HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » patrice » Journal
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU
Page: 1

patrice

Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 47,992

Journal Archives

Should Boomers fear the version of "liberation theology" held by at least some young?

Should Boomers fear the version of "liberation theology" held by a possibly significant minority of young Americans?

The linked article is a consideration of anarchism as the young's reaction to their own perceived inability to respond effectively to the failures of conventional social justice and problem solving.

I personally see at least some anarchism as a reaction to the religious powers that motivated our involvement in an illegal and immoral war that killed something around 250,000 INNOCENT Iraqis. From this perspective, civil anarchism, against evil government, is more socially acceptable than turning on the religious institutions that have failed social moral development.

I'm curious about all of the faith in anarchy that I see around me and wondering if my generation needs to fear vulnerable elder years that are politically and economically affected by anarchistic youth culture.

I know persons who would say, "No" on the somewhat mystical assumption that anarchism will free the truth and that "freedom" will lead to the discovery that (whatever form de facto "death panels" take) the consequences of economic injustice, though deeply pragmatic and conveniently effective for some, profoundly diminish the whole human mind-heart and America's future political powers, the young of today, will effectively resist that decline.

I think that mind-heart REAL -ization, to which some such anarchistic positions refer, is a potentiality that is progressively diminished by the amount of suffering and pain that occurs over time before we "discover" this particular mind-heart truth about ourselves.

If that diminution of potentials matters to anarchists, then they need to weigh being somewhat less anarchistic in service of this truth, lest we lose this particular potential BEFORE we have a chance to discover what it is.

If that loss and the possibility of de-facto "death panels" doesn't matter to anarchists, I have to ask, "What's the point? Anarchism for the sake of anarchism? Or is there some other payoff? . . . Power? for example.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/sermons/59/

On a scale of 1-5, what is your average level of concern about the issues associated with decline and aging being politically/economically managed by any generation other than the current generation of elders in that experience?

It occurs to me that Movement to Ammend and anyone else fighting Citizens United is an

essential factor that needs to be mentioned in the dynamic we are trying to describe.

Movement to Amend LIKELY attracts union-busters, so the Occupy, faced with its presence amongst everything else from Left to Right in the political spectrum that inhers in an authentic people's movement, must deal with the fact that over-turning Citizens United will ONLY return us to the more stable political environment that preceded that decision. Overturning CU will destroy the best opportunity for power acquisition that Labor has had for a very very very long time. And without authentically STRONG LABOR, the question of whether the Occupy & 99% Spring CAN change anything, let alone changing things by moving TO THE LEFT is way less relevant.
Go to Page: 1