Has the DU Community forgotten political R-E-S-P-E-C-T?

[omega minimo]

“The administrators of Democratic Underground are working to provide a place where progressives can share ideas and debate in an atmosphere of mutual respect.” - “Every member of this community has a responsibility to participate in a respectful manner, and to help foster an atmosphere of thoughtful discussion.”
************

Do we take our cue for behavior from the DU Rules? They set a tone for progressive and mutually tolerant behavior that is a throwback to the futuristic era of Martin’s Dream, rather than the hyperactive ADD mediascape of Obama’s marketing. DU Rules echo the basic courtesy that was necessary for the Democratic “Big Tent” Party of the past-- joining the issues and energies of a multitude of diverse groups.

DU Rules: "When discussing race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, or other highly-sensitive personal issues, please exercise the appropriate level of sensitivity toward others and take extra care to clearly express your point of view.”

It’s a really simple concept: “please exercise the appropriate level of sensitivity toward others and take extra care to clearly express your point of view.” It used to be called “Respect” and was seen as an important, integral part of succeeding in building a society that brought mutual benefit to the many rather than exclusive benefit for the few.

At the point where that notion had become normalized, the Reaganistas decided it was time to turn the clock back on generations of revolutionary social progress. Right wing regressive types-- the Frank Luntz/Karl Rove spinmeisters of their time-- turned a positive (that threatened their Divide and Conquer mentality) into a negative; spinning the developing movement of respect and diversity into a retrogressive, bitter and falsely labeled “political correctness.”

Now the term “political correctness” provides-- as it was intended to-- an easy out for the unrepentantly disrespectful and the just plain ignorant. A “sissified” punching bag, a Dittohead buzzword to discount all the historic and important reasons there are to respect others in the American melting pot-- without ever thinking about that history or acknowledging any of the reasons.

In the era of social progress, a real Democratic “Big Tent” Party and the last gasp of the American Dream before Reaganism took hold, there was a certain cultural and peer pressure to show respect or be perceived as showing your ignorance. That’s why the Neanderthals invented “political correctness” and accused the socially conscious of their own fear-based, bigoted bitterness, paving the way for today’s “Blame The Victim For Acting Like A Victim” campaign.

The clock has been turned back so far that some people are actually PROUD of their inability to see any point of view but their own. They accuse those who suggest a broader tolerance and respect for the concerns of other groups of people as infringing on their right to be a self-centered, self-righteous blowhard. That is the ignorance that would have been avoided in the progressive era-- if someone felt that way, they would have kept it private or amongst other regressive types; they would not have proclaimed their arrogant disregard for the experience, history and social progress of other groups publicly as some do today.

There were many ways of looking at the Biden/Obama flap and many words to pick up on (and argue about) in the quasi-complimentary phrase that Biden used to describe Senator Obama as a political marketing “dream.”

What he was saying was Obama is a “credit to his race.”

Not so long ago, the majority of Democrats and progressives would have understood that. They would have understood that it is a backhanded compliment, a thinly-veiled putdown, intentional or not. They would have understood that if it WAS unintentional, the person in Biden’s position could acknowledge the faux pas and the offense it caused to the group that was undermined by it. We could all learn from it. And move forward. Towards progress.

Now the bar has been set so low by some, that they think the only relevant criteria is how something they say affects them between their own ears and the distance from their brain to their mouth (the heart doesn’t seem to be engaged at all) or their fingertips. If THEY are not “offended” or claim they never “intended” any offense, then anyone else (even historically disenfranchised groups of people) could not POSSIBLY see it differently. They must just be “politically correct” or infringing on “free speech” or a "perpetual victim who 'hopes' bigotry will continue so they have 'something to complain about'."

The mutual respect of many groups under the Democratic Big Tent in the progressive era is why the bogus term “politically correct” was invented to turn the clock back and get self-styled Democrats and so-called “progressives” to do the dirty work themselves.



edit for:
"or their fingertips" (can't underestimate this behavior might be different face to face, eh?)

[Maven]

1. K/R

[ShortnFiery]

2. Perhaps because many of us are not afraid of the label

"liberal" instead of the republican-friendly term "progressive" ... yes, my beloved democratic party - moving to the right on the political spectrum has been a real sticking point for me.

Respect is a two way street. :shrug:

[omega minimo]

5. "progress" "progressive" "progressive era" -- when did that become

"the republican-friendly term "progressive" ? Geez, just can't keep up with all the machinations of the spinmeisters......

