverLover Apr 2016 #104
Leaving the democratic party months ago was the single most freeing moment of my life. Autumn Apr 2016 #122
Once one is no longer emotionally tied to the Party, one can objectively assess it's behavior. Maedhros Apr 2016 #134
It's downright ugly. Autumn Apr 2016 #135
Leaving the race and gender issues out of this (for the moment) ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #85
+1 Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #106
oh gawd, why did I take you off ignore. buh-bye again. Hiraeth Apr 2016 #114
Thank you ... putting back on Ignore will certainly improve the caliber of replies I receive. 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #132
test! stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #203
LOL ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #210
Yup ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #145
Now, the number is up to 43 ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #155
The underlying arrogance is difficult to watch ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #156
Hardly we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican for years azurnoir Apr 2016 #208
Me! wildeyed Apr 2016 #224
It drives them away-them who? azurnoir Apr 2016 #238
Anyone you are trying to convince. wildeyed Apr 2016 #240
I do too ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #250
Absolutely! wildeyed Apr 2016 #256
Do better next time? ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #258
Bull shit! ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #226
Stockholm Syndrome is accurately described in the OP and you admit it's aimed at the working class azurnoir Apr 2016 #237
In the context, and with history of DU, and the voting patterns in this primary ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #244
This is a different poster and an entirely different OP azurnoir Apr 2016 #245
Okay. 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #251
Yeah, odd, that. frylock Apr 2016 #228
Just a sign of the times azurnoir Apr 2016 #239
They'll go back to disparaging the South in the GE. frylock Apr 2016 #243
Hmmm. northernsouthern Apr 2016 #90
they're just blowing chaff because both Clintons make statements that'd sink Sanders permanently MisterP Apr 2016 #154
The definition is EXACTLY correct and applies to every gender, race and class of people. polly7 Apr 2016 #95
Anyone who claims to know what hundreds of millions of voters feel is full of him/herself. randome Apr 2016 #128
No-one claimed that. nt. polly7 Apr 2016 #131
The article does just that. 'America' needs to break free of Stockholm Syndrome. randome Apr 2016 #172
K&R sadoldgirl Apr 2016 #101
democracy, when it goes against you, don't you just hate it? La Lioness Priyanka Apr 2016 #102
Oh it will be broken. Give it some time. KPN Apr 2016 #110
Most likely. Its a damn shame though. /nt RiverLover Apr 2016 #140
Some of us know what it means and this is a good post. Thank you. K&R! nt haikugal Apr 2016 #126
And Thank God for that. RiverLover Apr 2016 #138
. haikugal Apr 2016 #158
. ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #143
Oy. greatauntoftriplets Apr 2016 #157
"It has NOTHING to do with RACE." NuclearDem Apr 2016 #159
Bullshit. The OP is about how the DEMOCRATIC PARTY is being held hostage RiverLover Apr 2016 #166
It was a waste of time trying to explain this to WillyT NuclearDem Apr 2016 #169
The article doesn't mention blacks at all, because its referring to the entire political party. RiverLover Apr 2016 #173
K & R imagine2015 Apr 2016 #160
Your comment at the end of the article is completely clueless Sheepshank Apr 2016 #161
Stockholm syndrome is not about race. Its about hostages & how those hostages deal with it. RiverLover Apr 2016 #163
Keep it up... Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #164
What you're posting is unhinged from reality. The (D) party has gone rogue Right Wing. RiverLover Apr 2016 #168
"unhinged from reality," what?? Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #175
They know this OP has nothing to do with race. Autumn Apr 2016 #268
Yet Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #290
Thanks for the high five, but there's nothing I can do to help you with your comprehension problems. Autumn Apr 2016 #291
Didn't request your help. Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #293
Not as short as you want it to be. Too bad. I'm sure Skinner doesn't want to knock Autumn Apr 2016 #294
True enough, I'll manage. Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #295
It is very much a winner OP there are many democrats who suffer from Democratic Stockholm Syndrome Autumn Apr 2016 #296
The OP is yet another embarrassment in a long line Bobbie Jo Apr 2016 #301
The meaning "given" to that phrase here on DU means nothing. You can't change the meaning Autumn Apr 2016 #302
Yeah. ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #167
Deflecting definitions? frylock Apr 2016 #233
delfection of how Stockholm Syndrom was applied here on DU to the AA Community, won't work Sheepshank Apr 2016 #171
My post has nothing to do with that situation. RiverLover Apr 2016 #174
yes it did...you attempt to pretend the past didn't happen Sheepshank Apr 2016 #176
You honestly believe this? ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #177
The Democrats for the past 25-30 years have been acting republican, and we have to go RiverLover Apr 2016 #181
Well that answers my question ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #188
" established fantasy of incremental rearguard progress...." pat_k Apr 2016 #165
The Party of "Yes We Can" turned "No We Can't" very quickly with Hillary. RiverLover Apr 2016 #170
We can be realists, we can work within that construct Sheepshank Apr 2016 #178
You lost Renew Deal Apr 2016 #179
No not really. The Democratic Party loses with Third Way Dems leading us with RW policies RiverLover Apr 2016 #183
The voters have spoken Renew Deal Apr 2016 #195
Your call sign is "Renew Deal" and your supporting Hillary? Phlem Apr 2016 #185
We will all be supporting Hillary soon. Renew Deal Apr 2016 #193
Nice story bro. Phlem Apr 2016 #197
Good to know which side you're one Renew Deal Apr 2016 #200
That would be the non corrupt side. Phlem Apr 2016 #201
That's the problem Renew Deal Apr 2016 #204
By Your Definition!? Phlem Apr 2016 #206
No ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #205
Gooble-gobble. frylock Apr 2016 #236
The blind followers spoken of divert attention from the message... polichick Apr 2016 #180
No kidding. /nt RiverLover Apr 2016 #182
"It has NOTHING to do with RACE." Phlem Apr 2016 #184
Talk about a passive aggressive way ... nolawarlock Apr 2016 #187
K&R quantumjunkie Apr 2016 #192
good article. I suppose the book "What's the matter with Kansas" is also bbgrunt Apr 2016 #207
You describe it so well. Thanks. RiverLover Apr 2016 #266
umadbro? stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #211
The Bernies.... MrWendel Apr 2016 #231
That's because the ones doing it KNOW ... 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #254
It's a dog whistle, for sure. wildeyed Apr 2016 #265
Yeah stay tuned.... MrWendel Apr 2016 #311
Has someone posted the jury results yet? Capt. Obvious Apr 2016 #235
I feel like this campaign season has deprogrammed me artislife Apr 2016 #241
I call bullshit. wildeyed Apr 2016 #246
Just another 1StrongBlackMan Apr 2016 #253
I wish there was a way wildeyed Apr 2016 #264
To fucking bad. Get over it. nt William769 Apr 2016 #249
Terrific article quantass Apr 2016 #261
The author really nailed it. Thanks quantass. RiverLover Apr 2016 #267
Wow. Was just talking about this phenomenon with my son. Duppers Apr 2016 #272
That's so great. I hope many people start talking it up to family & friends & coworkers. RiverLover Apr 2016 #274
Excellent Article RiverLover, thanks for sharing this. 2banon Apr 2016 #275
Mon plaisir, mon ami!! Ce n'était rien ;) RiverLover Apr 2016 #276
Au contraire , mon ami . il était très important et sur ​​ce point, 2banon Apr 2016 #280
"le bras dans le bras ensemble" - Arm & Arm we stand together! RiverLover Apr 2016 #286
The term "Stockholm Syndrome" is based on an assumption that is flat out wrong eridani Apr 2016 #289
K&R Autumn Apr 2016 #292
Quick Explanation PB57 Apr 2016 #299
Kick. JTFrog Apr 2016 #300
. stonecutter357 Apr 2016 #306
Load o' crap. johnp3907 Apr 2016 #310

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
4. You love endless war, wall street gambling with no risk on the taxpayers' backs, fossil fuels killin
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:29 AM
Apr 2016

sustainable life on the planet, monopolies, privatization of everything, public schools crumbling, unions snuffed out, American jobs outsourced or offshored, medical bankruptcies through the roof, outrageous cost of higher education, cut social services, corporations paying Zero Taxes.

Fine.

