Wow. Just wow.

[WilliamPitt]

My thread about the definition of 'progressive' and the splintering of the Left:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=3570459&mesg_id=3570459

...gets locked because of infighting, squabbling, personal attacks, etc.

The mod was right to lock it. But wow.

Just fucking wow.

I need a drink.

[Misunderestimator]

1. Sorry to have played a part in that...

well, not really sorry, but there it is.

[ruggerson]

5. You been bad again?

:spank:

[Misunderestimator]

6. Me?

:hi:

[arwalden]

8. I Thought You Did Well

Personally.

[Misunderestimator]

13. Thanks, allen...

:loveya:

And this part of Will's post bears repeating:

Sure, you have to support a woman's right to choose, health care for all in a non-profit fashion, fundamental education reform, Social Security, Medicare, the de-corporatization of American government, the re-regulation of media, environmental protection, total rights for homosexual individuals and couples, total rights for anyone of any racial or religious background, the separation of church and state, using the bloated military budget to pay for the aforementioned, and getting the hell out of Iraq while paying reparations to the people whose lives have been shattered as the smallest possible token of apology.

[Bluebear]

15. Me too.

[Misunderestimator]

18. Aw...

:loveya:

(I'm a little less pissed now, thanks.)

[Solly Mack]

21. but but...what about me?

:(

And did you ever get my email at the alternate address? I emailed you about finally being able to get to Stuttgart..but it wasn't until the 10th and I figured you guys were getting ready to come back.

[arwalden]

40. You're A Genius Too...

... and I'm sorry that our best-laid plans didn't work out. Hopefully another time soon. :hug:

[Solly Mack]

42. *preens*

*happy feet*

:blush:

Ain't too proud to beg!

[Renew Deal]

2. lol

Oh the irony. :nuke:

[Ron Green]

3. I guess that proved your point, huh?

[alittlelark]

4. Head here for a drink

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=105x3150524

The good stuff.

[Solly Mack]

7. Golly, I agreed with your basic tenets

:)

[Misunderestimator]

10. Yep. Me too...

[Solly Mack]

12. and I agreed with you too

hmmm.... :)

[Misunderestimator]

23. Hmmm

;)

[HEyHEY]

9. Dude, tis the way of the left these days

[mmonk]

11. Just proves its so.

Seems the whole USA is different since these people (rightwingers) have taken power. America is in one big psychotic episode.

[KnowerOfLogic]

14. What's wrong w/ infighting and squabbling? I really don't want

dems to turn into goose-stepping nazi group-thinkers like the repugs.

[WilliamPitt]

20. Oh fa chrissake

I think it is maaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaybe possible to be able to disagree with each other while keeping sight of the goals THAT WE ALL PRETTY MUCH AGREE WITH without turning into "goose-stepping nazi group-thinkers like the repugs."

By Godwin's Law, you lose.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

16. I agreed with your basic tenets

but some so-called progressives do not.

Red Sox are on at 8. They lost Arroyo for 3 games, on top of Wells and Schilling. x(

[Kathy in Cambridge]

17. Dupe again

[cry baby]

19. historically, dems never have agreed on much of anything.

My mom and grandmother are very political, grandma is 86. She told me that dems are always squabbling about how to get things done, but always have had the biggest hearts to want to help people that can't help themselves. They just can't agree on how to go about it. All these people that quibble on DU would stand locked arm in arm against tyrany (without fussing) at a protest. We each know we have each other's back, even though we don't show it.

[Just Me]

22. What happened was,...complicated.

It really involved "stuff" outside your post.

Nevertheless, too bad the discussion about being "progressive" and the underlying causes of "splintering" was squashed.

[Misunderestimator]

24. That's the part of me that's sorry about it... it would have been a good

discussion...

For what it's worth, I promise not to post on your thread if you repost it, Will... I think I'm wearing a perfume that attracts pests.

[Solly Mack]

25. Well now I feel used

Cause I honestly believe human rights is the biggie and thought the discussion (OP) was great.

[Just Me]

29. You know what I mean. After all, human rights IS a common progressive,...

,...issue. Those who act as splinters rather than progressives or liberals,...perhaps, should be totally ignored, from time to time,...maybe. :shrug:

[Solly Mack]

30. You're right of course

:)

[Just Me]

32. Hey! Maybe, we AREN'T really splintered,...but, being splintered,...

,...by splinterers!!!! If so, it's important we are aware of such dividers that shake our unity.

Yes? :bounce:

[Solly Mack]

33. Excellent point!

[Misunderestimator]

34. Yes!

:bounce:

[VelmaD]

26. Did you really...

expect any different? :crazy:

[frictionlessO]

27. Politics = Detente = The Art of Compromise

I agree with you pretty much Will. Wiggle room is always to be had as long as both sides wiggle in good faith.

I'm an "Out Now" guy but I hold no illusions about the fact that there is a bridge to be crossed before they can come home. I believe the approach you seem to be trying to take on the war is a part of the bridge and hey... its progress. Thats all I want and crave in regards to Iraq, just some friggin' progress.

and stuff...

peace!