[ShortnFiery]

12. It is a republican friendly term because MANY former "liberal democrats"

have run from the term "liberal" and into the arms of "progressive."

But the point is, they'll find a way to demonize "progressive" also so it's about time to take a stand and BE DEMOCRATS, NOT corporate enablers.

Those Senators who voted for the Bankruptcy Bill, including Joe Biden, do NOT deserve my respect because they have sold their souls to the Corporate Elite.

There are two types of Democrats out there: 1) For the People FIRST; and 2) For the Corporations FIRST.

It's not so simple under our big tent anymore. :shrug:

However, I concur that we should try to be more tolerant with fellow members in an effort to educate each other of the particular politician's stances. :hi:

[omega minimo]

17. agreed and agreed again

I reread the OP with your point in mind. i stuck with the "progressive" in the context of DU Rules and also the sense of social progress that's been lost. You're right about "liberal" -- and I don't know what it means any more or I might have thought to use it.


You hit the nail on the head.

"There are two types of Democrats out there: 1) For the People FIRST; and 2) For the Corporations FIRST."

Yeah it's not so simple. But are we even IN the tent anymore?

[ShortnFiery]

18. Point taken ... thank you for fully explaining your post.

Very thoughtful of you ... you've won me over. :applause: :hi:

[omega minimo]

21. all right.... now let's find a liberal, progressive Populist candidate to vote for!!

:bounce: :pals:

[jberryhill]

49. Biden and the Bankruptcy Bill - Not So Simple

"There are two types of Democrats out there: 1) For the People FIRST; and 2) For the Corporations FIRST."

In the aggregate, large credit card banks are by a wide margin the largest employers in the State of Delaware (MBNA alone having passed DuPont some years ago).

I realize that people outside of Delaware may not understand that, but inflammatory language that Biden had "sold his soul" in voting for a piece of legislation favorable to the largest employers of the state he represents does not neatly fall into the dichotomy you propose.

[Katherine Brengle]

20. Frankly, I believe "progressive" is more descriptive of my beliefs...

I know I am just one of many DUers, and one of even more liberals/Democrats/progressives/whatevers, but I think it makes perfect sense.

But at the same time, I am still willing and able to call myself liberal interchangeably...

[omega minimo]

23. What if we start calling ourselves

"Populists" to distinguish from the "liberals/Democrats/progressives/whatevers" that are being led by the nose down the path of corporate fascism and are somehow "okay" with that?

:hi:

[ShortnFiery]

24. "Populists" ---> yes, IMO, that is a viable label for many Democrats at DU. n/t

[cui bono]

62. I don't think liberals and progressives are being led down the corporate

road. The problem is that the RWingers have successfully demonized the word liberal and now attribute it to all Dems even though I believe most elected Dems are not liberal.

I do like the term populist and have thought of that being a good name for a new party. Unfortunately in this country a third party can only be a spoiler. :(

[omega minimo]

64. "None are so hopelessly enslaved as those who falsely believe they are free." -Goethe

your sigline :patriot:

[cui bono]

67. Sounds like the good ol' USA don't it? nt

[Australian]

36. Liberal, English or REAL-TALK ?

For decades I have watched the United States use this really ODD misnomer.

In Australia what you call the 'Conservative' or 'Right-Wing' Party IS the Liberal Party.
The reason Robert Menzies selected that name is because, to be Liberal is a virture, a good thing; and he believed his pro-business pro-individual responsibility views were good. Yet I hear the U.S. neo-conservative movement use the word Liberal as if they were spitting out something horrid and evil. When George Bush came here he loved the Liberal Party, said they were his trusted friends.

Outside of America, to be 'Liberal' is a good thing; and to be 'Conservative' means you are unbending and follow your father's biases rather than using your own judgement and good sense.

[Bluebear]

38. Inside of America, to be a liberal is also good.

:)

[cui bono]

63. In reality liberal is a great thing here too, it's just the RW spin machine won't

let anyone know it anymore.

Liberals are about taking care of each other and being open minded and accepting. What the hell is wrong with that? This country is so messed up right now. :(

[omega minimo]

65. well put

[IWantAChange]

3. Well said Omega Minimo - well said.......

[BlooInBloo]

4. Unfortunately, DUers would rather BE wrong than be TOLD they're wrong.

[omega minimo]

7. way to break it down, BlooInBloo

:spray:

[hfojvt]

35. "Given a choice between changing their mind and proving that

there is no need to do so. Most people will get busy on the proof."