But at least have the decency to articulate why you are all gung-ho for those things rather than hiding behind your emoticon.

It might lead people to believe you're justified in backing the bullshit, rather than being a republican hack.

brush

(53,776 posts)
26. Maybe, but I know the difference between "foment" and "ferment".
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:49 AM
Apr 2016

Plus, we've had enough of these insulting "Stockholm Syndrome" posts here on DU.

Seems you don't know that history.

Response to brush (Reply #26)

brush

(53,776 posts)
35. Careful there, buddy. The last Stockholm Syndrome poster got banned from his insults towards AAs
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:15 AM
Apr 2016

Last edited Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:13 AM - Edit history (1)

If you don't know the history here with that phrase, research it.

And do you even know what race baiting means?

Hiraeth

(4,805 posts)
41. and the bannings will probably continue until morale improves.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:32 AM
Apr 2016

funny thing about it, internet is YUUUUUUUUGE

 

LanternWaste

(37,748 posts)
297. Or until posters stop breaking Terms of Service.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:13 AM
Apr 2016

Or until posters stop breaking Terms of Service (however, I fully understand that bit of relevant non-fiction has little to no place in your narrative of DU's oppression and persecution-- it too being rather "YUUUUUUUUGE&quot .

Hiraeth

(4,805 posts)
298. I think the definition of ToS depends on the Admin. I leave it to their discretion.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:20 AM
Apr 2016

This is their sandbox.

I do not feel oppressed or persecuted.

Do you not agree that one can surf the internet forever?

Rhetorical question.

No reply necessary because I am in the mood today to liberally use my ignore option and you just bought a ticket.

Bye.

George II

(67,782 posts)
77. If one can't put fort a cogent argument, they resort to claiming "race baiting", even though you...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:45 AM
Apr 2016

....never mentioned race at all. You must have been "thinking it"!

tex-wyo-dem

(3,190 posts)
87. I know the history on DU and I will agree the term...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:02 AM
Apr 2016

Was misused and could have been construed as racist in that isolated case. But that occurrence does not forever make the term "Stockholm Syndrome" a "racist" one. In this case it refers to a group of Democrats (nothing to do with race) and is correctly applied.

nolawarlock

(1,729 posts)
194. And this is a passive-aggressive way to resurrect it ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:37 PM
Apr 2016

You knew the history of this term here and you used it on purpose to make the implication without coming right out and saying it.

I've said time and again, Trump hasn't just moved the needle of racism, he's moved the entire spectrum. Some of you Sanders supporters have said things and made implications of things that I haven't seen in thirty years.

When WillyH (and yes, I'm calling him that on purpose in reference to 41's hideous exploitation of racial fears) was banned, I saw how many people came to his defense.

brush

(53,776 posts)
111. It's primary definition is a noun (look it up). The poster used it as a verb.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:33 AM
Apr 2016

"Foment" should have been used in that context.

So who is the ignorant one?

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
117. both words are fine in that context...if you "look it up".
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:41 AM
Apr 2016

but for those who need to put others down in order to make themselves feel superior, a dictionary won't help.

brush

(53,776 posts)
120. I looked it up. He should have use "foment" in that context as "ferment" is primarily used as a noun
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:44 AM
Apr 2016

Why do ya think everyone is laughing at the usage?

 

virtualobserver

(8,760 posts)
129. "primarily" is not a synonym for "exclusively".....
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:49 AM
Apr 2016

look it up

Ridicule always reflects poorly on the person engaged in it.

brush

(53,776 posts)
133. Yeah, yeah. The poster dug in his heels though when his poor choice was pointed out
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:00 PM
Apr 2016

And I was not the first one to do so.

To come here to this site with a screed about "Stockholm Syndrome", with the ugly history that phrase has on this site, and to declare that Bernie is trying to "ferment a revolution" when everybody knows the common usage is "foment a revolution" . . . well, he kinda asked for it.

I'm through with it now though. There are posts up now asking Clinton supporters to be kind to Sanders supporters so I will try from now on.

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
252. It like the difference between nauseous and nauseated.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:55 PM
Apr 2016

The insensitivity of this OP makes me feel nauseous. (adjective)

VS.

I am nauseated by this divisive and mean spirited OP. (verb)

But misuse is so common these days, it is hardly worth arguing. No one can tell the difference.

For instance, hardly anyone would notice the misuse in the phrase "The racial insensitivity of posting an OP with "Stockholm Syndrome" in the title after painful discussions on this site in the recent past makes me feel nauseated." They are pretty much interchangeable now.

I'm with you. I ferment wine, kombachu and sourdough starter. I foment revolution. I would have claimed autocorrect or tired if I made that mistake rather than argue it

brush

(53,776 posts)
255. I'm with you. Ferment is for wine and sourdough, foment is for revolution.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:03 PM
Apr 2016

Do you actually ferment sourdough starter? I lived in San Francisco back in the day and the big bread bakeries there claimed their starters dated from the 1800s.

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
257. Yes, it is a FERMENTED.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:15 PM
Apr 2016

(OMG, I FOMENTED a new batch of sourdough starter last week. Nooooooo )

I make a batch now and then, keep it going for a few months until I lose interest, usually during football season. All the mixing and kneading gives me something to mess with during the breaks.

You can keep the fermented starter in the fridge in a closed jar and only feed it once a week or so if you bake occasionally. Or if you bake every day or two, leave it on out, just cover the top of the container with some cheese cloth to keep the dust out. And yes, you can keep a batch going indefinitely.

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
260. Flour, usually.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:28 PM
Apr 2016

but you can use sugar or milk in a pinch. I think it is 1 part water to 3/4 flour mixed into the original starter. Or the reverse. something like that.... If there is too much water, or it sits too long, it separates a bit. I just mix it up and correct the ratio. If the jar is too full, I throw some out. If I am baking a bunch, I get a bigger jar and mix more.

It's not rocket science. If you make a mistake, it is almost always easy to fix. Sourdough starter is VERY forgiving. If the liquid is a bad color, or it smells icky, then you have to throw it out. But that has never happened to me, and I am not diligent in my care at all.

I made a recipe similar to this a bunch over the winter. OMG, the French toast from that loaf was AMAZING!

http://www.food.com/recipe/sourdough-cinnamon-swirl-bread-30602

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
263. It's fun.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:38 PM
Apr 2016

Bread machines are easy, too. You can mix up a loaf, go out for the day and come home to fresh, hot bread, Nom!

Good luck if you try it. And don't forget to ferment!

frylock

(34,825 posts)
212. fer·ment
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:17 PM
Apr 2016

verb
verb: ferment; 3rd person present: ferments; past tense: fermented; past participle: fermented; gerund or present participle: fermenting
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More
effervesce, fizz, foam, froth
"the beer continues to ferment"
cause the fermentation of (a substance).
2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"
synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment.

brush

(53,776 posts)
221. I think you did.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:32 PM
Apr 2016

Nobody says "ferment a revolution" but let's stop making a big deal out of a misuse of a word.

I'm moving on.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
223. Take it up with Merriam-Webster
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:40 PM
Apr 2016
Full Definition of ferment

intransitive verb

1
: to undergo fermentation

2
: to be in a state of agitation or intense activity
transitive verb

1
: to cause to undergo fermentation

2
: to work up (as into a state of agitation) : foment

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ferment

brush

(53,776 posts)
225. Foment a revolution or ferment a revolution?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:44 PM
Apr 2016

If you don't know the first phrase is the commonly accepted usage, I wonder about you too.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
229. You tried to make this about the definition of one word.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:51 PM
Apr 2016

That shit blew up in the face you're attempting to save. Fucking own it and move on.

brush

(53,776 posts)
232. I think not. All you have to do is google
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:02 PM
Apr 2016


Ferment

See more synonyms on Thesaurus.com
noun
1.
Also called organized ferment. any of a group of living organisms, as yeasts, molds, and certain bacteria, that cause fermentation.
2.
Also called unorganized ferment. an enzyme.
3.
fermentation.
4.
agitation; unrest; excitement; commotion; tumult:
The new painters worked in a creative ferment. The capital lived in a political ferment.

verb
5.
to act upon as a ferment.
6.
to cause to undergo fermentation.
7.
to inflame; foment:



It's use as a verb, such as in ferment wine, is way down the list and most know that the first usages cited in dictionaries are the more common, accepted usages.

