For those who do not know...

[undergroundpanther]

Some people need a reminder..What exactly does a progressive Democrat stands for? Or what does LIBERAL mean?

Definition of Liberal:
noun liberal, progressive,a person who favors a political philosophy of progress and reform and the protection of civil liberties.

http://www.wordreference.com/definition/liberal

FOUR FREEDOMS
(Excerpted from a message to Congress, January 6, 1941, by President Franklin D. Roosevelt)
"We look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way.
The third is freedom from want.
The fourth is freedom from fear."

Here are 14 of the Core Principles Of The Democratic Party:

The mission of a democracy is the achievement of a society that is both free and fair. The Democratic Party historically has committed itself to the principles set out below, which, if pursued honestly, openly, and faithfully, will foster a just community of free men and women.

1. All people are entitled to live without fear for their own safety or the safety of their loved ones. That safety must be secured by both protection and prevention.

2. Each person is entitled to access to honest work providing a living wage conducted in a safe, healthy work environment.

3. Access to high quality public education must be available to all people regardless of sex, race, religion, national origin, financial status, or disability.
4. Each person is entitled to quality medical care at affordable cost.

5. Natural resources of our country and the world are held by individuals and institutions, public or private, in stewardship. As a democratic society, we must conserve and maintain the natural environment as a sacred trust owed to those now living and those to follow.

6. All citizens, corporate and individual, are stewards, as well, of the public good. Public policy must rest upon an ethic of mutual responsibility.

7. As citizens of the nation richest in natural and human capital, we must ensure that we share with the world’s less prosperous, so that all people can hold a vision of a brighter future.

8. Patriotism mandates that we act in accordance with our historical mission: to act as a responsible citizen-nation in the community of nations, adhering to our commitments; seeking peaceful resolution of international conflict; and fostering an atmosphere of global trust.

9. A just society ensures that the opportunities and benefits of that society are equally available and distributed; that human needs do not go unmet; and that the responsibility to fund that society is shared equitably.

10. Access to the benefits and opportunities provided by a democratic society may not be denied to any citizen on the basis of race, sex, age, religion, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability.

11. The free and open exchange of ideas is the bedrock of democracy. Freedom of expression, even of unpopular opinion, and unfettered access to information must be preserved and protected.

12. Everyone must be free to worship according to his or her own conscience; but government must refrain from either fostering or frustrating the practice of religion.

13. All citizens are entitled to equal treatment under the law. Our civil and criminal justice systems must be kept free of all bias, social and financial.

14. A democratic government IS the people. It is our role, as government, to assure the pursuit of the principles set forth above by enhancing the community life of the citizen, while leaving sacrosanct the social, religious and personal life, fostering in each citizen a dedication to fruitful and rewarding service to self, family, community and nation.
http://www.kywomensnetwork.org/principle.html


Below are 6 conservatisms CORE principles :

#1 A divine intent, as well as personal conscience, rules society.

Un Spun that is another way of saying, The Divine right of kings. If by divinity they mean Christian it is a theocracy. If there is one God, one creator, then one king is divinely appointed, well it must be God's chosen ruler on top, if society is run hierarchically by divine order.

#2 Traditional life is filled with variety and mystery while most radical systems are characterized by a narrowing uniformity ...
Their "order" makes sure they are first in line for everything but work, submission, responsibility and deprivation.

Tell that shit about "variety and mystery" to a housewife in the 1950's. Sometimes women back then were in such awe of the mysteries of church, taking care of house and husband and kids and seeking life we never had, they took Valium to sleep it away. Tell that to a factory worker who hates his job, or some cubicle slave. Oh, and never forget the great invisible hand -- divinity? -- of the market.

... while most radical systems are characterized by a narrowing uniformity.Radicals (read freedom oriented people)all must me made to agree with the inhuman basics of conservative ideology, or be ruthlessly stomped by the state if they do not uphold this notion of elitism couched as "divine order." That is why conservatives hate Anarchy: Because the radicals directly undermine the conservatives' bullshit about "divine mandates" they feel God gives them. They think God gave them their privilege to rule others, and exploit and manipulate them.