However, being told you are wrong is not the same thing as being proven wrong. I can tell Stephen Hawking that he is wrong. I can, perhaps even find a very clever and insulting way to do so and make it forceful. Why should he believe me unless I bring some facts and/or analysis to bear along with a mere "proof by statement". I told you that you were wrong, therefore, you are wrong.

"But honesty, Dr. Margolin explained, was not necessarily communication. 'To engage a man you don't like in conversation for the purpose of trying to understand if your dislike of him is justified is communication. Telling him he's an SOB is not.' ("The People Next Door" JP Miller p. 83)

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

6. K&R

[omega minimo]

9. nice to see you, haruka3_2000

:toast:

[VelmaD]

8. that was beautiful

It's like you crawled inside my head and heart and put words to how I feel. I remember when it was something to be proud of to be tolerant and sensitive to feelings and experience of others. When that was something to aspire to. Sensitive is of course another word they've managed to co-opt and all but ruin.

[omega minimo]

11. brilliant post in the "PC" thread, VelmaD

I didn't read through the whole thing. I've learned a lot from these recent weeks of backandforth on Obama, Shiny Objects, PC, etc. and from 2 years on DU. One thing that came through loud and clear lately was (on the excellent "Articulate" thread) was that SOME people are completely willing to blow off anything that doesn't affect them personally (so it must not exist) :crazy: even when it is GROUPS of people affected. I had to express some disgust with how arrogant, white privileged cluelessness was making us all look bad. Yes, we remember when people didn't flaunt that ignorance.

"I remember when it was something to be proud of to be tolerant and sensitive to feelings and experience of others. When that was something to aspire to. Sensitive is of course another word they've managed to co-opt and all but ruin. "

You're right. It was a point of pride-- not a phony "oh look how tolerant WE are" but a shared pride, a mutual awareness that fostering pride in others who were JUST LIKE WE ARE was a way to "float all the boats." THAT is the real danger for TPTB in the respect movement they gave a hateful bumpersticker name to...........

.... that's why it's time to turn it back around.

TPTB don't have to Divide and Conquer if Democrats are doing it to themselves!!!!!

[La Lioness Priyanka]

10. very well said

[theHandpuppet]

13. THANK YOU

K&R!

:kick:

[omega minimo]

19. thank you and I LOVE your sigline

the perfect spirit -- I've never seen that before:

"When you were born, you cried and the world rejoiced. Live your life so that when you die, the world cries and you rejoice." --old Native American saying

:toast:

[Bluebear]

14. "Take EXTRA care to clearly express your point of view"

"When discussing race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, religion, or other highly-sensitive personal issues, please exercise the appropriate level of sensitivity toward others and take extra care to clearly express your point of view.”

Yes, the administrators in their wisdom have just made a simple request, that people think twice before they press the 'post message' button. I don't think that is a lot to ask.

[Quixote1818]

15. I don't know why people often want to be so mean while on line.

Just a little while ago someone asked for an apology and people were ripping him with the most aggressive, childish insults. While I don't agree with someone asking for an apology that way, why do people have to be so cruel? The person was new and probably got their feelings hurt. Would we treat someone that way in person???? It boggles my mind when people attack someone who is already down.

:shrug:

[omega minimo]

28. There's a difference b/w what people say and how they say it

Here is an example of the sort of confusion some people have about how THEY are being treated, when the WAY they present may be the real problem.

"No I did a post earlier today and I was called a bigot and a racist, because some disagree with my thoughts..."

This sense of victimization: "because some disagree with my thoughts" does not AT ALL take into account WHY they might be "called a bigot and a racist."

Some of the folks who think they are being unfairly treated for their "thoughts" may not be able -- or willing -- to express their "thoughts" in a way that doesn't come across as bigoted!! :crazy:

Or mean.


There is a difference between what people are saying and the way that they say it.

A common accusation on DU has become people (who are so mystified that they are offending others) insist that the REASON they are being considered offensive is that others cannot handle their (oh so innocent and non-offensive) ideas and "thoughts."

[uppityperson]

53. I think that poster got TS'd too though.

Alert is our friend rather than insulting. If enough people alert, and can type a message to mods in alert thing, it works better than if only 1 or 2 do and the rest insult.

[autorank]

61. Good question Quixote 1818. 1) Key board commandos 2) Trolls

That exhausts the list. It's hard to tell between the two but consistency in approach is probably an indicator for #2. It's understandable that people lose it very rarely, it's not OK to see or be the subject of nastiness, yet it happens.