The guy used it wrong, admit it. You foment a revolution, you ferment wine.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
234. So in your world, words have only one definition?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:06 PM
Apr 2016

Just fucking let it go and move on with your life ffs.

brush

(53,776 posts)
247. Let's say we both let it go. I gave you several definitions of ferment, both noun and verb
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:38 PM
Apr 2016

I'm bored with this now so — truce?

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
27. No kidding.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:49 AM
Apr 2016

It definitely helps explain how conservative DINOs have taken over the party.

Mindless sheep to slaughter.

brush

(53,776 posts)
29. Don't know much about the history of that phrase around here, huh?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:52 AM
Apr 2016

Do some research on that and see if it's wise to continue the insults.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
31. Stockholm Syndrome is a phrase that only applies to PoC now, according to DU?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:55 AM
Apr 2016

Get out of the bubble, people.

 

rhett o rick

(55,981 posts)
288. Good luck. They will use anything to advance their world view. Banning is the most efficient for
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 12:44 AM
Apr 2016

them. They manufacture faux outrages to call out the posse and gang attack. It's not racist to say that so-and-so might suffer from Stockholm Syndrome. Only if one says that about the AA community here in DU. Then it becomes a tool to gang attack and ban.
The behavior certainly isn't "politically liberal" it's right wing hatred.

George II

(67,782 posts)
11. Are you trying to foment an argument?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:37 AM
Apr 2016


I think some on DU here need to try to understand the origin of "Stockholm Syndrome" before they try to attribute it to everything people say or do that they don't agree with.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
16. Ferment. . A state of agitation or of turbulent change or development.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:42 AM
Apr 2016

Some people need to put their thinking caps on this am.

brush

(53,776 posts)
34. Isn't "foment" the verb you were looking for? "Ferment" is primarily a noun. Even this . . .
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:04 AM
Apr 2016

definition post you just put up shows that.

 

tabasco

(22,974 posts)
199. I agree that foment would have been better,
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:43 PM
Apr 2016

but I disagree that "ferment" is used primarily as a noun.

"The ingredients ferment to make beer."

brush

(53,776 posts)
30. Why do you think people don't know theorigin? The origin in hostage situations is pretty well known.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:54 AM
Apr 2016

George II

(67,782 posts)
44. Why? Because it's misused so often around here. Seems every time someone has a different...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:35 AM
Apr 2016

..opinion about something they're suffering from "Stockholm Syndrome"

brush

(53,776 posts)
46. It was more than that though. It was used to imply that people were too stupid . . .
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:37 AM
Apr 2016

to know what was good for themselves.

George II

(67,782 posts)
79. That too, implying (sometimes MORE that just implying) that you're not smart enough to...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:47 AM
Apr 2016

...know what's "right".

Response to KittyWampus (Reply #1)

COLGATE4

(14,732 posts)
209. He needs a Thesaurus - but his father told him
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:57 PM
Apr 2016

that those all died out shortly after Jesus rode them.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
214. Maybe get one yourself.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:21 PM
Apr 2016

Full Definition of ferment

intransitive verb

1
: to undergo fermentation

2
: to be in a state of agitation or intense activity
transitive verb

1
: to cause to undergo fermentation

2
: to work up (as into a state of agitation) : foment

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ferment

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
279. Actually, you are the one who is incorrect here. They can be & are used interchangeably.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:35 PM
Apr 2016

fer•ment (n. ˈfɜr mɛnt; v. fərˈmɛnt)

n.
1. any of a group of living organisms, as yeasts, molds, and certain bacteria, that cause fermentation.
2. an enzyme that catalyzes the anaerobic breakdown of molecules that yield energy.
3. fermentation (def. 2).
4. agitation or excitement; commotion: artistic ferment; political ferment.
v.t.
5. to act upon as a ferment.
6. to cause to undergo fermentation.
7. to inflame or excite; foment.
v.i.
8. to be fermented; undergo fermentation.
9. to seethe with agitation or excitement.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ferment

I can see why so many miss the other fact here: That the Democratic Party as a Party for the Left & for People no longer exists & has become a softer less evil but still evil version of the republican party. They do talk nicer to us when running for office, but otherwise the entire party is DINO. (With some exceptions, like maybe 5 senators & our wonderful House Progressives.)

But some people just dig in & refuse to see what is right in front of their eyes & even begin to change their world view to fit the paradigm. Stockholm syndrome.

COLGATE4

(14,732 posts)
283. No. When in doubt I generally don't go to the very last possible
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:44 PM
Apr 2016

use of a word as my choice. Particularly when if you were to ask 100 people what word they would use in that instance, 100 of them would say "foment", not "ferment". But thanks for playing.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
284. Here's the deal. You fucked up.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:46 PM
Apr 2016

You tried to make a big deal out of the use this word, and it blew up in your face. To compound matters, you just can't fucking let it go. In any case, I'm done here. Feel free to get in the last word, because this is evidently very, very important to you.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
215. fer·ment
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:25 PM
Apr 2016

verb
verb: ferment; 3rd person present: ferments; past tense: fermented; past participle: fermented; gerund or present participle: fermenting
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More
effervesce, fizz, foam, froth
"the beer continues to ferment"
cause the fermentation of (a substance).
2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"
synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment.

JoePhilly

(27,787 posts)
56. Which is probably why were seeing this nonsense again.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:49 AM
Apr 2016

Bernie supporters are so much smarter than the rest of us.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
93. Well ... they are proving they are not psychically damaged by supporting ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:12 AM
Apr 2016

the candidate with no record of Congressional accomplishments in any of the areas he, now, promises ... in fact, all of the issues he says he will address, either came about or got worse during his time in congress.

Oh, wait ...

polly7

(20,582 posts)
58. https://www.google.ca/#q=ferment+definition
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:51 AM
Apr 2016

fer·ment
verb
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More

2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"

synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment; literarybeget, enkindle
"an environment that ferments disorder"


noun
ˈfərˌmənt/

1.
agitation and excitement among a group of people, typically concerning major change and leading to trouble or violence.
"Germany at this time was in a state of religious ferment"
synonyms: fever, furor, frenzy, tumult, storm, rumpus; More

2.
archaic
a fermenting agent or enzyme.



http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ferment

verb (used with object)

5.
to act upon as a ferment.

6.
to cause to undergo fermentation.

7.
to inflame; foment:
to ferment prejudiced crowds to riot.

8.
to cause agitation or excitement in:
Reading fermented his active imagination.


Seems the writer knows a bit more than the experts here. That took .50 seconds to see on the top of a whole page of definitions with the exact same results. I've seen it used as a verb in that exact way all my life. Just anything to distract from your OP and the truth of it.

brush

(53,776 posts)
107. Check it again. Ferment's primary definition is a noun. Foment is the verb that should have . . .
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:30 AM
Apr 2016

been used. So who showed what?

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
112. "ferment" is a verb too. hello? Read above or below for the definition.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:36 AM
Apr 2016
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/ferment

noun
1.
Also called organized ferment. any of a group of living organisms, as yeasts, molds, and certain bacteria, that cause fermentation.
2.
Also called unorganized ferment. an enzyme.
3.
fermentation.
4.
agitation; unrest; excitement; commotion; tumult:
The new painters worked in a creative ferment. The capital lived in a political ferment.

verb (used with object)
5.
to act upon as a ferment.
6.
to cause to undergo fermentation.
7.
to inflame; foment:

to ferment prejudiced crowds to riot.
8.
to cause agitation or excitement in:
Reading fermented his active imagination.

brush

(53,776 posts)
115. As I said, it's primary use is as a noun.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:40 AM
Apr 2016

It's verb usage is way down the list of usages.

Just admit it, you screwed up. You should have used "foment", which is why everyone is laughing so quite whining.

Or should I say "quit wining"? (heehee)

polly7

(20,582 posts)
118. I've never used it as a noun in my life, there are much better terms.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:43 AM
Apr 2016

No-one's laughing, except at your attempt to derail a thread you don't approve of.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
130. In your opinion. In mine, he used the exact right term and most
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:53 AM
Apr 2016

people do understand the meaning of it. Maybe you should write something notable and use "foment", like "I am fomenting disruption in this thread because I'd like it to go away - people shouldn't be allowed to think outside the boxes they're supposed to be content within" - something like that. Something stockholm syndromy-like.