#3 Civilized society requires orders and classes.
Taken literally as conservatives seem to mean, this says blacks sit at the back of the bus. Conservative values are strified by classism.
Stratification creates inequality and strife and poverty. When times are hard, it is no longer the entire group that suffers: The elite takes what it thinks it is 'entitled' to take, and the underclass does without because they are inferior.

This sickening belief that some are more deserving or more 'well bred' still being believed as 'truth' is why classism and bigotry still exist. (hence "divine order," or more accurately an institutionalized excuse for systemic exploitation of others by the most powerful). God is used as the ultimate "permission giver" for the elites, excusing their plundering, enslaving, and domination of the masses. Beliefs like ...Gays are unnatural; not in the order of nature as God made it to be male and female, together...
Atheists are evil because they don't see God as a king...
And anyone is evil if they don't see "family values" when a man is head of the household and owns a little kingdom and his wife and kids are his property serve to keep the social status quo unequal, unjust, unfair and oppressive.Ancient Rome and Nazis also had this "nuclear family" model, The wife and kids were property of male head of household. This is the same crap the Christian Conservatives are spouting these days -- they want to go back to home feudalism. And if feudalism is a 'normal' lifestyle at home, then society will reflect it as "normal."In Rome, fathers could beat, rape, kill their uppity wives and disobedient kids because the "right" of the 'dick-head of the household' to dominate the weaker was couched as "divine order." It was master and slave, morality deified.There is nothing divine about "divine order." The class-ism, elitism, and social hierarchy that conservatives tout as the "special" "glue" or bedrock of 'civilization' means they rely on maintaining a master/slaves morality to keep their own power stable. Basically, conservatism echoes the divine right of kings, and insists that the proper place for the "lower classes" is a life of poverty, desperation, xenophobia, ignorance, religion, and being bound in servitude. That is their 'divine order', and this self serving ugly, evil ideology is what conservatives believe holds civilizations together.

Hierarchy is the supreme insult to a democratic human brother/sister hood. All this lie does is concentrate power away from the lessors and keep the elites on top of this "divine order." Slavery is a natural part of divinity for these thuggish, entitled, well-off people. It's all part of the elites' plan, which they call "God's plan."

#4 Property and freedom are inseparably connected.

Basically this says, If you own it, you can do whatever you want with it. Other people who don't own it have no say in what you do with your property, lest their objections interfere with owners' or plunderers' property owners "freedom."
Beating and raping slaves, for example, is a divine right of an owner, when human beings are seen as "property." That is part of the owners' "freedom" and "property rights." Even today, human trafficking and certain industries create and reinforce the idea a human being is an object that can be used owned and sold (porn) as property of the 'owner'.Remember it was not long ago (still is this way in some countries) when women were seen as property of their husbands/buyers. In those days and places, husbands had a right to beat their wives for not submitting, or for not cooking dinner on time. The wedding band is a symbolic remnant of this marriage bondage, and according to sociologist Stephanie Coontz, 'family' was a word that once meant a band of slaves.

#5 Man must control his will and his appetite, knowing that he is governed more by emotion than by reason.

If you are poor thou shalt not covet the wealth of parasites and kings. Thou shalt work for boss without sloth or offending him. Thou shalt not eat too much. Thou shalt not have pride and look unsightly before the king. Thou shalt not challenge the "divine order." Thou shalt not do anything that would offend the classes above you, unless the rulers above them tell you to do it.

But ... if you are of the elite class, different rules apply. You are in the club, Leo Strauss and Voglen speak your language.Because of your status you can be taught the "inner" truths -- that there is no morality, that having ethics is a show to keep the lessors loyal to you. If you have insatiable appetites, don't incite the plebeians envy of your wealth, dress down when you walk among them, hide your decadence, pretend it isn't there and do it anyway away from the gaze of the poor lest they covet and the Bastille is stormed. Because the most elite are sociopaths, and know to be depraved behind closed doors where the "evidence" can be hidden. They will not be called into account for it. Because the ways of princes is Machiavellian and the plebeians need not meddle in the affairs of kings...

#6 Society must alter itself slowly.