Keyboard commandos are fun to imageine...sitting at the keyboard with a fore-and-aft Admiral's hat, typing out the most vicious insults and intermittently marching abound the apartment shouting orders at their pets;)

[dapper]

16. K&R

You heard correctly :-)

[bettyellen]

22. the self-centered, self-righteous blowhards could use this perspective...

i know it's largely kids, who take way too much for granted.

[omega minimo]

25. LOL

"the self-centered, self-righteous blowhards"

:rofl: strong words, aren't they? :spray:


"i know it's largely kids, who take way too much for granted."

good point, "largely kids" and good point "take way too much for granted." we are all products of our age........ if they had grown up with other influences, with respect in the air they breathed, they would see differently............

thanks Archi--- erm, I mean bettyellen :thumbsup:

[bettyellen]

26. LOL, what is scary is my post is all paraphrasing other DUers....

there was an post about "so called minorities" in it that had me blow a gasket.
i saw way too many posts where people conceded that those offended had a good point, they just didn't think they should making it. or thought maybe it could be made a better (quieter, friendlier. non-attention getting?) way. ehem.
that's some tricky shit, huh?

[omega minimo]

27. and like BlooInBloo said in #4

**********

well your quotes show how confused the thinking is and how much it resembles -- um, that other board. That's was my question about bigotry on DU: how are we supposed to tell the difference b/w trolls and ignorant bullshitters? Wouldn't weeding them out benefit all? Going back to the tone set by DU in the quotes at the top of the OP?

and the OP attempts to show how there was a time when expressing that ignorance openly (or digitally) was NOT something to be proud of.

the thing that even some who are "well-intentioned" may not get is........... it doesn't matter if you "get it" as if it was YOU, you show the respect even if you DON'T get it as if it was you.

the fact that even has to be explained seems absurd.

id' hope also that this OP made the point that all this infighting only hurts us and helps the bastards that are wrecking things for all of us.

[hfojvt]

37. 'expressing ignorance openly'

Until you express it openly, you do not know that it is ignorance.

I do not find the 'wilfull ignorance' argument to be persuasive. Maybe people are just tired. Tired of having to explain something they found to be obvious so long ago. I wrote a nasty letter to my Congresman when he had written me some ignorant nonsense about the Reagan tax cuts, but then I re-considered. Maybe he just did not know any better, and that he was being fed lies from Cato Institute or Heritage Foundation types. It was a long shot, but he would be more likely to change his mind if I informed him instead of attacking him.

[xultar]

29. Yes. - Great Post!

[omega minimo]

32. xultar!

:toast:

[Trillo]

30. Nice read. You wrote, "heart doesn’t seem to be engaged"

I actually think a whole essay can be written on that from an American cultural point of view, and I mean U.S. culture.

It seems to me that from the first day we're born, to our punishments in schools, to the contempt with which employers and managers hold us (unless you're in hi-tech, then maybe it's a little different), there's an entire culture centered around wounding our hearts at each and every possible opportunity. This has a predictable outcome: we shut off, or shut down, our heart feeling center. It's how we cope. We learn to look to our brains for all the answers, and this is a rewarded lesson in school, but for most of us, it's not rewarded in later working lives, where the contempt is impressed daily.

When dealing with masses of people who've been abused all their lives, keep that in mind. When one says "the heart doesn't seem to be engaged", yes, you're stating a deep truth, but remember there are solid reasons those hearts are shut down and shut off.

A preponderance of ridicule speaks clearly to the culture in creation. Changing the paradigm will take years, if it can be changed. Wounding others without landing yourself in jail in the process is "sport" here and has evolved to "high artform".

[omega minimo]

31. if only the opposite was a simple trend

"It seems to me that from the first day we're born, to our punishments in schools, to the contempt with which employers and managers hold us (unless you're in hi-tech, then maybe it's a little different), there's an entire culture centered around wounding our hearts at each and every possible opportunity. This has a predictable outcome: we shut off, or shut down, our heart feeling center. It's how we cope."

"When dealing with masses of people who've been abused all their lives, keep that in mind."

Well, yes, it then makes sense that people would hide behind screens and violate each other with keytaps............ easy, obvious, chickenshit...... As you say "Wounding others without landing yourself in jail in the process is "sport" here and has evolved to "high artform"."

"We learn to look to our brains for all the answers, and this is a rewarded lesson in school, but for most of us, it's not rewarded in later working lives, where the contempt is impressed daily."

