Joining in the holiday DU navel gazing, a few, simple Progressive steps toward Respect and Community

[omega minimo]

Threads are appearing about post counts or long timers or un/recs or other social complications, amongst issues of the day: the health care legislation that leaves the cancer at the center of the health care delivery system intact, just as the Bankster bailout did.

Definitely a time to regroup on so many levels, as well as the traditional time for this sort of reflection.

There are some very simple steps that DUers can take, to improve the quality of discourse (as opposed to "cheapen it" as DU Rules warn against).

Especially after recent comments posted by the creator/administrator of DU, we are reminded to think of this as a community of people, a community of PROGRESSIVES.

The terms for right and left and far left and center and everything shift all over the map. DUers use them in discussion without defining what they mean, anyway.

However, "Progressive" implies a certain attitude, awareness, spirit and recognition of history and social progress: including previous progressive eras where progress was made; even if the clock has been almost entirely turned back on the successes. Even if the pivotal leaders were killed where they stood, while fighting to represent We, The People.

That awareness and attitude of a Progressive includes some knowledge of the issues that define those eras and the people in them, if not full fledged support for each one. The most basic notion of Progressive is the recognition and support of issues that are interdependent, if not necessarily one's (if Progressives have only one) own pet issue.

The vile anti-meme of "political correctness" provided the Repugnant Party a tool to leverage against otherwise well-intentioned people, to embarrass them into feeling like sissies or latte liberals or dreadlocked trust fund students, if they dared care about issues of social justice that didn't (appear to) affect them directly.

Social justice for all depends on social justice for some, and vice versa. We have been balkanized into subgroups politically and by our own digitized behavior on a board like this.

Being Progressive means having some basic level of respect for other issues and for others who care about them, even if you don't care. If "respect" is too strong a concept, try tolerance or basic courtesy.


The DU Administrator also commented that sometimes the disagreements seem so malicious and over-the-top that even he gets sick if it. He called for us all to make an effort to remember those things that unite us rather than divide us; remember what we have in common.

He went further, reminding all of us that when we disagree, we can do so in a spirit of mutual respect.

Remembering what unites us is Progressive.
Remembering what we have in common is Progressive.
Disagreeing in a spirit of mutual respect is Progressive.

Let's give ourselves a gift this Holiday Season, as members of DU -- a gift the Administrators and Mods will cherish year round.

Remember that this IS a Progressive board.
Discuss with a spirit of common cause and strength, not competition and insecurity.
Show mutual respect when learning from each other or disagreeing on a point or an issue.

If it comes in a Christmas message from DU Admin, who are you to say otherwise?

We don't need to argue (well some do, we can respect that) about Un/Rec or Low Post Counts or Longtime DUers With Low Post Counts. If we follow some simple steps, the real disruptors are easier to spot and eliminate. Don't tolerate bigoted comments on DU. Belligerence is a big red flag that the poster is not here with the Progressive intentions invoked in the Admin. reminder.

Let's see if we can get subthreads going that are ACTUAL DISCUSSION, not fisticuffs.

Let's see if we can volley posts back and forth at least ONCE, maybe even TWICE.

Let's read before reacting, not assuming the worst meaning but the best, as sometimes these disembodied words can set someone off with no real reason or intention at the other end.

Let's remember We're All In This Together.

Here's to the future :toast: HAPPY NEW YEAR :woohoo: :party: :grouphug: :pals:




http://www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html

[BrklynLiberal]

1. I am very, very disappointed that I can recommend this post only once..

Thank you so much for your rationality and eloquence.

:thumbsup: :hi: :grouphug: :fistbump: :yourock: :applause:

[omega minimo]

3. I'm shocked at the immediate

and because they're immediate, overwhelming endorsements ....... so glad this resonated.

Thanks BrklynLiberal!! :pals:

[leftstreet]

2. Ruling Class Apologists can still kiss my ass though

Other than that, I'm on board!

:rofl:

:toast:

K&R

[omega minimo]

4. People who like Journey .... well, as long as they don't make me listen to it ........

:rofl: :hug: Merry Christmas leftstreet. Happy, healthy New Year. :toast:

[rumpel]

5. Thanks for this post, omega minimo

:)

[omega minimo]

6. cheers, rumpel

:toast:

Conscience is the soul of freedom, its eyes, its energy, its life. Without conscience, freedom never knows what to do with itself.

~ Thomas Merton

[highplainsdem]

7. Thanks for posting this! K&R

[omega minimo]

12. much obliged, highplainsdem

:hi:

[MorningGlow]

8. K&R, baby

Thanks for this. :*

[omega minimo]

11. Happy Solstice, MG

:pals:

[MorningGlow]

13. And you!

:hug:

[librechik]

9. Hear Hear!

Where Where?