[all.of.me]

28. mrscorpio's got the bar open!

[rigel99]

31. PROGRESSIVES need leadership

Here's your answer WIll and by the way, congrats on joining PDA from a GA PDA representative..

bottom line we need leadership to stop all the splintering.

For a brief moment in our history, Howard Dean was that leader. He was ahead 20% in the polls ahead of Iowa and then a lot of Kerry Money and bad TV ads and attacks from CNN playing the scream 600 times, well, anybody would have faltered.

But here's my PRESCRIPTION FOR UNSPLINTERING US PROGRESSIVES, and I do call myself a progressive, not because I'm for gay issues but because I'm for CIVIL RIGHTS, not because I'm prochoice, but I'm for women choosing their own destinies, not becuase I'm against the war in Iraq, but because I'm for
#1 Fiscal responsibility and fighting wars that are justified based on true aggressions on US not because of oil interests, or the capitalization of Iraq's government sector by US Corporate interests


MY PRESCRIPTION is as follows:
#1 Howard Dean, Spend 500K of DNC money not on election reform , but on election fraud. Help citizens doing audits in CA/OH/GA/NC/FL/NM and elsewhere prove that the election was a sham
#2 Barbera Boxer/John Conyers, start impeachment proceedings using all the existing evidence that the current administration is not fit to rule
#3 Lawyers of the country.. drop what you are doing and SUE SUE SUE.. sue the living crap out of anything that is GOP and moves in the wrong unprogressive direction.

and mostly, it's time for new Leaders.. folks who can take the reigns and collect us as a team and unsplinter us... Dean unfortunately has become mainstream and Joe Trippi is on a headtrip creating a new independent party.. so my suggestion is that we begin grooming our next progressive leader.. any ideas on who that might be???? and then we put the same INTERNET FINANCIAL machine we built for Howard Dean but independent of Howard Dean and put that money on the next guy.... we have the power and bucks to bring a unified party.. with unification comes framing that embraces and encourages diversity while moving toward common goals....

and will, before you get all drunk and everything... you now belong to the most UNIFYING AND PROGRESSIVE ORGANIZATION on the planet, PDA, so get PDA to start planting new leaders in our view... I promise you progressives like me used to wasting $2K on the right candidate will go spending liberally for the right person!!!!

[Just Me]

35. We need a "leader" who advances united interests and draws the line,...

,...draws a clear line between those who demonstrably participate in a unified, common movement and those who can't get their heads outta' their box, behaving in a divisive manner.

It's not like anyone's 'cause is being stolen or oppressed if everyone simply decides to unify on a common platform. :shrug:

[H2O Man]

36. Yes, but even more

people need the goodness of truth to take root within themselves. When people do anything because of a "leader," it indicates that they do not have a full grasp of why they are doing it. Perhaps we have too many people trying to promote an agenda.

What we need to have is people recognize that their own interests are best promoted -- and indeed protected -- by uniting with others. Alone we are like individual fingers that our enemy can break. Together, we form a powerful fist that can protect our collective interests.

[Just Me]

43. A leader reminds us,...of our goodness,...

,...and how powerful we are when we unite in action the BEST of ourselves,...in contrast to the powerlessness associated with imposing the most stubborn or angry or oppositional or "lonely" or disappointed or longing et al of ourselves.

I am always grateful for your posts, H2O Man. Thank you for being here.

[H2O Man]

53. "unite in action the Best of ourselves"

I find that very similar to something I read a few hours back, when I posted a section of a Martin Luther King, Jr speech on GD. I had been reading through a few books and articles by Martin. One, in which he addressed the dangers of vicious infighting among civil rights groups, comes to mind when I read Will Pitt's very logical OP on the locked thread, and his reaction in the OP here. From an article in the October 1966 Ebony, called "Nonviolence: The Only Road to Freedom," I'll quote King:

"Our most powerful nonviolent weapon is, as would be expected, also our most demanding, that is organization. To produce change, people must organize to work together in units of power. These units might be political, as in the case of voter's leagues and political parties; they may be economic units such as groups of tenants who join forces to form a tenant union or to organize a rent strike; or they may be laboring units of persons who are seeking employment and wage increases.

"More and more, the civil rights movement will become engaged in the task of organizing people into permanent groups to protect their own interests and to produce change in their behalf. This is a tedious task which may take years, but the results are more permanent and meaningful.

"In the future we will be called to organize the unemployed, to unionize the businesses within the ghetto, to bring tenants together into collective bargaining units and establish cooperatives for building viable financial institutions within the ghetto that can be controlled by Negroes themselves.

"There is no easy way to create a world where men and women can live together, where each has his own job and house and where all children receive as much education as their minds can absorb. But if such a world is created in our lifetime, it will be done in the United States by Negroes and white people of good will. It will be accomplished by persons who have the courage to put an end to suffering by willingly suffering themselves rather than inflicting suffering upon others. It will be done by rejecting the racism, materialism, and violence that has characterized Western civilization and especially by working toward a world of brotherhood, cooperation, and peace."