Even so, we are responsible for our own hearts, are we not? I know we live in a nation of zombies, I know the cultural forces at work, I know it's harder and harder to grow up with a sense of self intact-- but it we let those forces deaden our hearts and acquiesce to that, what point in living at all?

"The contempt is impressed daily" indeed. Beautifully put, as terrible as it is. And that may explain why some of the perceived abusive posters somehow feel themselves to be "attacked" -- the paranoia leads to their projections.

[Trillo]

34. simple kindness shown to another changes everything in that moment.

" perceived abusive posters somehow feel themselves to be "attacked" -- the paranoia leads to their projections."

Projections and our reactions to them seem to be hardwired into us. It's the mirror. We all make our mistakes, then we live with those mistakes. In that sense, the concept of forgiveness is an important lubricant within society.

" we are responsible for our own hearts, are we not?"

I don't know. The consumer society has created the false desire using emotional associations, which leads to lack of trust in one's own heart, practiced today on a mass scale. The failure of authorities to allow children to follow their hearts when young, or even provide instruction as to how to follow or just listen to them, is part of the problem.

Until something is accepted scientifically in our society, there is no truth there, even when it's the greatest truth.

if "we let those forces deaden our hearts and acquiesce to that, what point in living at all?"

That's probably the greatest challenge, sometimes it's a very long life.

The following is a paraphrase from somebody I've met, while it certainly doesn't always work, especially in politics where there are gazillions of dollars at stake, or when dealing with the impersonal machine directed "from above" that also represents gazillions, nevertheless it often has seemed to be true: in most situations with most people, simple kindness shown to another changes everything in that moment.

[omega minimo]

44. Dalai Lama?

"The following is a paraphrase from somebody I've met..........: in most situations with most people, simple kindness shown to another changes everything in that moment."

:thumbsup:

"The consumer society has created the false desire using emotional associations, which leads to lack of trust in one's own heart, practiced today on a mass scale."

"The failure of authorities to allow children to follow their hearts when young, or even provide instruction as to how to follow or just listen to them, is part of the problem."

"Until something is accepted scientifically in our society, there is no truth there, even when it's the greatest truth."

You've identified the cause. The solution is in there too.

:toast:

[SeattleGirl]

33. Thank you, omega minimo, for your post.

It bothers me that so many threads here disintegrate, sometimes right away, into name calling, bashing, personal attacks against other posters. Simple respect is so often lacking in the posts here.

I don't think we all need to agree on everything; in fact, I think that would not be good at all. I have learned a lot from people who have a different take on things, and I appreciate it a lot, and I hope that some others have gotten something from me on occasion. But the drive-by snarks and attacks add absolutely nothing, and in fact, take away a lot, I think.

I appreciate what you posted, omega. It's very much what I think.

[omega minimo]

46. "I have learned a lot from people who have a different take on things"

"I don't think we all need to agree on everything; in fact, I think that would not be good at all. I have learned a lot from people who have a different take on things, and I appreciate it a lot, and I hope that some others have gotten something from me on occasion."


I appreciate it too. IMHO that "throwback" style of big tent tolerance would allow us to do more of that.

Cheers, SeattleGirl :toast:

[Australian]

39. Do Americans understand "Why this is happening" ?

I have to ask, if anyone reading these pages understands WHY the United States has become the mosted hated and feared power against democracy and freedom aross the planet;
NOT since 9/11; but since 1946, the pass five years is just a concentrated and more visible version of what US governments have been doing for the pass sixty years.

Vietnam, Iran, the Middle East, 9/11, Iraq are ALL the result of the SAME thing. Noam Chomsky and myself have spent decades trying to explain this to the US public, but do any of you understand yet ?

[omega minimo]

45. some

The historical perspective you raise is not common knowledge. Several DUers educate on that level. And there are many here (DU and U.S.) who think this "started" with Bush in the last 6 years.

There's a disconnect with history, context-- it's quite bizarre. It's mediated reality. And it's an open secret that U.S. audiences get a censored, fishbowl version of international news.

Have you heard Thom Hartmann on Air America Radio? IMHO he does a great job of making that sort of history and connecting-the-dots accessible and palatable to a broad American audience that may just be starting at Square One. Extremely informative and makes it relevant to right now.

[Australian]

70. Global Perspective

The only Michael Moore thing I have seen was called "Bowling for Columbine" on TV, and I had never heard of a Prof. Noam Chomsky before some of your countrymen began accussing me of listening to him too much.