Here Here!


thx omega!

[omega minimo]

10. Ha Ha!!

:toast:

[niyad]

14. k and r--just because

[omega minimo]

22. cheers niyad

:toast:

[me b zola]

15. Thank you, thank you

The overwhelming majority of us here want progressive ideas and policies to advance--we just need to figure out how to focus on that rather than focusing on others with the same agenda but differing views on how to get there. We really are all in this together, and we hurt ourselves when we battle each other rather than the issues.

Many thanks for this thread. :thumbsup:

[omega minimo]

18. Well put

There's a chance for some new openings, possible b/c many are going to be questioning their own assumptions about --- lotsa stuff. Rather than lash out, folks may open up a bit, even though it'll be confusing.

People are talking about giving up or tuning out, which we won't do completely, but a shift in energies is appropriate. The big battles on the board now seem to be those who are disillusioned and those who demand allegiance to.... what?

I'm struck by how just recently it's become A Thing to acknowledge that we have corporate fascism in our government, as if that AIN'T A Thing! One thing to admit it, another to admit it and yawn and go on the the next fight over Un/Rec,,,,,,,,

[pscot]

16. Well said

There's a lot of agita out there. and people are bringing it here. We're just one big disfunctional family, feuding our way through the holidays. Maybe things will settle down after the New Year.
Cheers. :toast:

[Bluebear]

17. #1 Happy new year to you!

#2 That talking bird animation tickles me :)

[omega minimo]

19. Good on ya, Bluebear. Happy New Year

glad you liked that. pretty funny. :spray:

[lunatica]

20. Cool! I'm game

[omega minimo]

21. Nice!

:pals:

[skepticscott]

23. Sounds like a post

From someone who thinks that if we all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya, that everything will be hunky-dory. Sorry that everything can't be the progressive lovefest that you'd like, and sorry if having to defend your ideas and beliefs against strident criticism is too much for your delicate sensibilities. No, the discussions here are not always pretty, but if you think that everything that needs to be said can be said without ruffling the feathers of the most sensitive and thin-skinned people out there (and there are many such on this site), then you're fooling yourself.

[omega minimo]

24. "someone who thinks that if we all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya" like Skinner?

-- You have a problem with him saying -- and me echoing -- that this is a Progressive site, with common cause, where we are encouraged by management to disagree respectfully?

"Sorry if having to defend your ideas and beliefs against strident criticism is too much for your delicate sensibilities."

-- Sorry if the simple concepts of common cause and basic respect are too much for your "thin-skinned, delicate sensibilities." Are you able to communicate clearly without the "stridency"? Communicate clearly without the "criticism"? Communication as discussion, collaboration, respectful disagreement ... or is "strident criticism" the best you can do?

"No, the discussions here are not always pretty, but if you think that everything that needs to be said can be said without ruffling the feathers of the most sensitive and thin-skinned people out there (and there are many such on this site), then you're fooling yourself."

-- I think -- and apparently Skinner does too -- that disagreements can occur in a respectful way. I think that the "strident criticism" and belligerence that many hide behind, also provides cover for the real disruptors. The suggestion here is that each of us make more of an effort to post peacefully, will make it easier to spot and flush out the real phonies. (A repeated topic of concern on the board when I posted this OP).

-- If that sounds like a "progressive lovefest" that you sneer at, perhaps you have some self-reflection to do, regarding your contributions and presence on DU...

... a start would be some honesty about that "ruffling the feathers of the most sensitive and thin-skinned people out there (and there are many such on this site)." Many of those "most sensitive and thin-skinned people out there" have their feathers pre-ruffled, feel entitled to jump others out of the blue, "stridently" attacking and dismissing what they don't condone -- where's the respect? That's just obnoxious. Don't fool yourself about that.

[skepticscott]

37. I have a problem

with the kind of subtle censorship that implies that people need to be careful what they say. And with the attitude of people who are all in favor of free speech, as long as it doesn't offend anyone.

-- Sorry if the simple concepts of common cause and basic respect are too much for your "thin-skinned, delicate sensibilities." Are you able to communicate clearly without the "stridency"? Communicate clearly without the "criticism"? Communication as discussion, collaboration, respectful disagreement ... or is "strident criticism" the best you can do?--

And what specifically is implied by the rather mushy term "common cause"? This site includes forums on an extremely wide range of topics, no one of which has a single "common cause" which all posters are expected to fall into lockstep with. Even in the realm of politics, I defy you to show me agreement on what constitute "Democratic" or "progressive" ideals, or who embodies them. And no, "strident criticism" is not the only way I communicate here, but when people lie, misrepresent, invent facts, distort logic and just plain say stupid stuff, and do it over and over and over, then it absolutely is appropriate. If someone is spewing flat-out bullshit, then I'm not going to say "I respectfully disagree", because they haven't earned respect by that tactic. I'm going to tell them that they're full of it, and more importantly, WHY. Not every issue can be argued, and not every truth can be hammered out simply by "discussion, collaboration and respectful disagreement". And frankly, I don't give two hoots about identifying the "real phonies" (whatever that means). The truth is all that matters in the end, and getting to it is not always a warm and fuzzy process.