 

northernsouthern

(1,511 posts)
196. I love the fact
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:38 PM
Apr 2016

The person is claiming the numbering system indicates which words you can't use. Basically it can only be a noun or a verb ever.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
124. OMG. You're just digging in further into your own crap. He used ferment correctly.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:48 AM
Apr 2016

Just like his whole point in the article is spot on correct.

Ferment & foment can be & are used interchangeably as shown by the friggin dictionary! Educate yourself, and then maybe put some focus on how the Democratic party has morphed into another republican party with a different name.

7.
to inflame; foment:



 

northernsouthern

(1,511 posts)
186. Lollololololololol!
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:15 PM
Apr 2016
Ferment's primary definition is a noun.


What the heck does that mean? Only one meaning per word? That is so not how English works. Are you often confused by double entendres? :p They include multiple definitions on purpose and archaic or obscure usages are usually marked thusly.

?w=1080
 

northernsouthern

(1,511 posts)
191. Exactly
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:35 PM
Apr 2016

I am because I am funny as a "democratic" primary. (clean but so politically dirty double entendre)

Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
307. Um...
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 01:11 PM
Apr 2016
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1808876

You better school this guy while you're at it.

On another note - the critics of my grammar are quite right. It is foment. I used ferment inappropriately.



Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
309. Too funny
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 01:49 PM
Apr 2016

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2016, 02:06 PM - Edit history (1)

The only bright spot in this abysmal thread.


I love it when a swarm of flaming jerks get their ass handed to them.

frylock

(34,825 posts)
216. I know, right?! Derpa derpa derp.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:27 PM
Apr 2016

Full Definition of ferment

intransitive verb

1
: to undergo fermentation

2
: to be in a state of agitation or intense activity
transitive verb

1
: to cause to undergo fermentation

2
: to work up (as into a state of agitation) : foment

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/ferment

polly7

(20,582 posts)
144. No, it was the first definition in the very first link.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:37 PM
Apr 2016

Just type in "ferment" "definition" into google - you'll see. I copied and pasted - changed nothing. The second used it as a noun first, there seem to be no set rules on what it should be used as. No need to be rude over something so trivial.

Tarc

(10,476 posts)
147. You've spent a lot of time telling people to "see post 58!" for an alleged triviality
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:39 PM
Apr 2016

Perhaps you need to re-read what you posted;

fer·ment
verb
fərˈment/

1.
(of a substance) undergo fermentation.
"the drink had fermented, turning some of the juice into alcohol"
synonyms: undergo fermentation, brew; More

2.
incite or stir up (trouble or disorder).
"the politicians and warlords who are fermenting this chaos"

synonyms: cause, bring about, give rise to, generate, engender, spawn, instigate, provoke, incite, excite, stir up, whip up, foment; literarybeget, enkindle
"an environment that ferments disorder"


As I said, #2.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
148. I've never even posted that.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:41 PM
Apr 2016

You seem confused. Perhaps you need to re-read something or other. (Not that I care).

Tarc

(10,476 posts)
149. Ah, I assumed you were the first poster replying back again, never looked at the username
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:43 PM
Apr 2016

Otherwise, why would you care what I said to another user?

Butt out.

Tarc

(10,476 posts)
151. Hard to tell one complaining Sanders supporter from another these days
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:45 PM
Apr 2016

You were both wrong, how's that?

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
14. How in the hell is this racist? You know what is racist & sexist & harms those causes?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:39 AM
Apr 2016

Using it for Everything when you don't have a valid argument.

VulgarPoet

(2,872 posts)
23. Because somehow in the HRC camp, they've gotten Stormfront and Tumblr to peacefully coexist
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:46 AM
Apr 2016

and that's fucking up scores of innocent dictionaries.

 

artislife

(9,497 posts)
242. That h supporter is not deep enough to understand
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:55 PM
Apr 2016

read a couple of their posts and you will get the brain on simmer whiff.

SidDithers

(44,228 posts)
15. +1...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 08:41 AM
Apr 2016

it was racist when it got that troll WillyT banned, and it's just as racist now, coming from Peter Bloom.

Sid

Response to RiverLover (Original post)

 

geek tragedy

(68,868 posts)
36. it's not necessary to be a low information narcissist to write for Common Dreams, but it sure helps.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:24 AM
Apr 2016

"ferment a revolution?"

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
37. It has EVERYTHING to do with race and gender. EVERYTHING.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:26 AM
Apr 2016

And it is not hard to understand why.

Hillary's margin of victory is driven by minority and women voters. To say NY was lost because Hillary voters have Stockholm Syndrome means that non-white and female voters, who supported her by overwhelming margins, are being told that don't know what is best for them or their future. On the other hand, the one group where the majority supported Bernie, white men, they're leading the revolution! They know what is best for the country!

Context is everything. This OP is about as tone-deaf as you can get.

 

MillennialDem

(2,367 posts)
42. You're forgetting the other major group Bernie wins - YOUNG PEOPLE. You Hillary supporters are
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:32 AM
Apr 2016

telling US what is best for us.


I'm a white trans woman if we want to play around in demagoguery.

 

MillennialDem

(2,367 posts)
55. And I never said Hillary supporters had Stockholm Syndrome. I said you're telling us
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:48 AM
Apr 2016

what is best for us.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
50. It has fuck-all to do with race and gender.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:45 AM
Apr 2016

It has everything to do with the self-destructive foolishness of voting for a candidate who doesn't give a single, solitary fuck about non-oligarchs, save for pandering her way into their votes.

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
54. Again, implication is the demographic groups that are leading Clinton to the nomination
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:47 AM
Apr 2016

Don't know what is best for them.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
62. The implication would only apply to a small cross-section of said groups.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:01 AM
Apr 2016

That is to say, the members of those groups who voted for Hillary (and are not 0.1%'ers). While it opens up a bit in open primary states, basically we're talking a minority of the people who showed up to vote (under 20% of those eligible in NY), who are a minority (c. 30%) of the electorate. Subtract out the majority of young members of those groups (who tend to vote for Bernie) and you have a damn small cross-section of these demographic groups.

Do I have any problem saying that those voters are voting against their own best interests? Nope.

fleur-de-lisa

(14,624 posts)
66. Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:05 AM
Apr 2016

On Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:00 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

It has fuck-all to do with race and gender.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1800357

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Over the top.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:04 AM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Ridiculous alert. Can't win an argument so you choose to alert? Grow up! This shit is getting old.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Nothing at all hideable about that post. Poor alert.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Grow a thicker skin TBH fam.

 

northernsouthern

(1,511 posts)
96. This makes sense
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:15 AM
Apr 2016

A post so laughable that it is from a god of humor.

Hillary's margin of victory is driven by minority and women voters. To say NY was lost because Hillary voters have Stockholm Syndrome means that non-white and female voters, who supported her by overwhelming margins, are being told that don't know what is best for them or their future. On the other hand, the one group where the majority supported Bernie, white men, they're leading the revolution! They know what is best for the country!


A post about racism that is racist.

Godhumor

(6,437 posts)
109. I get that demographic divides are difficult to understand and accept
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:31 AM
Apr 2016

But, on the plus side, your bolding skills have developed well.

 

northernsouthern

(1,511 posts)
139. Thanks for the compliment.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:17 PM
Apr 2016

Your skills at obfuscation of posts and bending them to fit a racist narrative has somewhat improved, but not too much (just being honest because I respect you). :p

What is funny according to the demographics men are far more likely to support a woman in NY? Men went 50/5 and women went 67/33? So you owe men an apology. As well as white which was also 50/50...so go ahead apologize for the racist vote against the only Jewish man in the race. (by your logic) But what is funny is that people that like it as it is and think Hillary will do better against Trump (polls have showed consistantly that is wrong) seem to vote for Hillary, which is the very definition of the syndrome. Also Hillary loses trustworthyness by large numbers and even her own people think Bernie ran a more fair campaign that Hillary. The biggest thing is that 64% people decided who to support by 58% for Hillary to 42% for Bernie well over a month ago.