I have since discovered Noam to be an intelligent and decent person; and it does worry me that he has for years tried to explain to your nation how Indonesia was created by corporate America yet your nation does not seem to understand the significance of the Ford Foundation, Bechtel and the old Standard Oil group of companies (including Exxon, Freeport, Conoco, etc.) operating a colonial superpower second in size only to the old Soviet Union and its satellite Provinces (to use the Indonesian term) as their private piggy bank to finance other operations around the world.

[omega minimo]

71. aye

the truth is marginalized

[Australian]

74. The Truth can WIN the ELECTION

The truth does not need to be marginalized.

If the US Democrat Party went public with my United Nations letter http://wpik.org/Src/draft.html it would split the Republican Party between Jakarta loyalist like Bush and Cond. Rice whove been supporting the TNI military irrespective of its jihad aspirations and links; while the majority of Republicans like the majority of Democrats will say YES to supporting the human rights to freedom for West Papua.

West Papua is the Pacific Island that turned the war against the Japanese; the West Papuans literally went into battle with US soldiers to carry any of your wounded back to the medic stations. While the Japanese were suffering 65% loses because the Papuans refused to give them food or aid; the US forces were being feed and protected, the death rate for the wounded dropped to 15%.

The West Papuans even built a Church for your US soldiers - see the photo http://wpik.org/Src/US-Papua.html

Freeing West Papua is a return to a peaceful UN decolonization process, Indonesia will simply be asked to remove its military and police from the Pacific, a request Jakarta can NOT refuse because it in part depends on US and world Aid;
it not only would win the next few terms for the Democrat Party but the corrupt TNI Generals and US corporations will lose their power base and be gone soon after. Washington will no longer have companies like Bechtel pulling the CIA's and Whitehouse strings.

Is it a good idea?

[evilkumquat]

47. The United States is a Very Young Country

The best teacher I ever had was my high school social studies teacher.

For the first day of class, the entire period was spent discussing "ethnocentrism", and how the people of the United States view the entire world through eyes focused inward on ourselves rather than how the rest of the planet may view us. My teacher outlined the danger of diplomacy without empathy, with one side so convinced of its righteousness that not only does it fail to acknowledge the other side may have its own ideas as to what is acceptable, but it often cannot even accept the other side even has its own view.

It is apparent that almost everything this country has done since becoming powerful enough to exert its will on others has been done with only short-term ideas on what was in our "best" interest, rather than what might happen to bite us in the ass later when those countries upon whom we rendered our unique form of imperialism grows strong enough to hit us back.

Hell, look no further than the fact that almost everyone in the United States refers to their country as "America" and its citizens as "Americans". How much more egocentric can we be? This country is called the United States of America. Referring to ourselves as "Americans" ignores the Canadians, the Mexicans, those countries in Central America and the entirety of that big continent down south. Personally, I do my damnedest to remember our correct name when discussing this country, and only call it "America" when being sarcastic about national jingoism (usually pronouncing it "Merika").

Perhaps it is because the United States is still just a bit over 200 years old and suffering from adolescent growing pains while so much of the rest of the world is comprised of countries five hundred years old or more, many of which are more socially conscious than we could almost ever hope to be.

Evil Kumquat

[Australian]

73. Old Nation, New Generation

He must have been a good teacher, you seem to have a good gasp of domestic social dynamics affecting United States foreign policy. But I think you are mistaken about being a new nation , I think the basic problem the United States has is because the US Congressmen and Senators did not mature and show the kind of lateral thinking you are using.

Most of today's 'States' are less than two hundred years of age; Australia is just over one hundred, and today you see a product of one hundred years developement of the businessman - Rupert Murdoch ; and one hundred years ago you had the Rockefeller family.

Oil men are miners, a miner digs the ground that belongs to the community and if he finds gold or other economic minerals the community pays him - presumedly for his hard work. Oil is even better, you stick a hole in the ground and it rushs up at you; it is not more valuable than gold, it is just easier to get vast volumes of it.

In defence of 'free enterprise' nobody questioned the reasoning for oil men to get excessive rewards for digging up the community's resources ; next the community became lax and dependent on the oil. And when the US convicted Standard Oil in 1911, instead of jailing or preventing those corrupt businessmen from continuing their business ethos, the US allowed them to continue, and this time Rockefeller and company moved their illegal operations overseas outsiide of US laws.