Face it...most of this is about people here who express opinions that they are unable to defend, but that they think should be immune from criticism. They can't deal with the factual and logical demolition of their cherished beliefs, so they complain about how mean their critics are instead.

[omega minimo]

43. This is a very well articulated version of a common attitude on DU

--that somehow courtesy or care in word choice is "censorship"
--that "common cause" is unfamiliar and "mushy"
--that whatever "common cause" is, it involves "walking in lockstep"
--that the progressive attitude presented in the OP is forgotten, unlearned and ignored
--that respect has to be "earned"
--that if *you* decide something is "invented facts," "distorted logic," or "stupid," you have the right to "tell them they're full of it"
--that *you* think *you* tell them "more importantly" "WHY" (which would be an improvement on most of these sorts of self righteous attacks)
--that the bellicose take no responsiblity for providing cover for real disruptors
--that the belligerent don't respect the Admin or the Rules enough to be personally responsible for their behavior


"Not every issue can be argued, and not every truth can be hammered out simply by "discussion, collaboration and respectful disagreement". "

--You might have a point, if there were examples of successes where "issues are argued" in any productive manner; where the result of the behavior you endorse isn't just smackdowns and flamefests. What's the point? The OP challenged DU to discuss with volleys of one, maybe even two posts. What you call "hammering out" is usually just hammering ON.

"And frankly, I don't give two hoots about identifying the "real phonies" (whatever that means)."

--What that means is already stated in the OP, which you ignored:

OP: "If we follow some simple steps, the real disruptors are easier to spot and eliminate. Don't tolerate bigoted comments on DU. Belligerence is a big red flag that the poster is not here with the Progressive intentions invoked in the Admin. reminder."

"The truth is all that matters in the end, and getting to it is not always a warm and fuzzy process."

--What matters in the end is also stated in the OP, which you ignored:

OP: "If it comes in a Christmas message from DU Admin, who are you to say otherwise?"

"Even in the realm of politics, I defy you to show me agreement on what constitute "Democratic" or "progressive" ideals, or who embodies them."

--What constitutes "progressive" is also stated in the OP, which you ignored:

OP: However, "Progressive" implies a certain attitude, awareness, spirit and recognition of history and social progress: including previous progressive eras where progress was made; even if the clock has been almost entirely turned back on the successes. Even if the pivotal leaders were killed where they stood, while fighting to represent We, The People.

That awareness and attitude of a Progressive includes some knowledge of the issues that define those eras and the people in them, if not full fledged support for each one. The most basic notion of Progressive is the recognition and support of issues that are interdependent, if not necessarily one's (if Progressives have only one) own pet issue.

[skepticscott]

45. There's so much nonsense and illogic on your post

that I can't even begin to address it all, even if I were so inclined, but a few things deserve comment.

This is a very well articulated version of a common attitude on DU
--that somehow courtesy or care in word choice is "censorship"
--that "common cause" is unfamiliar and "mushy"
--that whatever "common cause" is, it involves "walking in lockstep"
--that the progressive attitude presented in the OP is forgotten, unlearned and ignored
--that respect has to be "earned"
--that if *you* decide something is "invented facts," "distorted logic," or "stupid," you have the right to "tell them they're full of it"
--that *you* think *you* tell them "more importantly" "WHY" (which would be an improvement on most of these sorts of self righteous attacks)
--that the bellicose take no responsiblity for providing cover for real disruptors
--that the belligerent don't respect the Admin or the Rules enough to be personally responsible for their behavior

And...your point would be what? That just by calling all of these things one "common attitude" (without citing any other posts which contain them-apparently if YOU decide that they constitute a "common attitude" they are) that renders them illegitimate.


"Not every issue can be argued, and not every truth can be hammered out simply by "discussion, collaboration and respectful disagreement". "

--You might have a point, if there were examples of successes where "issues are argued" in any productive manner; where the result of the behavior you endorse isn't just smackdowns and flamefests. What's the point? The OP challenged DU to discuss with volleys of one, maybe even two posts. What you call "hammering out" is usually just hammering ON.

Just to cite one blindingly obvious example out of many, was the issue of whether slavery was acceptable hammered out simply by "discussion, collaboration and respectful disagreement". Of course not. Could it have been? Not remotely. Long-term, heated and even violent debates DO get settled by means other than "respectful disagreement" with those holding offensive or demonstrably false views.

