Anti-Establishment Does Not Necessarily Mean Progressive

[MineralMan]

I hope we've learned that, finally. People like Glenn Greenwald, Julian Assange, and a whole list of people who were lauded here on DU for quite a long time have shown their true colors. Many DUers recognized them as frauds long ago, and tried to warn that they were not on our side.

We suffered through constant links to RT, DemocracyNow, The Intercept and other sources that were actually nothing more than Russian propaganda outlets or libertarian claptrap. Turns out that Russia isn't on our side, either, as we've learned to our regret via their helping Donald Trump win the election. What a surprise that was, eh? It shouldn't have been.

We watched as some DUers constantly attacked the Obama administration, starting immediately after his first inauguration, finding fault with everything the President did, even when it promoted progressive goals. It was never enough. His efforts were never good enough. He was called vile names by some of the same people who sided with the false progressives and frauds. Anyone who praised what Obama was trying to do was attacked mercilessly here on DU. Many people simply left because of that. Others fell away after being deliberately targeted with alerts.

Many DUers who tried to warn people not to trust the libertarians and others pretending to be progressives were timed-out or even banned on DU after being targeted by a constant barrage of alerts from followers of those false prophets. DU was hurt by those efforts, and we lost the input from many people who saw the dangers clearly.

So, for one last time, here's something to keep in mind:

Anti-Establishment Views Are Not Necessarily the Same as Progressive Views.

I suggest that do our best to examine things in more depth and not simply accept anti-establishment rhetoric for truth. I suggest that, when someone raises concerns about sources and slavish dedication to questionable people, we examine those things more closely. I suggest that we always be skeptical and look beyond simple anti-establishment memes to discover what lies under them. I suggest we use our common sense and analytic skills to investigate before we fall into lockstep with pretenders.

That's my opinion this Sunday morning. Thanks for reading it.

[SHRED]

1. I've been fooled before

Stay vigilant.

[MineralMan]

8. Vigilant and skeptical.

In politics, especially, it's always good to stay skeptical until you're sure what you're hearing is correct.

[baldguy]

2. Trump is anti-establishment.

[MineralMan]

9. Well, he claims to be. But Trump always lies.

I'm sure we'll see that right away.

[meow2u3]

13. Trump is anti-AMERICAN!

Just look at his track record.

Siding with Putin over American intelligence? Check.
Blaming Obama for Russia's hacking the US elections? Check.
This is just the tip of the proverbial iceberg.

We are about to inaugurate a traitor in hock to a geopolitical enemy. God help America and the world.

[hexola]

18. He is not...that was a campaign gimmick

He copied from Bernie...

Look at his cabinet picks and explain to me how he is "anti-establishment"

Lets not sing his praises here at DU!

[Hekate]

3. KnR

[JHan]

4. those "progressives" only get side eye from me..

Obama handled the office of the President with dignity and an elegance we're going to miss once the Orange Vulgarian takes office.

I haven't agreed with Obama on everything, even got frustrated with him at times, but his administration was - for the most part - scandal free. And he's a thinker and a realist. Even the times I disagreed with him, I knew that he didn't arrive at his decisions easily or without thoughtful consideration.

So when I heard all these anti-establishment arguments I couldn't make head or tails of it, it was a smear and unfair.

I guess we need the upcoming horror show to appreciate what we had and lost.

[MineralMan]

10. We'll soon learn what we have lost.

There will be wailing and gnashing of teeth, no doubt.

[HoneyBadger]

5. I do not expect the current love of the CIA to last very long either.

[ismnotwasm]

17. .

[MineralMan]

19. You're probably right.

[nycbos]

6. Yup absolutely.

[mopinko]

7. the attacks on obama started before the inauguration.

the whole rick warren debacle split this board. it was ugly, ugly, ugly.

i would add john aravosis to your list.

[MineralMan]

11. Yes, Aravosis for sure is on that list.

Along with many familiar names to DUers.

[HoneyBadger]

12. It is so weird to see Democrats supporting a larger and further reaching intelligence community

Compare and contrast to the 60's

[MineralMan]

14. An intelligence community is necessary.

I'm actually pretty familiar with the intelligence community in the 1960s, particularly the last half of that decade. I'm less familiar with its workings now, of course, since I'm no longer part of it.

That community can certainly overstep its boundaries. I can assure you, though, that Donald Trump will encourage it to overstep even more when it comes to spying on Americans. He objects to that intelligence community only because they have found things that make him look bad. When he discovers, as he will, that it's possible to use it for his own ends, he will green-light all sorts of things we won't like, I guarantee.

A lot of people have made claims about our intelligence agencies spying on Americans. Most of those claims were overblown, actually. The CIA and NSA, for example, are not all that interested in what Americans are doing in America. That's not their mission. That's the purview of the FBI, and it is busy doing that, and always has been.

Some of the people trying to sell us on being afraid of agencies that spy on foreign governments and actors are the same people who are now recognized as part of the Russian propaganda mill. By sowing the seeds of distrust in those agencies, they were acting on behalf of Russian interests, either knowingly or as tools. Propaganda, for the most part.

It's all part of the same deceptive attempt to divert our attention from real issues we should have been watching. Now, we will have a federal government completely in the hands of the conservatives. Oddly enough, our conservatives are now less likely to focus their attention on what Russia has planned for many parts of the world. This whole thing was a strategic thing on Putin's part, I'm quite sure.

Many of us were taken in by it all. More's the pity.

[Cha]

15. Yep we had to have the BOG.. a place that was hate free to celebrate

Obama's history in the White House.. a private group for our President on Democratic Underground.

And, they would mock us.. which was a badge of honor, btw.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028444732



Thank you for this, MineralMan~

[MineralMan]

16. I never really visited the BOG much.

I stayed in the main forums and tried to counter what was being said in the main forums about the Obama administration. Now that many of the people who were attacking President Obama are no longer here, DU is a more friendly place. I believe those attacks were part of an organized effort, frankly.

[Initech]

20. Alex Jones thinks he's anti establishment.

But now that Donald Trump won, and called Infowars to thank them for their support, they are the establishment now!

[erpowers]

21. Interesting Post With Good Advice

Your post is very interesting and gives out good advice. I think it is hard for regular people to do the work necessary to expose people Julian Assange and Edward Snowden; however, you are right. We should at least try to be skeptical of anyone claiming to support any views.

However, I think the media is more of a problem. Where were the journalists looking into the private lives of Edward Snowden and Julian Assange? How many journalists did in depth stories examining the agendas and goals of Edward Snowden and Julian Assange?