That's how Rockefeller and company came up with the idea of building an American version of the old Dutch East Indies Corporation (VoC). Which is why in 1935 Rockefeller purchased NNGPM and sent Jean Dozy to see if West New Guinea also had anything Rokefeller wanted - unfortunately inland from the central southern coast Dozy discovered the world's richest Gold and Copper deposits.

The rest is history, manipulating Kennedy and United Nations, colonizing West New Guinea (West Papua), putting General Suharto in power, commercing Globalization as Java's female population was put to work and the Javanese military made the minerals of West Papua and Aceh and a dozen other countries available to Bechtel's friends.

Eventually getting one of their own people, Bush Jnr in position to become President, funding his election campaigns,; and then he began returning the favors.

That's why Freeport McMoRan is still stealing West Papua's gold & copper, why FBI agents were sent to kidnap West Papuans for the Indonesian military before the Papuans could reach the US courts which wanted them and where they wanted to surrender themselves to testify against the TNI Generals.

That's why the US Indonesia Society (a.k.a. Bechtel, Exxon, Freeport, etc.) petitioned the US Senate to remove Section 1115 which the US Congressmen wrote. You see, not even the Republican US Congressman are 'evil' people; the vast majority of them want to do the right thing by your nation; like the majority of US corporations are good citizens, but not all.

I think the US Democratic Party should go public and instead upsetting people by trying to explain the corruption that's been pulling the strings in Washington; the Democrats should simply go public with my letter http://wpik.org/Src/draft.html for the United Nations - everything (apart from one item which is also easy to fix) else will fix itself.
Supporting West Papua's Freedom is something the majority of Americans including Republicans will support; but George Bush and Cond. Rice and anyone working for Bechtel and company will choke before they support it. The Republican Party will split over it; the Indonesian military Generals and the US corpoations in Jakarta will lose their political & fiscal power base.

Will SOMEONE please start a new thread with my United Nations letter ? http://wpik.org/Src/draft.html

[Jonathan50]

40. Robert Burns

O wad some power the giftie gie us To see oursel's as ithers see us! It wad frae monie a blunder free us. And foolish notion; What airs in dress and gait wad lea'e us, And ev'n devotion! --Robert Burns, To a Louse

[omega minimo]

43. "It wad frae monie a blunder free us."

:yourock:

thank you for that j50

[Kolesar]

41. I wish you had put Obama-Biden-flap early on in the message

Instead of making me read throught this rambling, uninteresting journal. sorry!

[tomp]

42. what is "progressive" and what is "appropriate"?

it is what a moderator says it is. certainly, it is not what i say it is. having run afoul of the moderators in years past, i know that we disagree on these terms.

[The Count]

48. Obama is a credit to his race? What if Obama would have said this of Biden?

Would YOU like to get such a "compliment"? Maybe put that on your resume?

WTF is political respect anyway?
If Biden says shit like:

Biden also had blunt advice for European critics: "I have one
simple message: Get over it. Get over it. President Bush is our
president for the next four years. So get over it and start to act in
your interest, Europe.''..........

am I supposed to respect him because he calls himself a democrat? Am I to be kicked out of DU for my past rants against Zell Miller and Joe Lieberman? How far does a political label go? How many crimes can it disguise? Should we love James Trafficant?
Isn't one of the PNAC-ers (Perle?) still a "democrat"? Should I respect him too?

[omega minimo]

50. I'm sorry. Maybe that (putdown) phrase isn't familiar anymore either

and I apologize if it seemed I was trying to excuse Biden.

"What he was saying was Obama is a “credit to his race.”

"Not so long ago, the majority of Democrats and progressives would have understood that. They would have understood that it is a backhanded compliment, a thinly-veiled putdown, intentional or not."

There's what I think about it-- maybe put too mildly. Not so long ago, the majority of Americans knew that saying "____ is a credit to his race" was code for racial superiority, deigning to compliment someone who was aspiring beyond their station in life. And maybe (or not) being clueless about it.

I listened to the tape of Biden and read the whole article (which was very interesting)
http://www.observer.com/20070205/20070205_Jason_Horowitz_pageone_newsstory1.html
Biden Unbound: Lays Into Clinton, Obama, Edwards
Loquacious Senator, Democratic Candidate on Hillary: ‘Four of 10 Is the Max You Can Get?’ Edwards ‘Doesn’t Know What He’s Talking About’
By Jason Horowitz

I could see that possbly Biden was being clueless. Clueless like ______ people occasionally are towards ______ people and it's too bad we can't admit that when it happens. It happened to me a few times and I learned from it. Which is why I said:

"They would have understood that if it WAS unintentional, the person in Biden’s position could acknowledge the faux pas and the offense it caused to the group that was undermined by it. We could all learn from it. And move forward. Towards progress."