"The truth is all that matters in the end, and getting to it is not always a warm and fuzzy process."

--What matters in the end is also stated in the OP, which you ignored:

And if we adhere to what the OP says matters in the end, but fail to speak the plain truth because it may offend someone, what has really been achieved? Productive and ultimately useful discussions about important and emotional issues cannot be held without the possibility of hurt feelings, ruffled feathers and accusations of rudeness, any more than we could have waged war in Iraq without collateral damage.


"Even in the realm of politics, I defy you to show me agreement on what constitute "Democratic" or "progressive" ideals, or who embodies them."

--What constitutes "progressive" is also stated in the OP, which you ignored

No, one person's opinion about what constitutes "progressive" is stated in the OP. If there was strong agreement (which is what I asked you to demonstrate, and what YOU ignored) about that point, there would have been no reason for the mod to try to lay it all out, now would there? And even if there was agreement on principals or ideals, there is not and never will be agreement on how to achieve them.

And as far as respect, I respect everyone's right to hold any opinions they wish, and to express and debate them in any way they choose (a respect which you would apparently not grant to me), but as far as the opinions themselves, they do not automatically earn my respect just by being opinions, no matter how deeply held or fondly adhered to. If they cannot be justified or defended, they deserve no more than to be dismissed.

[omega minimo]

47. #

2.
That is a common attitude, you articulated it well. Your logic about "calling them" common "makes them illegitimate" makes no sense. The attitude is reflected back to you. Do you find it illegitimate? I find it belligerent.

3.
Just to state the blindingly obvious, I meant ON DU.

4.
The OP referenced the words of the Administrator, who seems to think that respect and progressive views can work together, presumably with "the plain truth" on his brainchild web discussion board. Are you saying you're not willing to try?

5.
That is not "one person's opinion about what constitutes 'progressive'," that is a historical and contextual definition of progressive.

"And even if there was agreement on principals or ideals, there is not and never will be agreement on how to achieve them."

That is the point. "Being Progressive means having some basic level of respect for other issues and for others who care about them, even if you don't care. If "respect" is too strong a concept, try tolerance or basic courtesy."

Yet because you are so busy side-stepping, reading and not comprehending, you need to read the OP and the definition again. Perhaps it will sink in a little.

6.
"And as far as respect, I respect everyone's right to hold any opinions they wish, and to express and debate them in any way they choose (a respect which you would apparently not grant to me)...."

EXCUSE ME? :wtf: And Where do YOU get OFF making THAT particular JAB?!

1.
"There's so much nonsense and illogic on your post that I can't even begin to address it all, even if I were so inclined, but a few things deserve comment."

That's how I felt about your post but I TRIED to communicate with you. Your pathetic and unfounded INSULT proves you are not able to "discuss with a spirit of common cause and strength, not competition and insecurity."

0.
"... but as far as the opinions themselves, they do not automatically earn my respect just by being opinions, no matter how deeply held or fondly adhered to. If they cannot be justified or defended, they deserve no more than to be dismissed."

There it is, the bottom line of that common and callous attitude, again very well articulated. It really is indefensibly ARROGANT, especially in light of this OP, this thread being about what the DU Administrator has in mind for the site.

Who are *you* to decide ahead of time what "deserves" respect and attention on DU, to deem something unworthy ("distorted," "stupid"), attack out of nowhere, demand it be "justified or defended" and then object when others don't want to play with you because of your own outlandish, self entitled behavior?

[omega minimo]

53. .

[LanternWaste]

54. I imagine many people believe...

I imagine many people believe that civility and "subtle censorship" are one in the same. I do not, though...

[skepticscott]

59. Well, I have to disagree somewhat

Have you ever been in a situation at a social gathering, or at work, and someone started spouting off about "those damn towelheads" or "those damn feminists" or "those damn faggots" messing up the country, or some such blatant nonsense, and you bit your tongue and didn't say what you really wanted to say and what you knew needed to be said, because you knew you had to interact with these people over the long term, or didn't feel it was appropriate in that situation to make a scene and make everyone else uncomfortable? I suspect it's happened to most people. Maybe civility and "subtle censorship" are not necessarily the same thing, but we DO self-censor in subtle and not-so-subtle ways all the time in the name of civility and because of the realities of ongoing social interaction. And in doing so, we leave important things unsaid and allow lies and bigotry to go unchallenged. Sometimes the civility is more important, but it cannot always be. Sometimes the cold, undiplomatic truth has to be paramount, no matter who it honks off.