Also you forget that New York voted against a black man by even larger numbers last time...so way to go NY, a city so nice, they voted down race twice.

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/04/19/us/elections/new-york-primary-democratic-exit-polls.html

tex-wyo-dem

(3,190 posts)
136. Last I looked, plenty of white men voted for Hillary..
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:08 PM
Apr 2016

So making this a racists/sexist "tone deaf" arguement is riduculous and not becoming of you.

 

Doctor_J

(36,392 posts)
45. It would seem to be a textbook case
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:36 AM
Apr 2016

You have those who claim that we have to vote D to protect reproductive rights voting for the candidate who has said she's willing to curb them. You have vocal critics of the Iraq War voting for the woman who voted for it, and then got us involved in 3 more while SoS. You have people who believe that a woman who takes in literally millions from dark money PACs will, if she becomes president, work hard to get rid of dark money PACs. You have people who claim to care deeply about the plight of single mothers, especially black single mothers, supporting one of the authors of the "end of welfare as we know it". Over the last 25 years she's flip-flopped on nearly every issue important to progressives and liberals, yet the swooning minions "trust her".

Certainly there is something psychologically atypical at play here.

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
65. Absolutely.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:04 AM
Apr 2016

Personally, our mutual possession of vaginas doesn't motivate me to vote for Hillary in the slightest.

desmiller

(747 posts)
227. ^^^This. and that reason alone can have disastrous consequences. Hillary is not the right woman
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:48 PM
Apr 2016

for the presidency. n/t

 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
48. 47 replies...I can see 8. LOL
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:43 AM
Apr 2016

This one really stirred up Camp Weathervane, didn't it?

I'm unsure that "Stockholm syndrome" applies to all that many Hillary voters...but I have no problem admitting I think any non-1%er who votes for her when there's a far, far better option available is an utter fool.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
63. Yep.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:02 AM
Apr 2016

Voting against their own best interests, for people who are essentially republicans at heart & are posing as Democrats.

Fools are falling for it, and then justifying their conservative capitulations to themselves, which is the scariest thing about all of this.
(stockholm syndrome)

 

CrowCityDem

(2,348 posts)
59. There it is again...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:56 AM
Apr 2016

the argument that a minority of the party has somehow proven that it, and not the majority, is the only voice that should matter going forward.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
68. Here's one thing Obama has on Clinton: Trickle Down economics
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:07 AM
Apr 2016

Obama came to office at the nadir of an economic collapse Democrats conveniently pinned on Bush despite the fact that we bought the 401K Casino economy Republicans sold America.

In one sense, the 401K Casino economy is like a student loan: for kids to get them, their parents, who are already in debt, have to co-sign. And thanks to Democrats like Joe Biden, you cannot escape student loan debt through bankruptcy. That makes them generational. 401Ks work in much the same way in that there's no getting out. Republicans and New Democrats were ingenious in setting up a system that funnels money from the middle class to the 10%.

We've refused to accept responsibility for Bill Clinton, who pretty much resided over the consolidation of everything from media to financial institutions, the creation of Wall Street black markets, and brought us race to the bottom trade deals.

I think 90% of us hoped Obama was going to be the change candidate. Instead, we got another New Democrat.

Where Obama had the luxury of a Trickle Down, 401K inflating bailout, Hillary won't. Her "incrimental" platform will keep her married to the Casino sham with no public appetite for another Wall Street bailout.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
73. Great post.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:37 AM
Apr 2016

I completely had my head in the sand & as a young person at the time, totally missed all of the republican crap he did back then. I just mindlessly followed the media version of him.

Now I see people doing that with Hillary. Good people busy with their lives & no time to look at what is really happening.

Its tragic. I blame the republicans who have taken over the party, and even more so, the corporate, propagandized media.

 

WhaTHellsgoingonhere

(5,252 posts)
82. I was young and naive, too. I look back now and consider myself an
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:51 AM
Apr 2016

Auto Pilot Democrat. The Reagan Era is over! Democrats are in charge. It's all good. Idiot me. A lot of Hillary supporters are as naive today as I was throughout the Clinton 42 years.

Just think, today's naive young people actually espouse Democratic Progressive values and principles. And in return, they are ruthlessly and relentlessly shamed by Hillary, her wayward supporters, and Rachel Maddow et al.

 

Arugula Latte

(50,566 posts)
230. But it was much harder back then to put two and two together. We had no Internet.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:55 PM
Apr 2016

I look back and am amazed how naive I was before the 2000 selection. That woke me up and led me to this emerging new thing called the Internet. It lets us compare notes and find out the agendas behind politicians' actions.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
273. Very true.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:03 PM
Apr 2016

We're lucky in this age, the age of the internet. Another reason I'm nervous about a republican in the WH (this includes Hillary). As long as the PTB make money from the internet, more than they lose from internet freedom, hopefully we'll be ok.

Maybe. I can definitely see them changing things up on US quite a bit for the very reason we're grateful for the internet. I hope I'm wrong.

 

NCTraveler

(30,481 posts)
69. The stockholm argument is for simpletons and to give certian people feelings.....
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:08 AM
Apr 2016

of self-importance.

It is almost always an argument put forth by the privileged class.


I personally ensure I am registered as NPA except during primary times. The Florida Democratic Party often pisses me off to no end. It drove me crazy when this place allowed for the open support of Crist over Meeks.

No democrat is guaranteed my vote.

I am the exact opposite of anything resembling the argument put forth here and am a huge Clinton supporter.

In a bout of irony, the target audience for this article are the LIV's. The exact opposite of the brilliant point some think is being made.

 

JTFrog

(14,274 posts)
72. This is the kind of shit that makes people hope a purge is on the horizon.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:24 AM
Apr 2016

Seriously. It wasn't enough to see a long time DUer get the fucking boot for this kind of shit?

This is the same asshole writing articles like "Off With Their Heads" and then citing Hillary as the Head of the Democratic party?

You can scream in all caps that it has nothing to do with race but it definitely reeks of privilege and arrogance. And you all sure have tried to skirt that line the entire primary season.

Sick. Sick. Sick.









auntpurl

(4,311 posts)
74. Oh good, more Obama bashing.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:38 AM
Apr 2016

And then this "The reign of a Trump or Cruz would be similar but worse than that of Clinton" disqualifies this article from being based in reality at all.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
78. Nearly 90 Percent Of People Killed In Recent Drone Strikes Were Not The Target
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:45 AM
Apr 2016
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/civilian-deaths-drone-strikes_us_561fafe2e4b028dd7ea6c4ff

The TPP: More Job Offshoring and Lower Wages
http://www.citizen.org/documents/tpp-wages-jobs.pdf

This is NOT progressive, just 2 examples, there are more. He himself says he's more like a moderate republican. The term progressive should not be twisted in such a way as being applied to Obama. Unless you only look at how he ran in his campaigns.

auntpurl

(4,311 posts)
80. I AM a moderate.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:47 AM
Apr 2016

So are millions of other Democrats. Not being a progressive is not disqualifying for me.

Obama is a social progressive, and so is Hillary (and so am I). He's fiscally moderate/conservative, and so is Hillary (and so am I). He believes in a strong foreign policy, and so does Hillary (and so do I). I am not unusual; it's just that DU skews MUCH further left than the majority of Democratic voters.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
83. So I guess you don't mind thousands of people just living their lives like you & I being murdered
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:54 AM
Apr 2016

for no reason other than being at the wrong place at the wrong time.

If this is Democratic, count me out. Its terrorism.

auntpurl

(4,311 posts)
86. That's a characterisation, not a fact.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:01 AM
Apr 2016

The ME is extremely complicated. I live in the UK; I see the results of IS every day with the migrant crisis. Should we just let IS take over the world, one square mile at a time? They literally want to kill every single one of us, and are happy to die themselves. There's no diplomacy with this group. What should we do? Just stay out of it?

This article helped me understand a bit better what's going on over there:

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/03/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

How do we handle this? Is it not our responsibility? Do we just stay out? What happens to all the people who will be murdered if we stay out?


RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
92. Its a fact:
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:09 AM
Apr 2016
Civilian casualties from US drone strikes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_US_drone_strikes

And yes, I say we get out of the ME completely. We're only making more people hate the US & creating more people who rightly want to do US harm, & we aren't helping the people who live there. If I lived there & my family was killed by drone while eating dinner together or at a wedding or visiting a loved one in the hospital, I would hate the US. With prejudice. Look at how we destroyed Libya. If I lived in Libya and my water supply was destroyed by the west, I would hate the west too.

Maybe there is no simple answer, but we are not being the good guys. And corporations like Halliburton & Raytheon are making enormous profits. That in itself isn't bad, but they're doing it by pushing a narrative that the US has to be there when we're only making things worse.

auntpurl

(4,311 posts)
94. Unilateral intervention is (nearly) always bad
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:13 AM
Apr 2016

But if we have a coalition of allies, all working toward the same goal of eradicating a global threat, I am fine with intervention. We are a superpower, it's part of the job description.

Anyway, we disagree on that. My original point was that being a moderate doesn't make me a unicorn. There are a lot of people who believe as I do, and most of us wholeheartedly support Obama and are looking forward to Hillary building on his progress and adding some of her own.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
98. Our being there, killing people, is creating the global threat.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:20 AM
Apr 2016

You're being suckered by the propaganda.

I'm going to agree to disagree here. I have this argument often enough with my repub family members.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
103. It seems many are becoming desensitized to this. I'm glad you aren't one of them
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:25 AM
Apr 2016

& are speaking out.

Its enough the Democratic process has been hijacked by Moneyed Interests, but then when the people are trying to exercise their right to vote, its being stolen.

Its all quite pathetic. USA!

onecaliberal

(32,852 posts)
142. Many people died in the struggle for voting rights, I will never forget that, anyone who thinks it's
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:30 PM
Apr 2016

fine to keep folks from voting should lose their own right; then perhaps they would change their tune.

Autumn

(45,066 posts)
84. Recommended. That is indeed the correct definition of Stockholm syndrome.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:57 AM
Apr 2016

First time I ever heard it used was with Patty Herst when she was kidnapped and held by the SLA. Patty Herst is a white woman.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
104. Me too. Patty Hearst.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:27 AM
Apr 2016

I'm surprised the syndrome wasn't renamed as the Hearst Syndrome, it was so textbook.

Autumn

(45,066 posts)
122. Leaving the democratic party months ago was the single most freeing moment of my life.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:47 AM
Apr 2016

I switched back so I could caucus for Bernie and literally couldn't wait to switch back to Unaffiliated. I will never go back to that party. I am content.

 

Maedhros

(10,007 posts)
134. Once one is no longer emotionally tied to the Party, one can objectively assess it's behavior.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:05 PM
Apr 2016

That assessment is not pretty.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
85. Leaving the race and gender issues out of this (for the moment) ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:00 AM
Apr 2016

Isn't that just so precious that 24 (and counting) DU:progressives cheer the creation of a new class of "others": psychically damaged working class people?!?

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
155. Now, the number is up to 43 ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:01 PM
Apr 2016

How can so many "progressives" NOT see the sophistry of labeling a, or a class of people, psychically damages ... because they support a different candidate than they.

But I'm sure someone will be along to explain it to me. On the bright side, most of those that would try, have me on Ignore!

ismnotwasm

(41,976 posts)
156. The underlying arrogance is difficult to watch
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:08 PM
Apr 2016

The dismissal of racism as something this broad rush OP "isn't about" is disturbing.

What if I said, what I truly believe, just as we cannot magically escape sexism, we cannot magically "make" something like this not about race. It's not possible.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
208. Hardly we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican for years
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:41 PM
Apr 2016

no one ever had much problem with that

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
224. Me!
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:44 PM
Apr 2016

It is counterproductive because it drives them farther away from our views and hardens opposition.

Start by finding common ground, points where you DO agree, not by accusing people of stupidity or mental illness and you will find that you are more successful in persuading them to support your candidate or issue. It might take patience, but in the long run, this is proven to be a more successful tactic. And also note that some are not persuadable. Better to just let those go. Nothing is gained by antagonizing them.


Here are some hints on the art of political persuasion:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/5/23/1211036/-Top-Five-Rules-of-Political-Persuasion

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
240. Anyone you are trying to convince.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:47 PM
Apr 2016

Telling conservatives that they are voting against their self interest drives them away. You said "we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican" and no one had a problem with that. I did and do. Because it is counterproductive for the reasons I posted already.

It is also counterproductive to tell Democrats who prefer Clinton that they have mental illness. *If* you care about persuading us to your candidate or cause. But I guess that ship has pretty much sailed already, so the article is sour grapes? Who knows. Not me. I didn't read the article because fuck-all if I want to listen to some internet jackass pontificate about how my political choice in a primary election is indicative of mental infirmity. pffftttt....



BUT, posting that article here at the DU, with that title and the history that phrase has? That is just nasty and divisive. I know it was not you who did that. Just adding the comment here to see if I can avoid making a second post in this thread.

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
250. I do too ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:52 PM
Apr 2016
You said "we've been saying the same about working class/poor folks who vote Republican" and no one had a problem with that. I did and do. Because it is counterproductive for the reasons I posted already.


But mostly because its arrogant and ignorant to attempt to tell someone what is/isn't in their interest, even after they have given you ample evidence of what THEY have determined are THEIR interests.

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
256. Absolutely!
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:07 PM
Apr 2016

It IS arrogant and rude to do that. But not sure that most people here care about that part. So I am starting with the fact that, in addition to being bad manners, it is completely counterproductive, a TOTAL waste of time.

I come here to learn things, have discussions with likeminded people and sometimes for vigorous debate (which I enjoy). But I am NOT actively campaigning. On a site like this, almost everyone has decided. Trying to push them, particularly after they say stop, just makes them dig into their opposition. If I want to get votes for my candidate, I phone bank, canvass or register voters. Those are productive uses of my time. But here? Nope.

But I dunno, right out of the gate, a very dedicated cadre of Sanders online supporters decided that no one could say anything negative, ever, about their guy (not just here, either). And in the process, did a BUNCH of damage to the campaign. Maybe they can learn and do better next time? I dunno. But I am trying to persuade them to give it a try

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
226. Bull shit! ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 04:46 PM
Apr 2016

we (including myself) have been telling "Kansas" (the stand in for white, poor, working class) that they are voting against their interests by voting republican.

(BTW, I stopped doing it when I recognized how arrogant and ignorant it was for me to tell a group, that I am not a part of, what their interests are/are not. Hell, "Kansans" told us very clearly where their interests lie ... Their voting told us that: maintaining the racial/gender/Heterosexist status quo (or taking it back to the "good ole days", where Blacks and Womens and Gays knew their place) was more important to them, than putting more $$$ in their pocket.)

But, telling someone they are voting against their interests is very different from calling them Stockholm Syndrome Sufferers ... the former indicates they are making a "bad" or, even, "stupid" choice, that can be fixed with more information or better "right" thinking; while, the latter can't been (completely) fixed with more information or "right" thinking" because the subject is psychically damaged.

Oh ... And it hasn't escaped me that the original Stockholm Syndrome sufferer invective(s) was directed at Black folks (and the LGBTQ ... NWB) and its current incarnation is directed at "the working class", i.e., the poor, a group that we are constantly reminded as being disproportionately Black; whereas, the "fixable" problem, was/is directed at ... well ... "Kansas."

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
237. Stockholm Syndrome is accurately described in the OP and you admit it's aimed at the working class
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:24 PM
Apr 2016

so how is that racist poor and working class cuts across every racial line in the US

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
244. In the context, and with history of DU, and the voting patterns in this primary ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:57 PM
Apr 2016
Oh ... And it hasn't escaped me that the original Stockholm Syndrome sufferer invective(s) was directed at Black folks (and the LGBTQ ... NWB) and its current incarnation is directed at "the working class", i.e., the poor, a group that we are constantly reminded as being disproportionately Black; whereas, the "fixable" problem, was/is directed at ... well ... "Kansas."


very easily.

I racist comment doesn't become race-neutral because one includes a few whites.

azurnoir

(45,850 posts)
245. This is a different poster and an entirely different OP
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:58 PM
Apr 2016

just because the first one was racist doesn't make this one so

frylock

(34,825 posts)
243. They'll go back to disparaging the South in the GE.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 05:56 PM
Apr 2016

Then we'll hear all about low info voters who go against their own best interest.