Because if things change too fast, the elites might not be able to control how it comes out. They might lose their cushy place in the "divine order" if it turns upside down.

For conservatives, there must always be a king even if he's called a "president".

http://www.unknownnews.org/060502a-Panther.html

Here is a conservative rationalizing the value of conservative core principles..Ever hear similar arguments out of the democratic party? YES and that is why I am angry it is a betrayal of the core principles of democracy.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=the_core_of_conservatism_distinctions_and_consequences&ns=MichaelMedved&dt=03/14/2007&page=full&comments=true
Conservative"values" are a BLIGHT upon humanity , authoritarian based,which means anti democratic,and unfair frankly.

[wildhorses]

1. king george

odd, i thought we solved that problem circa 1776.

[undergroundpanther]

2. No it was not solved

The tree of liberty withers because we the people have let tyrants rule for too long. We don't even recognize a tyrant as a tyrant because we have been fed poison from manipulators liars and lobbyists and psychopaths and the TV..and so have refused to think for ourselves about what things really mean anymore.In fact we have become too conservative to trust the liberty and progressive reforms we say we all crave..
Some of the founding fathers were pretty damn anarchistic,(ben franklin comes to mind) But the particular constraints put on the liberties sought by the founders were caused by the CONSERVATIVES among the founding fathers who had not shaken off the debilitating effects of that the oppression of kingship and aristocracy caused in their thinking yet,they didn't get the true protean ambitions that started this country because they wanted to dominate it and set up a 'market'even as they spoke inspiring diatribes about freedoms..Some of the founders were despicable hypocrites.

[wildhorses]

3. i guess i should have used the

:sarcasm:

sorry

[undergroundpanther]

4. Might be sarcastic in your case

Because even though you were being sarcastic and that's fine..There are some people in this nation who really believe tyranny has been eradicated.If not in their words they show it in how they RESPOND to tyranny's,bullies, ideologies and those erosions of our liberties. And what's really scary..some of them are Democrats!! Even in congress!!!
And I am NOT being sarcastic at all.Too damn of a scary and serious issue to be sarcastic about to me.

[wildhorses]

6. yes. so what time is the revolution?

sorry, can't help myself

[undergroundpanther]

9. When enough of the people

Get ethically and emotionally mature and courageous enough to step outside the boundaries of state social control,Decide they've had enough of this being imprisoned in their leaders imperialist,economic or otherwise toxic dreams and bullied by the state( When I say state I mean that Military religious corporate industrial state mess).


When enough of the population gets the courage within to reject empire/state and corporation bullshit games,and lifestyle planning and reject the marketplace as the director of how we should be,get sick of being consumers and treated like cattle..

When people have enough social isolation and cannot stand it anymore,go out and get to know one another build some solidarity,share skills, help each other,out of a ethical desire to be part of something meaningful..rather than watch vicariously representatives that do not represent them,fake it.
When they gather up the fortitude to rebel against the force of the state.Which the state will use to defend it's rulers and their hoarded resources.

When people are finally aware of the need to help oneself also requires one to care and help each other, rather than depend on a psychopathic institution to do it...And refuse to become atomized and compete against one another for stuff or status.

When more people realize they got to take that risk of diving into the unknown trusting they can manage it together, and refuse all authoritarians a "divine right" to rule them. And become a KING-LESS generation.

Literally because they each become sovereign people over them-self only, and know how to rule themselves internally.Ethical development does not grow wiser by obedience and faith in a leader to do it FOR you..

Does that answer your question?

As for WHEN,well You can begin to see it happen when more people get sick of living like this.
When enough people in the general populace are sick, scared and exhausted with the imperial trance,sick of the games and the treadmill of work and get tired of fighting each other for no real reasons besides culturally instigated bigotry , you will see an ethical uprising. That will eventually turn into a revolution.Because people will be forced to use the brain and heart and learn why being dominated and the act of domination in of itself kills life and it delays self actualization. That brings an end forever to authority having power-over.

[wildhorses]

11. believe it or not

i am on your side...

what are we going to revolt with if we let them take our guns away?