[LanternWaste]

60. I've never found it to be the case that civility denies truth.

I've never come across a truth (or a lie) which could not be told in a civil and honorable manner-- it's merely a matter of placing as much a priority on civility as we do on truth (but both seem to be out of style these days anyway...).

I've never found it to be the case that civility denies truth.

[skepticscott]

61. Well, while you're looking for

warm and fuzzy ways to call lies lies and bullshit bullshit, I'll keep calling them like I see them. No matter how you speak the truth, to treat lies deferentially and with respect elevates them to the level of acceptable discourse, and I refuse to do that.

[omega minimo]

67. You are really fucking out of line.

That post was totally undeserving of your macho posturing and insults. What a fucking joke. You are doing what the OP talks about, the "competitive and insecure."

You have just finished telling us how you pander to bigoted assholes in your life and you are projecting these venal insults FOR NO VALID REASON at a DUer, accusing them of what YOU do IRL?!!!!!! :wow:

"To treat lies deferentially and with respect elevates them to the level of acceptable discourse" is what YOU DO when you don't correct the bigots in your life. It takes courage and IT TOO can be done peacefully and respectfully, simply bearing witness to the fact that those bigoted comments are unacceptable.

Come here and act like a tough guy, eh?

[skepticscott]

71. Please get over yourself

"Venal insults"? What exactly would those have been? Hyperventilating doesn't become you.

And tell you what....you feel free to argue against stupidity in the way that suits you, and I will do the same. Perhaps between us we'll do more good than we would individually.

[omega minimo]

72. Here's some "stupidity" and chickenshit

You aren't even capable of being honest about your own insulting behavior:

"61. Well, while you're looking for warm and fuzzy ways to call lies lies and bullshit bullshit,"

That 's a total projection and insulting load of arrogant horseshit

"I'll keep calling them like I see them."

Yeah, "please get over yourself."

"No matter how you speak the truth, to treat lies deferentially and with respect elevates them to the level of acceptable discourse, and I refuse to do that."

That 's a total projection and insulting load of arrogant horseshit. The poster gave you no grounds for your baseless assumptions. So much for being a "skeptic."

You also don't admit that that IS what you are doing when you play nicey nice with bigots IRL.

What's REALLY stupid is how many really smart people there are on DU who act/think/post like you do. And you did articulate the POV quite well. Somewhere along the line though, through overeducation or undersocialization, these people prefer to attack than understand.

Yes there's different styles of communication and no, nobody's "singing Kumbaya" or "censoring." But the self entitled prigs who decide that something is "unworthy" of even basic respect and attack out of the blue with the kind of groundless accusations and venal insults you've provided here, are a real PIA.

As for your suggestion, I prefer to Ignore the kind of stupidity you're selling.

[skepticscott]

73. So those were the insults?

:rofl: You and the people you're trying to defend seem to be even thinner-skinned than I imagined if those are the most insulting things you can point to me saying. In any case, your bluster is not impressive.

And btw, before you make yourself look even sillier, I suggest you go look up the word "venal", and then explain to me how my (imagined) insults qualify. You're trying to smear me with a $64 word that you don't even know the meaning of, just because it sounds biting and caustic. Which, come to think of it, is not too far from what you're in a snit about me doing, except that I know the meaning of what I'm saying.

[omega minimo]

68. You are correct

And with a comment in the OP in mind, regarding how we may come off differently than intended, I'm willing to take another look at posts; be careful with the one liners and what I think may be humor but doesn't translate to the screen.... (however, below, your correspondent has really pissed me off).

[omega minimo]

66. Anything THAT blatantly bigoted must be addressed immediately, by saying it is unacceptable

or walking away -- anything else is complicity, telling the bigoted speaker that what they said is being condoned, approved by deadly silence.

You keep shifting the discussion about relations on DU to comparisons of offline situations. (Sounds like you're in some bizarre ones too.) This post appears that you keep your lip zipped in the face of totlally outrageous comments IRL and come to DU to be all sharp elbows and "cold, undiplomatic truth."

Try finding a balance between the two, rather than work off your passive/aggression on the keyboard after smiling at and enabling the bigots in your life.

:thumbsup:

[billh58]

30. And your post sounds

like a diatribe from someone just itching for a fight. The OP doesn't call for you to hold anyone's hand, or sing anything -- only that you make your points in a civilized and respectful manner.

[Flying Dream Blues]

31. Great illustration of what the OP is trying to change.

Insulting and disrespectful, completely missing the point and contributing nothing to the discussion. Check.

[omega minimo]

33. Antagonistic, Missing the point on purpose, Making a false interpretation of what we presented,

and "contributing nothing to the discussion" Check. :spray:

[blondeatlast]

25. I found DU by literally Googling "democrat" and "underground. "

I was looking for a place for party loyals who could talk freely about our misgivings about the management. I lurked for about a week and realized I'd found a home.