[Beetwasher]

37. LOL!

:thumbsup:

[Zomby Woof]

38. I have long held that view

When I was fairly new here, I posted a similar thread, based on my interpretation of Orwell's "Homage To Catalonia", in which he ascribed one of the failures of the Left during the 30's in general - and the Spanish Civil War in particular: its propensity for factionalism. And yes, it came down to purity tests and the unwillingness to seek commonality and unity.

Is there a solution? Yes, but it's compromise, the Great American Political Art Form, but the mere mention of that word is anathema to most of the targeted audience. And so it goes...

Edit: Yes, I want the same goals as everyone else here, and I am not talking about compromising the individual components (such as NEVER giving an inch on women's choice or rights), just the means and tactics of getting from here to there. It's not the Right we need to compromise with, it is OURSELVES.

[MissB]

39. Have a drink.

All I can do some days is laugh.

[ibid]

41. Relax - the 'litmus tests' protect our rights crowd disrupt much more at

DU than they do in real life - at least that is my opinion.

Most folks - on any side of any issue - tune them out. Civilization requires cooperation which in turn requires compromise - and some some folks just are not into being civilized.

:-)

[Misunderestimator]

44. Welcome to DU.

Am I to understand from your post that you "tune out" people who want to protect civil rights? Which ones do we compromise?

[ibid]

58. Litmus test protect usually means no protection as there is no election

that is won.

So yes - tune out, or ignore - seems best if my goal of truly protecting as much civil rights as possible is to be met.

Perhaps some may feel it is a "moral" victory to replace a 60% on the right side of the issues Democratic Party member with a Republican - I do not.

[Solly Mack]

47. Yeah, like those gun people right?

Always wanting their 2nd amendment rights protected! I mean sheesh...why can't they just shut up and compromise!

What do they need guns for anyway?

Ever notice how it's straight white males who never have to compromise their rights...and how some of them are always telling everyone else to shut up? Those are the ones I tune out.

edit: not all straight white males, of course. :)

[Kevin Spidel]

45. YO WILL...

have a drink on me! welcome to the team, the drama, and the squabble. But guess what... we gotsta get threw this. its our only hope!
just rember folks who we are against! not eachother!

[Catherine Vincent]

46. Whatever you do, drink liberally.

That's the way to go (so I heard) as long as you have a designated driver. ;-)

[Az]

48. Will, The left is the party of divergant and passionate opinions

The left is the big tent. In the big tent we have lots of different opinions and differing levels of concern and passion regarding these issues.

Example, for me and a lot of atheists seperation of church and state loom primary as concern. For many feminists the right to control their bodies plays the dominant roll in their agenda. For others it may be freedom of speech or economic issues. Welfare or education. Each one of us has a different balance of issues we favor and ignore.

The job we have as activists is to deal with the infighting and find ways to get these various individuals to come to a consensus regarding the priorities. People have to be made to understand how these various issues are important to others. Each of us has to give a little and hope for a little.

[Eloriel]

49. Good grief, Will

that was worse than your usual worst. You're regressing.

Badly.

What was the fucking point of it anyway? You bring up a "definition" that is too obvious for words -- yes, teally! -- and want to get our permission or agreement or something on its use (how ridiculous to start with, not to mention boring), and launch a drive-by all-purpose assault on, well, nearly all of us, on your way to your master-of-the-obvious, all-important QUESTION and somehow expect not to generate some controversy?

[Name removed]

52. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Just Me]

55. Hey, I didn't even get a chance to alert on myself.

No fair.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Just Me]

56. I tried to a alert on him and me. But, he can be personally insulting.

Apparently.

[bloom]

50. I think that one-issue democrats

are not progressive - no matter what their one issue is.

[H2O Man]

57. Valid point.

One-issue democrats are, by definition, focused entirely on their issue, to the exclusion of others.

[Maiden England]

51. So much for civil discourse eh?

Thats what grown ups do. They have different opinions, but common values and through civil discourse, debate and compromise, they come up with mutually agreeable solutions. No one gets exactly what they want, but everyone takes a step towards a common goal. This way, radical ideas get toned down and tried out, things which are not working get fresh new improvements, and everyone slowly moves forward and progresses.
If the world of politics could work like that, even on one side of the aisle, we would all be better off for it.
I can't believe so many blithering idjits miss that point....

Right now we have squabbles and bickering on the left, goose-stepping and bullying on the right and neither side willing to do anything other than play viscious power-plays at those on the opposite side of the aisle. In the meantime the country goes down the toilet.
Frankly, I'm not surprised.

[Misunderestimator]

59. Wow... Just wow.

Should I be feeling as blamed as your post makes me feel, and your lack of responses since you posted? I've seen you squabble PLENTY of times for much less reason. I'll never stand down against anyone who opposes equal rights for everyone and a woman's right to choose. That's a deal-breaker for me. I thought we had the same position on that.

Maybe it's just PMS... I need a drink now.

[Moderator]

60. Locking.

Continuation of a locked thread.

Thanks, again, for your consideration.
DU Mod