 

northernsouthern

(1,511 posts)
90. Hmmm.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:05 AM
Apr 2016

I think someone was telling me about this post. They said it was racist and I said if the statement was only aimed at minorities then it would have the tinge of "we know best", which is not good. But as there was no link to it I went on to say I could not tell and that we are all under the syndrome (I even linked the definition), that they have us captive. It is nice to see I am not crazy. It has nothing to do with race, but a system that preys on the most down trodden by the very system. I still think the south is more of a PTSD vote (I am only peaking for the people I know as I grew up there and ALL of my family is from there). We have been hurt so hard by the right-wing there we are afraid to try anymore and if we think about a revolution all we see is Reagan and GW.

MisterP

(23,730 posts)
154. they're just blowing chaff because both Clintons make statements that'd sink Sanders permanently
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 12:58 PM
Apr 2016

it's hard to say the opposition to her's racist if she's the only candidate BLM keeps having to protest

polly7

(20,582 posts)
95. The definition is EXACTLY correct and applies to every gender, race and class of people.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:14 AM
Apr 2016
Stockholm syndrome
n.

A psychological syndrome in which a person being held captive begins to identify with and grow sympathetic to his or her captor, simultaneously becoming unsympathetic towards the police or other authorities.


Go to any shelter and talk with people who've lived in long-term DV situations - you'll hear story after story where the abuse is minimized and the abuser even defended. Many of those women still have love for their partner and just do not understand how damaged they've been and how much has been taken from them - because they were so beaten down physically and/or emotionally they didn't see anything but trying to keep their lives from getting worse. Gaslighting/crazymaking, and causing one to literally see nothing better to hope for. Until it does get worse.

And this happens to people of all race, gender and class .... abuse can be in any form - physical, emotional, economical, and on and on. Very often the people who choose to use it know exactly what they're doing and will give just enough to keep the sick game going. We ALL know what stockholm syndrome is. Anyone that claims not to, denies the reality or seriousness of it, how damaging it is .. or tries to make it about any one demographic or situation is being very dishonest.
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
128. Anyone who claims to know what hundreds of millions of voters feel is full of him/herself.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:49 AM
Apr 2016

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

 

randome

(34,845 posts)
172. The article does just that. 'America' needs to break free of Stockholm Syndrome.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:55 PM
Apr 2016

Some hacks have become quite fond of tossing that term around and applying it to anyone they don't like.

And what does "every gender, race and class of people" mean -they're all suffering from SS or they're capable of suffering from it? I have more confidence in people than that. I have more confidence in you.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Treat your body like a machine. Your mind like a castle.[/center][/font][hr]

KPN

(15,643 posts)
110. Oh it will be broken. Give it some time.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:31 AM
Apr 2016

Sometimes things have to get worse before they get better. Whether Hillary or a Repug, things will be worse.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
159. "It has NOTHING to do with RACE."
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:22 PM
Apr 2016

Yeah, I'm sure it doesn't.

Skinner, this is still happening on your site.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
166. Bullshit. The OP is about how the DEMOCRATIC PARTY is being held hostage
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:46 PM
Apr 2016

by Rightwingers pulling rightwing crap & labeling it (D), like "trade" deals that offshore American jobs, deregulation of industries, offshore oil drilling, unending war for profit, etc.

Is the entire party PoC?

This whole line of attack is meant to be DISTRACTION. Nothing else. Its fermenting a false argument, if you will, to obscure a real problem within the party.

 

NuclearDem

(16,184 posts)
169. It was a waste of time trying to explain this to WillyT
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:50 PM
Apr 2016

and I can tell it's going to be a waste of time trying to explain it to you.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
173. The article doesn't mention blacks at all, because its referring to the entire political party.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:56 PM
Apr 2016

There is REAL racism out there that needs to be banished & these false flags are only harming that cause. You diminish the fight against racism by this crying wolf.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
161. Your comment at the end of the article is completely clueless
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:28 PM
Apr 2016

you have deliberately chosen to misinterpret, or pretend to forget how Stockholm Syndrome was specifically applied to the AA community.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
163. Stockholm syndrome is not about race. Its about hostages & how those hostages deal with it.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:36 PM
Apr 2016
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon first described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors. These feelings are generally considered irrational in light of the danger or risk endured by the victims, who essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness.[1][2] The FBI's Hostage Barricade Database System shows that roughly eight percent of victims show evidence of Stockholm syndrome.[3]

Stockholm syndrome can be seen as a form of traumatic bonding, which does not necessarily require a hostage scenario, but which describes "strong emotional ties that develop between two persons where one person intermittently harasses, beats, threatens, abuses, or intimidates the other."[4] One commonly used hypothesis to explain the effect of Stockholm syndrome is based on Freudian theory. It suggests that the bonding is the individual's response to trauma in becoming a victim. Identifying with the aggressor is one way that the ego defends itself. When a victim believes the same values as the aggressor, they cease to be perceived as a threat.[5]

Stockholm syndrome is sometimes erroneously referred to as Helsinki syndrome.[6][7]

Stockholm syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken at Norrmalmstorg in Stockholm, Sweden. During the crime, several bank employees were held hostage in a bank vault from August 23 to 28, 1973, while their captors negotiated with police. During this standoff, the victims became emotionally attached to their captors, rejected assistance from government officials at one point, and even defended their captors after they were freed from their six-day ordeal.[8]

The term was coined by the criminologist and psychiatrist Nils Bejerot, consultant psychiatrist to the police when it happened. He called it "Norrmalmstorgssyndromet" (Swedish), directly translated as The Norrmalmstorg Syndrome, but then later became known abroad as the Stockholm syndrome.[9] It was originally defined by psychiatrist Frank Ochberg to aid the management of hostage situations.[10]

In Nazi Germany in the 1930s some Jews were allegedly shouting "Down with Us"[18] and supported Hitler's policies.[19] The syndrome is encouraged in crime situations because it can increase the hostages' chances for survival, but those experiencing it are usually not very cooperative during rescue or prosecution.

Several symptoms of Stockholm Syndrome have been identified in the following: positive feelings toward the controller, negative feelings toward the rescuers, supportive behavior by the victim helping the abuser, and lack of desire by the victim to be rescued.[20][21]

Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
164. Keep it up...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:42 PM
Apr 2016

Last edited Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:24 AM - Edit history (1)

Brilliant tactic, really.


eta: it's really disgusting to watch these people lining up to congratulate one another for yet another successful dog whistle.

Another proud berniebro moment. Is it any wonder he's losing?

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
168. What you're posting is unhinged from reality. The (D) party has gone rogue Right Wing.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:49 PM
Apr 2016

That's the problem.

NOTHING TO DO WITH RACE.

Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
175. "unhinged from reality," what??
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:59 PM
Apr 2016

No matter how many times you try and SCREAM at people here, the fact remains that this POV reeks of arrogance on so many levels.

Not the least of which is the way it was used RIGHT HERE.

Keep it up, it's effing brilliant I tell ya.

Autumn

(45,066 posts)
291. Thanks for the high five, but there's nothing I can do to help you with your comprehension problems.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:43 AM
Apr 2016

Autumn

(45,066 posts)
294. Not as short as you want it to be. Too bad. I'm sure Skinner doesn't want to knock
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 09:54 AM
Apr 2016

out a good chunk of his board yet.

Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
295. True enough, I'll manage.
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:04 AM
Apr 2016

In the meantime, keep up the good work with these winners.

High fives all around.

Autumn

(45,066 posts)
296. It is very much a winner OP there are many democrats who suffer from Democratic Stockholm Syndrome
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:11 AM
Apr 2016

I know, I was one. Leaving the democratic party was the most liberating experience of my life.

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon first described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome

I am no longer bonded with the democratic party, and it feels good.

Bobbie Jo

(14,341 posts)
301. The OP is yet another embarrassment in a long line
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:34 AM
Apr 2016

of arrogant attacks. Quadrupling down at this point isn't helping your candidate one whit.

Congrats on your epiphany, or whatever it is. Do what you need to do, but cheering this crap on only serves to insult and alienate these people even further.

The phrase has meaning here, everyone knows it. To pretend it's anything else at this point is disingenuous at best.