"We're all in this together." It can be difficult to remember that when labeledon this board. The labels simply don't work; precious few of us fit the more common ones.
I'm convinced that there may be a very few on this board who easily slip into those categories but I think that most of us have pet issues that don't conveniently fit iinto any category--nor do the issues we are dealing with. Politics indeed creates odd bedfellows--those who neatly label me one way because of how I feel on Issue A often support my positions and opinions on another hot issue.

We need the purists and we need the pragmatists. It really is as simple as that.

OM, I was becoming so disgusted with what I've been seeing here that I was ready to write Skinner and tell him thanks, but I was through. I'm not quite ready for this--I have been through so much with my DU colleagues--this place saved my sanity on November 4, 2004.

Thanks for helping me remember why I looked for this place.

[omega minimo]

26. Thank you blondeatlast

The thanks go to Skinner for reinvoking this notion of what DU can be. I've gotten in a lot of trouble for thinking that those are the standards we aspire to. Maybe if all each of us did was "preview" before posting, we could build fewer assumptions and more understanding into the intertubes. I find the labels really -- not confusing, as much as meaningless -- never really fleshed out, somewhat arbitrary... yes, confusing.

Happy New Year :toast:

[blondeatlast]

28. I'm one of those that will type a mini-essay in anger. Then I stop,

read it again; take 90% of the snark and spit out of it, and find that there is nothing left to say--or that I get to the point without being stupid.

Once I felt comfortable here, I developed a bad habit of reating rather than responding. I still do on occasion but only when I think it really, really matters (this whole Hamsher/Norquist thing, for instance). Still, I try to keep it in check, aminly by waiting before I respond to an "offending" post.

Cheers to you! :toast:

[Odin2005]

27. K&R

Love the jab against Palin in the pic! :rofl:

[SidDithers]

29. Bookmarking...nt

Sid

[madamesilverspurs]

32. Hear here! Bingo! Yes!

and Amen! for good measure.


---

[omega minimo]

34. Bingo and Amen!

:rofl:

[JonLP24]

35. K&R

I recall one of the administrators said the best thing any of us can do to make this a more respectful place is to look within ourselves and see what we can do as individuals to make this a better place. I try to make sure I don't resort to name calling or insults and I try to overall be 'nice' to others here.

BTW I love this paragraph. How true. :thumbsup:

"The vile anti-meme of "political correctness" provided the Repugnant Party a tool to leverage against otherwise well-intentioned people, to embarrass them into feeling like sissies or latte liberals or dreadlocked trust fund students, if they dared care about issues of social justice that didn't (appear to) affect them directly."

[omega minimo]

39. Good point.

Thanks for the feedback. I wondered how that would sit (esp. with dread locked trust fund students) :yoiks:

[Kermitt Gribble]

36. I've decided I'm no longer going to use the "Progressive" label.

I don't want any part of a label the DLC associates with.

Good post, though. K&R!

[omega minimo]

38. All right.

That'll work too. :toast:

[Hidden Stillness]

40. Right Again; No Progress Unless We Have Awareness and Thinking

Hi, omega, and Merry uh, generic holiday season; whatever. An early Christian mystical writer, called St. Isaac the Syrian, or Isaac of Nineveh, wrote that to know the world and outer life, and the mystical eternity-space of God, we must first know ourselves and turn inward--that is the way to the external:

"Be at peace with your own soul; then heaven and earth will be at peace with you. Enter eagerly into the treasure house that is within you, and so you will see the things that are in heaven; for there is but one single entry to them both. The ladder that leads to the kingdom is hidden within your soul. Flee from sin, dive into yourself, and in your soul you will discover the stairs by which to ascend." From the book "The Orthodox Way," (Eastern Orthodox Christianity), by Bishop Kallistos Ware; ignoring the bigoted "kingdom" jargon. The "ladder" that leads to one, is the "ladder" that leads to the other.

As someone who flares up with anger every now and then, I have been thinking about that quotation over this Christmas season. Be at peace with myself and what I am (introvert, etc.), and get more calm and peaceful, to relate to others better, etc. Some fights are real, others are because we honestly do not share the same issue-interests; but others are phony "evil" disharmony or bigotry, that has to be opposed, before it poisons everything.

Happy Holidays, whatever you celebrate; Merry Christmas, etc. Another great thread telling the truth, omega.

[omega minimo]

41. Thanks for being on the rung with me, HS

Always a pleasure :toast: End of school/Solstice/Death in family/Christmas/New meditation group ... New Year ...

Your beautiful message sounds like what we get from the Buddhists, going within, clearing the mind's eye, being the change ... this post inspired by all of the above and mostly the administrative reiteration that it IS appropriate to seek that level on DU.