Thanks for calling me on that if it sounded like I thought Biden's patronizing statement was a good thing. And maybe it's good if "a credit to his race" has become unfamiliar now.

:thumbsup:

[The Count]

51. Oh, the apology is mine. Once I got to that sentence, I saw red and stopped

reading....Racism tends to do that to me. Your point is well made! K&R

[omega minimo]

56. all right

:toast:

[theNotoriousP.I.G.]

52. Thank you

very well put.


:hi: :thumbsup:

[HarukaTheTrophyWife]

75. I thought the two of you would agree.

:D

[cboy4]

76. One word:

sockpuppet

[foreigncorrespondent]

79. ROFLMAO

You just crack me up so much. :)

[applegrove]

54. We have to trust each other. We have to trust that alltogether we will

choose the right leadership in the end. Then we will win!

[omega minimo]

57. esp. since

we're on the same side! :bounce: :kick:

[CelticWinter]

55. Thank you n/t

[happydreams]

58. I think selective blindness is disrespectful as well as a lie!

This is the deliberate attempt to fuck up a topic with inane, though strongly asserted bullshit, bullshit that is obvious to all concerned as it has been shown to be that for eons.


People who don't show respect deserve it not for themselves.

[omega minimo]

59. Not sure if your "strong assertions" are "inane or BS"--- but what are you talking about?

:shrug:

[happydreams]

68. You know exactly what I'm talking about.

[omega minimo]

72. this is a good example of anger/fear coming loud and clear, but meaning, not so much

this is how it's done, eh? someone spews something emotionally charged with just enough vague concepts to hang a reaction on and Let The Games Begin!!


i reread your post and it still doesn't make sense. sorry.

[autorank]

60. Thank you very much. Needed political primer. No excuses for not knowing this now.

First rate, truly. My compliments!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[omega minimo]

66. much obliged, autorank

:yourock:



Some background on a time that wasn't easy-- the respect was hard-won. Heard RFK Jr and Mike Papp on Ring of Fire, talking about Molly Ivins and the various groups she heard from back in the day: "angry blacks and angry women and angry Native Americans....." How "troublemakers" was high praise from Molly.

So if there's a need for a primer, it's not to recall that people were handed respect a la "political correctness" bogusness but that it was fought for through the hard work of generations of people. Those who fall for the post-"PC" whitewash of history and sneer at current calls for basic respect-- they need to check themselves and face the fact that they have been duped by the Right Wing puppetmasters.


"DU Rules echo the basic courtesy that was necessary for the Democratic “Big Tent” Party of the past-- joining the issues and energies of a multitude of diverse groups."

So from the brainwashed perspective, my version may sound too tidy and reinforce their fantasy that "perpetual victims" are whining for special status.

"The mutual respect of many groups under the Democratic Big Tent in the progressive era is why the bogus term “politically correct” was invented to turn the clock back and get self-styled Democrats and so-called “progressives” to do the dirty work themselves."

The mutual respect was necessary but not necessarily tidy. It was not whined about by perpetual victims-- it was demanded by empowered human beings. And then along came the slick and slimy snake oil salesman to turn the clock back on decades of social progress.....

[karlrschneider]

69. Democrats are nicer to Repuglicans than they are to each other.

Which is ass-backward but seems to be the case. :D

[evilkumquat]

77. Think Of the Democratic Party Like a Family

We put on a polite face to outsiders, but when the guests leave and the front door is shut behind them, we immediately tear into each other about who did not close the bread bag tight enough or why no one bothered to replace the empty toilet paper roll.

Using this metaphor, our party should stick together and immediately close ranks whenever outside forces threaten, regardless of our own personal ideas as to what could make the family work better.

Not that this actually happens with the Democratic Party; often we are more like a pack of predators during famine times tearing into the weakest of our own kind to survive.

Evil Kumquat

[omega minimo]

78. the real question is

does the paper hang down the back of the roll or off the front? :evilgrin:

Ya know you're right. This family has a lot of creative, bright individuals running around with ideas and stuff while the Republican family sits at home in their matching jackboots watching reruns of "Father Knows Best."

[evilkumquat]

80. The Paper Rolls Off the Front

Anyone who says otherwise is a goddamned commie.

Evil Kumquat