Have the last word, I've said what I wanted to say here.


Autumn

(45,066 posts)
302. The meaning "given" to that phrase here on DU means nothing. You can't change the meaning
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:41 AM
Apr 2016

of a phrase because someone misused it. Words and phrases have meaning, they may change over time but outrage on a message board will not change their meanings.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
171. delfection of how Stockholm Syndrom was applied here on DU to the AA Community, won't work
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:55 PM
Apr 2016

the original author was so shamed at the OP's (yes there were more than one) they were finally deleted...and you bring it back up...shame on you

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
174. My post has nothing to do with that situation.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:58 PM
Apr 2016

If the term "stockholm syndrome" has a different meaning here than in the rest of the world, it should be in the ToS never to use it here.

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
176. yes it did...you attempt to pretend the past didn't happen
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:02 PM
Apr 2016

you intended to wipe out how the terms was previously used but stating it had been misapplied.

It was despicable in it's racism then, and your deflection, and re-writing and telling us how in essence it was not used to label the AA's community, is just about as bad. Maybe worse. I find re-writing of facts to be heinous.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
181. The Democrats for the past 25-30 years have been acting republican, and we have to go
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:07 PM
Apr 2016

along with it because the actual republicans have moved to crazyland in response.

We're being held hostage.

That's what this OP article is about. Its the truth.

pat_k

(9,313 posts)
165. " established fantasy of incremental rearguard progress...."
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 01:44 PM
Apr 2016

A key "weapon" in the fantasy of incremental rearguard progress is "preemptive surrender."

It constantly mystifies. How can surrendering whenever a fight appears to be brewing on the horizon be "realism"?

The only thing it absolutely guarantees is failure.

When did so many Democrats decide that guaranteed failure was far better than making an effort?

What happened to the ideal of the "little engine that could"?

The so-called Democratic leadership is just littered with "little engines that couldn't."

 

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)
178. We can be realists, we can work within that construct
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:04 PM
Apr 2016

I cannot play with fairies and unicorns and be told it will come true.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
183. No not really. The Democratic Party loses with Third Way Dems leading us with RW policies
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:09 PM
Apr 2016

& forcing us to go along because the repubs are more evil.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
185. Your call sign is "Renew Deal" and your supporting Hillary?
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:13 PM
Apr 2016

That is some seriously fucked up shit.

Phlem

(6,323 posts)
201. That would be the non corrupt side.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:49 PM
Apr 2016

The non conservative side.

The NOT PRO CORPORATE side.

The side of the working man.

Not the side of shipping more fucking jobs out of the country.

etc...........


You didn't get that from my Bernie sig? Not seeing the big picture? Not surprised.

Renew Deal

(81,856 posts)
204. That's the problem
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:59 PM
Apr 2016

You can't be on that side and post what you posted. The 2000 Nader voters weren't some virtuous patriots that stood up for the little man. They were suckers that got fooled into destruction of the economy, civil rights, infrastructure, and several countries.

polichick

(37,152 posts)
180. The blind followers spoken of divert attention from the message...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:06 PM
Apr 2016

to word choice or anything else, rather than try to get their minds around why they continue to follow.

nolawarlock

(1,729 posts)
187. Talk about a passive aggressive way ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 02:17 PM
Apr 2016

... to resurrect the racist Stockholm Syndrome thread. Is that you, WillyH? And yes, I spelled it that way on purpose because you're clearly trying to stir racial hatred the same 41 did.

bbgrunt

(5,281 posts)
207. good article. I suppose the book "What's the matter with Kansas" is also
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 03:31 PM
Apr 2016

taboo in some circles here. Stockholm syndrome is what happens when someone starts identifying with their oppressor(s). It is more than mere ignorance. It is a primal self-defensive reaction that results in exactly the opposite of self-defense.

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
266. You describe it so well. Thanks.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 09:24 PM
Apr 2016

And we could go so far as to take many of the posts on this thread & others here & use them as examples of Dems held hostage identifying with their oppressors & getting defensive. You said something I can't refute, so so you are racist! You used a word in a way not commonly used, you don't know English!

Elsewhere....High college costs when it used to be quite affordable? Awesome! Killing innocents with drones? Hey its war, things happen. Unauthorized war? Did someone say something? Corporations & candidates setting up shell companies to avoid paying their taxes? No problem! No one likes paying taxes...

Primal, sad, something...

 

1StrongBlackMan

(31,849 posts)
254. That's because the ones doing it KNOW ...
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:00 PM
Apr 2016

the can't use the other word ... well ... the knew until recently.

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
246. I call bullshit.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 06:16 PM
Apr 2016

Anyone who understands the history that phrase has at this site and decides to post it anyway is being racially insensitive and divisive.

You KNOW that is a sensitive phrase, one that MANY black DUers take offense at and yet you decide to post it anyway.

No one cares what you meant, it only matter how it make people feel.

It is not even a good article.

wildeyed

(11,243 posts)
264. I wish there was a way
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 07:43 PM
Apr 2016

to make the computer blow-up when someone tries to post an OP with that word in the title. You post "BLAHBLAHBLAH Stockholm Syndrome, but that doesn't make me racist!!!1!!! And get the blue screen of death. BOOM. I'll go to over to ATA and see if the admins can hook that up

Duppers

(28,120 posts)
272. Wow. Was just talking about this phenomenon with my son.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 10:30 PM
Apr 2016

There's much truth here.

For to say thanks for this article and thread.


RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
274. That's so great. I hope many people start talking it up to family & friends & coworkers.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:07 PM
Apr 2016

Corporate media sure isn't talking about it. Its up to US.

Thanks for sharing, Duppers!

 

2banon

(7,321 posts)
275. Excellent Article RiverLover, thanks for sharing this.
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:08 PM
Apr 2016

And my hat off to ya for the Courage to post in hostile territory, particularly among a tribe of Neo Liberals given to despicable arrogance, extreme hubris and worst of all, intellectual dishonesty which I hold with a significant degree of contempt and loathing.

Bravo, mon ami! Bravo!

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
276. Mon plaisir, mon ami!! Ce n'était rien ;)
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:16 PM
Apr 2016

Hats off to you, 2banon! You call it like it is with articulated swagger & grace all rolled into one. Boom! I envy that.



Well said.

 

2banon

(7,321 posts)
280. Au contraire , mon ami . il était très important et sur ​​ce point,
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:37 PM
Apr 2016

d'aller au cœur de ce qui fait souffrir ce parti . Je vous remercie! vous me flattez , et je suis charmé , mais il vous est avec le courage et fanfaronnades !

tu gères!

et la lutte continue, mon ami.. le bras dans le bras ensemble.

Viva la révolution!

RiverLover

(7,830 posts)
286. "le bras dans le bras ensemble" - Arm & Arm we stand together!
Thu Apr 21, 2016, 11:54 PM
Apr 2016

Love that.

Keeps us strong in the fight against the neoliberal BS. In this together!

eridani

(51,907 posts)
289. The term "Stockholm Syndrome" is based on an assumption that is flat out wrong
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 04:53 AM
Apr 2016

Namely that most voters know candidates' positions on a range of issues and vote accordingly. They don't, and they don't.

PB57

(2 posts)
299. Quick Explanation
Fri Apr 22, 2016, 10:28 AM
Apr 2016

Dear All,

I am the author of this post - it is republished from an article I wrote for Common Dreams. I was completely unaware of any of the connotations that were previously associated with the Stockholm Syndrome posted on this site. Further, my goal in the article was not to dismiss or discount anyone for supporting one candidate over another. Rather, my only aim in the piece was to start a conversation regarding the possibilities of creating a more unified progressive movement and politics. I do feel that - quite understandably - a large amount of genuine progressive energy and resources are invested in leaders and Parties that do not substantively promote such values either domestically or internationally. In this regard, the piece was largely meant as a critique of Sanders supporters for not effectively articulating why this Centrist strategy may no longer be the best and most effective way to advocate for social reform and change.
I am sorry though if unintentionally it reinforced any discriminatory assumptions or perspectives - which again was the complete opposite of its intention.

On another note - the critics of my grammar are quite right. It is foment. I used ferment inappropriately.

Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»"The Democratic Stoc...