"As someone who flares up with anger every now and then, I have been thinking about that quotation over this Christmas season. Be at peace with myself and what I am (introvert, etc.), and get more calm and peaceful, to relate to others better, etc. Some fights are real, others are because we honestly do not share the same issue-interests; but others are phony "evil" disharmony or bigotry, that has to be opposed, before it poisons everything."

Some fights are big and some are right up close; some are abstract, some too personal. I'm tired of fighting on many levels; in ways I could describe for myself and also I feel that many of us may be examining right now: political battles that go nowhere (here, in real life and at different levels) being at the top of the list.

The stance of "en guard" becomes a habit, an eventual waste of energy.

30 years of Reaganism, crying in the dark, pointing to The Path Not To Take, warning ... and now? Now, when "people will care when it affects them" finally comes, I don't care anymore. They want to get all excited and NOW let's DO something about this damned CORPORATE GUBMINT!! Yeah, well, good luck with that.

:spray:

[Hidden Stillness]

57. Fighting Until It Wears You Down...to Nothing..?

I started really thinking about your reply a little later, re-read it, and thought about it, and its tone (or what it seemed to me). Are you really feeling as "hopeless" or "shutting off" or fed-up as some of the phrasing seemed to be, (understandable, considering some of the shocking "D"LC/corporate moves, after all the campaign jargon)? Many battles seem to go on forever and have no constructive end at all--I am always depressingly aware of this every time you get another vicious, hostile blast of sexist hate from the "liberal males" on this or that invented issue, or you just realize again how male-centered and bigoted most of them still are, as if there had been no feminist movement and teaching at all.

There is getting to be a profound "sea-change" of attitudes, of societal groups, of what are considered to be political issues even, and a lot of that is muddled and angry for the time being, until it starts to sort itself out and become clearer. One of the biggest is what was done to women--starting with the hateful media treatment of the campaign of Hillary Clinton (even those who didn't support her were disgusted at its sexism) and all women's issues, the exploitation of women that never ends but seems to get even more violent--and the lack of response by anyone on this issue (nobody even calls it a hate crime, and it obviously is), etc. This can seem not only outrageous but hopeless just as a state of the world. Talk to women alone though, and you hear how angry they are, just beneath the surface; these issues never went away, to them. I think this will resurface as a political issue, because the shit that has been done to women is not forgotten. They are the ultimate "you have to vote for us, you have nowhere else to go/taken-for-granted group."

You also mentioned fighting on many levels, some personal. You probably don't want to get into something personal, but whatever it is, I hope it will go better and be happier next year. It is always tricky getting along with people; everybody can get touchy, defensive. The part at the very end though, "..and now? Now, when "people will care when it affects them" finally comes, I don't care anymore. They want to get all excited and NOW let's DO something about this damned CORPORATE GUBMINT!! Yeah, well, good luck with that."--well, that is really distressing. It seems so hopeless and giving-up, and yet, who can argue with it? I hope the people get back into the Government, get back into the National agenda for things, get the corporations and their poisonous, corrupting influence out, but this will be a huge, monumental, "fight to the death," "good vs. evil" level fight, conducted...how?

[omega minimo]

70. Need to think and come back, too

:pals:

[pecwae]

42. I'm actually LOLing

still at that gull! Thanks for the great post!!

[omega minimo]

44. Pretty good, huh?

[phasma ex machina]

46. Deleted

[Monk06]

48. According to this Progressive doesn't constitute a concrete political program.

It's just a psychological orientation.

"However, "Progressive" implies a certain attitude, awareness, spirit and recognition of history and social progress: including previous progressive eras where progress was made; even if the clock has been almost entirely turned back on the successes. Even if the pivotal leaders were killed where they stood, while fighting to represent We, The People.

That awareness and attitude of a Progressive includes some knowledge of the issues that define those eras and the people in them, if not full fledged support for each one. The most basic notion of Progressive is the recognition and support of issues that are interdependent, if not necessarily one's (if Progressives have only one) own pet issue."

Sorry to have to say it but these to paragraphs are just a collection of generalizations regarding social attitudes.
It contains no facts, no concrete historical or political discussion that would leave one with an understanding of what the word progressive actually means.

I have gotten into some heated discussion on this board for pointing this out but the term Progressive is a neologism.
I have have yet to see a discussion of what progressive means other than something vaguely left of a centrist liberal position.

For instance the word Suffragette has a specific meaning. It refers to a social movement that had concrete social goals and a program to achieve them. The so called Progressive movement lacks that kind of political and philosophical clarity and your OP does nothing to bring the term into focus

[omega minimo]

49. This OP was not intended to provide that level of education

although it does allude to "concrete historical" events, including the assassinations that symbolize the era and the politics, in both the quotes you show.