:popcorn:

[undergroundpanther]

12. We don't need guns

We need to "starve the beast.As in stop WORKING.
Fuck the bill collectors all at once.
We cannot DO this as lone individuals, but as blocs we can,as more give the companies the big fuck you..the rich pigs will realize they have lost control. They will try to use force but remember WE are many.And we have a right to exist and not be in a pay as you go system that only benefits our captors.They got technology and a monkey wrench or 5th column friend can make life really hard for these imperialist fucks using that technology.
Learn to take care of each other and teach each other how to take care of each other.Defend each other like brothers and sisters. Read my Damn Sig Lines!! Share your skills and resources freely with each other,take care of each other. BOND.

We may not be able to go back to a simpler lifestyle without a lot of people dying off, because this planet has been so polluted and damaged,we will suffer either way. But on the upside without constant consuming and polluting the earth renews itself pretty fast.Just watch a neglected field, it can become a decent forest in 5-8 years in ten years you got a thriving ecosystem there with deer and wildlife . There will be tons of salvageable stuff when the production stops enough for everyone if NO one is permitted to claim to own it and put conditions on how he distributes it.

But if we keep going as we are now and keep following the leader and working and consuming at this insane level and we do not demand a halt to this cult of growth,alot of us are going to die anyway,you know. What do we got to lose..Everything.. or just some. If we learn to be mature and act ethically than some of us might make it. If we do not do this humanity may go extinct and only the wealthy authoritarian psychopaths who engineered this catastrophe by accident and/or on purpose will survive and get away with it ,Stealing OUR planet all for themselves..

[Warren Stupidity]

5. "All citizens, corporate and individual"

Corporations are not citizens. Corporations may unfortunately have the legal standing of people in some situations, but they do not have the status of citizenship, at least not yet.

[undergroundpanther]

7. I agree with you

Corporations are papers they have no personhood, I didn't say the list there was perfect. If I was to say what really I thought of corprations and private property people would call me an Anarchist and they'd be Correct..I am here to counter the horrid rightwing tilt that so many Democarats are UNAWARE they have co-opted.Many of the democratic principles I share.Some I don't The corporate stuff is crap another manipulation by aristocrats to take from the people and force them to want, The Four Freedoms Speech,in the OP I TOTALLY agree with. That's why I put it above the Democratic Principles list.

Why I am An Anarchist? I am ETHICAL is why.

Lawrence Kohlberg created his Theory of Moral Development in the 1950s based on extensive research of boys between 10 and 16, in an effort to determine where morality (e.g., ethics) came from. The following is a cursory summary of his observations.

Kohlberg theorized that there are six stages of moral development, with Stage One being the lowest, most basic level of moral development, and Stage Six being the highest. He also developed the idea of cognitive dissonance, whereby people operating at different levels of moral development would find communication nearly impossible.

In other words, these people were operating from completely different paradigms -- speaking different moral languages, and would not be able to bridge that gap without considerable effort.

What does this have to do with anarchism? I think it has a great deal to do with it.

When you look at the stages of moral development, what becomes apparent is that the lower stages are more authoritarian, whereas the highest stage is the most libertarian. While much attention has been paid to Kohlberg's theories, I think that inner biases of researchers have led them to overlook that, for some operating at the highest stage of moral development (Stage Six), government can only be viewed as an evil -- an affront to their moral reasoning. The history of the 20th century backs this view.

Kohlberg later sought to apply his theories in alternative education, whereby methods of teaching could be used to develop moral reasoning. His theories, naturally, are controversial, as is anything that challenges antiquated notions of right and wrong.

PRE-CONVENTIONAL
* Stage One: Fear of punishment or respect for authority; no higher reasoning.

People operating at this level of moral development obey laws and authority out of a fear of punishment. Most conservative theorists think we all operate at this very basic, childish level of moral development, and are only held in check by the power of the state. This is a falsehood, however. Only a small percentage of a population operates at this basic level. Fascists and fundamentalist Christians are most likely to be found at this stage.

* Stage Two: Moral relativism, with a sense of equal exchange and fairness; rules should be followed only when they serve to advance your's or another's interests. Some individualism developed at this point.

This is a somewhat more common stage, which combines an awareness of the ideas of fairness and equality with opportunism -- that rules are to be obeyed when it is in your best interests to obey them. I suspect most capitalists operate on this level of moral development, as well as authoritarian socialists (Bolsheviks, Maoists, Trotskyites).

CONVENTIONAL
* Stage Three: Golden Rule

("Do unto others as you would have them do unto you") emphasized, valuation of trust, loyalty, respect, and gratitude -- heedful of expectations of others. They follow stereotypes of what is "good" around them. A sense of caring is developed at this stage.

* Stage Four: Adhering to Kant’s categorical imperative.

(e.g., "if everyone did this, would it produce the greatest good?"), avoiding actions that if undertaken would undermine the collective; recognizing a generalized moral system that defines roles and rules. They seek to fulfill agreed-upon duties.

I suspect that most people fall into these categories, with conservative moderates falling in Stage Three, and liberal moderates in Stage Four. Mainstream (not fundamentalist) Christians are likely operating at Stage Three on Kohlberg's scale, using God (and/or Jesus) as the stereotype of goodness, whereas the moderate liberal seeks a secular model in Stage Four in the idea of government.

POST-CONVENTIONAL (PRINCIPLED)
* Stage Five: Holds that values are still relative, but upholds them on basis of notions of social contract which requires obedience to shared laws;
sees utilitarianism as justification for good (e.g., that which brings greatest good to greatest number of people is good).

This is probably the basic democratic socialist position. They seek to bring about the best situation to the most number of people, while still allowing themselves moral latitude -- e.g., opportunism. They see the state as a necessary and logical component for social justice to be realized.

* Stage Six: Sees development of personal commitment to universal moral principles such as justice, equal human rights, individual dignity; sees persons as ends unto themselves, and not means, and treats them as such.

This is where genuine anarchists find themselves. We oppose the state and capitalism because we see individuals reduced to the level of products and drones to be used and abused at the will of leaders; we hold justice and equality central to our beliefs. For a person at this level of moral development, anarchism is the only satisfying political theory. Everything else requires a compromise of one's internal values.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. You and me both.

peace.

[undergroundpanther]

10. Purrrr

:loveya:

[mcg]

13. Latin famul / famula / famulus: a servant, slave, attendant

"... according to sociologist Stephanie Coontz, 'family' was a word that once meant a band of slaves."

It appears she is essentially correct. From
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/family

Origin: 1350–1400; ME familie < L familia a household, the slaves of a household,
equiv. to famul(us) servant, slave + -ia -y

From
http://www.bible-history.com/latin/latin_f.html

famul, famula; see famulus.

famularis -e, relating to servants or slaves.

famulatus -us, m. servitude, slavery, service; meton., an establishment of slaves.

famulor -ari, dep. to be a servant, to serve.

famulus -a -um, serving, servile; as subst. m. famulus (famul) -i, a servant, slave, attendant; f. famula -ae, a female slave, handmaid.

[starroute]

14. Actually, there's something to both sides

The liberal assumption is that human beings are creatures of reason with the capacity to alter their society for the better according to rational ideals of justice, equality, and self-fulfillment.

The conservative assumption is that human beings are creatures of instinct and habit, who are able to stay clear of their lower impulses only when they adhere to the dictates of traditional wisdom and morality and make changes slowly, if at all.

I'd say both perspectives have a share of the truth, and both are suspect to abuse. Excessive faith in your own ability to break society and reconstruct it according to your desires leads to the Reign of Terror, Stalin's purges, or Mao's Great Leap Forward. Excessive reverence for the social norms laid down in Egypt or Sumeria 5000 years ago leads to a society of masters and slaves.

But the toxic mixture of both at once we're suffering under -- where the free-market right is driven by a utopian fervor to remake the world into a nightmare perversion of the conservative dream -- does neither any credit.

In contrast, a little more humility on the part of liberals, along with a little more faith in the human spirit on the part of conservatives, could go a long way to correct the deficiencies of both parties.

And, just possibly, we might find our way out of the 200-year-old debate between left and right, start hitting on all cylinders at once, and figure out how to shape our world in a way that honors all sources of knowledge and wisdom and respects the contributions of even the least among us.

[annabanana]

15. Thank you.