"... awareness, spirit and recognition of history and social progress" .... " includes some knowledge of the issues that define those eras and the people in them ..."

It also points out "the clock has been almost entirely turned back on the successes ..." This OP WAS "regarding social attitudes."

Yes, the history may need to be retaught.

[Monk06]

50. I should have pointed out that a too narrowly or rigidly orthodox definition of

Progressive would be equally inadequate.

Again, as a for instance we can take the example of the
word Conservative. This used to describe a range of views
from center right to the extremes of far right thinking
in American politics.

Now the term conservative has ossified into a narrowly
defined orthodoxy orbiting around a well known list
of issues that both define and constrain conservatives
eg:

Anti-abortion
Pro Military
Anti Government
Hostility toward immigrants legal and undocumented
Historical Revisionism regarding the Civil Rights Movement of the sixties
Hostility to international institutions such as the UN and the IHRT
Adherence to the doctrine of US exeptionalism in foreign policy
Hostility to tax increases of any kind.

And the list goes on as you know.

The point to remember is the extreme orthodoxy of the RW/Conservative
alliance has become a strait jacket making impossible for them to do
anything but obstruct a sitting Democratic President. That is why they
are floundering now even as they predict victory at the polls in 2010

My objection would be better termed a desire to see more cohesion and
concrete political policy on the left. Rather than the sniping that I
have been seeing lately here.

[omega minimo]

51. It sounds like the start

of some interesting OPs of yours.

"...more cohesion and concrete political policy on the left..." sounds good. I take political labels on DU with a huge grain of salt because people talk as if they know what they mean, but the definitions have shifted all over the place.

I understand that Progressive is that way too -- and the historic sense I invoked is no longer common knowledge, which is part of the problem. Many people don't recall a time when different agendas actually did cooperate or at least communicate.

I can't help with the Conservative ossification and constraint because they've just painted themselves into a corner of complete insanity AFAIK.

All these years, we've hoped there might be one or two sane Repukes or Conservatives to stand up for what once was their principles, but since Jim Jeffords switched parties, it ain't happnin.'

[Monk06]

52. Here's a tidbit the Conservative Party of Canada used to be called the Progressive Conservative

Party

"The party adopted the "Progressive Conservative" party name in 1942 when Manitoba Premier John Bracken, a long-time leader of that province's Progressive Party, agreed to become leader of the Conservatives on condition that the party add Progressive to its name. Despite the name change, most former Progressive supporters continued to support the Liberal Party or the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, and Bracken's leadership of the Conservative Party came to an end in 1948. Many Canadians still simply referred to the party as "the Conservatives"."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Conservative_Party_of_Canada

As you can see it was the result of expediency and political opportunism.
They dropped the progressive label when the new Conservative party was
formed with the merger of the Conservative and Alliance parties.

The name had long become a joke among politicla commentators who called
the PC the "Regressive Conservative Party"

After Harper took over the RWers in Canadian politics purged centrist
conservatives some of whom joined the Liberals.

[Uncle Joe]

55. Kicked, but too late to recommend.

I'm sorry to have missed this one.

Thanks for the thread, omega minimo.:thumbsup:

[omega minimo]

56. Thanks Uncle Joe. Happy Holidays.

:pals:

[Skidmore]

58. Thank you.

It would also help to point out that it's hard to be progressive without being liberal, and vice versa.

[omega minimo]

69. Good point.

Thank YOU.

[HughMoran]

62. progressive: 13 mentions; liberal 1 ('latte liberal'); Democrat: 0

From your link to the RULES:

2. Who We Are: Democratic Underground is an online community for Democrats and other progressives. Members are expected to be generally supportive of progressive ideals, and to support Democratic candidates for political office. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates.

bias?

[omega minimo]

64. "bias?" Yes.

Yours. Take off your blinders long enough to see what it right before you.

"Especially after recent comments posted by the creator/administrator of DU, we are reminded to think of this as a community of people, a community of PROGRESSIVES."

"The DU Administrator also commented that sometimes the disagreements seem so malicious and over-the-top that even he gets sick if it. He called for us all to make an effort to remember those things that unite us rather than divide us; remember what we have in common. He went further, reminding all of us that when we disagree, we can do so in a spirit of mutual respect."

"If it comes in a Christmas message from DU Admin, who are you to say otherwise?"


Ir's EXCEEDINGLY clear that my OP was echoing the comments of the DU administrator's Christmas greeting to DUer. If you have a problem with your word count, take it up with him.

[IndianaGreen]

63. Happy New Year, omega minimo

Too late to rec your thread.

[omega minimo]

65. Many Happy Returns, IndianaGreen

:toast: