Member since: Fri Nov 19, 2004, 09:10 PM
Number of posts: 14,079
Number of posts: 14,079
What I mean is that believing the use of intelligent argument to effect a change in thinking by one's enemies or detractors has quite simply become a quaint notion.
While there may have been a time when arguments were more than the piņata parties of ad hominem they are now, it seems our political culture and society no longer support such a concept. Very few online or off have had a come-to-Jesus moment as a result of the sudden grasp of a new truth unveiled in the midst of heated discussion. What generally happens is that trenches are dug deeper, voices become louder, insults are offered instead of insights and minds are hardened rather than cultivated.
Although it can be satisfying to engage in argument if for no other reason than to clothe yourself with a "I'm not with Stupid" virtual T-shirt; Stupid is, unfortunately, pretty damn proud of his peanut-brained world view and not inclined to ponder the value of rationality.
Feel free to disagree, but remember - your mother was a hamster and your father smelt of elderberries!
Posted by IDemo | Sat Aug 30, 2014, 09:24 PM (22 replies)
Odds are better than naught that it's one of the new breed of American combat cops. And unless you're Cliff from "Cheers" and begin most of your sentences with the word "actually", we have effectively become a police state.
Actually, IDemo, just the fact that you are able to post your terr'istic thoughts on the Internet means you're wrong. People aren't being rousted in the dead of night and hauled away in Black Marias for a night of torture and a trip to the concentration camp. Journalists who haven't shown deference to the regime aren't being poisoned. Politicians haven't faced a sudden unexpected end when they become less than agreeable to the gameplan of the Plutocrats. Well, let's scratch that last one for now.
Actually, binary thinking. Black and white versus degrees of difference: "A degree or amount by which things differ." When that degree or amount amounts to disagreement over the shading of the big picture rather than an unfiltered look directly at the subject, the dialog reaches a stasis. The subject at hand is a duck with a gas mask, wearing desert camo and carrying an automatic rifle and a boiling rage. And he didn't have to walk like a duck to get here. He arrived in a heavily armored vehicle straight from the last place it didn't belong either -- in an illegal undeclared war. All on your dime, of course.
We are by no means at the same place as Stalin's Russia. Citizens don't live in fear of being assigned a bed in a 'mental hospital' for incurring the displeasure of the local Party chief. But the term "Police State" has become applicable to the state of affairs we've arrived at. Virtually all of your communications minus your singing in the shower are open for intercept by the NSA/CIA/FBI/DoD. And pull the battery on the SmartPhone if you want to be sure about your shower exception. Your FaceBooking and Googling, along with all of your other adventures on the tubes; your library book choices, your email, all are potential targets for a surveillance system on steroids. Because terra.
Publicly protesting, even if peacefully, will more often than not gain you a face-off with a group who appear to have just parachuted in to your encampment with intents of taking out Osama. And who appear perfectly equipped, ready, willing and anxious to make you their bin Laden du jour.
It is time to remove the blinders and recognize that this nation's police have in many places morphed into a standing army, regardless of whether they are federal enlistees or report to the Pentagon. And that army has defined the citizenry it ostensibly protects as the defacto enemy: suspected of terrorism until proven otherwise. "Resisting" by existing. Free speech in a zone, maybe, but just STFU preferably. You may videotape your cats, but not your cops. Piss one off even if just by being in his space on a bad day, and pay the price -- tear gas, clubbing, false arrest, gunfire in a shockingly increasing number of cases, and an absolution for the thug(s) by our judicial system more often than not.
It is time to recognize that this has no good end, and will potentially be the spark that finally brings about the uprising that grand theft oligarchy and a world of warhawks have failed to.
Posted by IDemo | Thu Aug 14, 2014, 05:05 PM (2 replies)
So DU hosts still another soccer riot, this time based on what your definition of "is" is. Or rather, what your valuation of "reason" is, as in reasons for engaging in criminal acts such as torture. Whether one is just following orders, is possessed by fear for her country, believes actionable testimony can be gained, loathes dark-skinned people, or simply enjoys making others scream, we can enter the discussion at least knowing these acts were not perpetrated by zombies.
There were reasons, you see.
They had purpose, dammit! Purposes be damned, but their brains had at least fashioned the crude clay form of justification for their sickening acts, and act they did. They may not have taken the long view, which might have resulted in understanding the criminality, the uselessness, the human costs associated with torture. We may not condone or understand why they did what they did, but at least we can't say they acted impulsively.
But reasons exist for everything within human experience and comprehension, from natural phenomena to politics. It is ludicrous to distill a set of reasons into an abstract entity which stands as its own palliative, regardless of the underlying facts. But that is what suggesting that we must acknowledge the back story of the torturer, unsanctimoniously, before daring to criticize, does. To offer such outrageous absurdity with seriousness is to embark on a road we do not want to travel.
I'm afraid we're already on milepost 11,000 of that road, unfortunately.
Posted by IDemo | Tue Aug 5, 2014, 09:26 PM (0 replies)
It now seems like a secondary concern when measured against realpolitik, which is the acceptable way of saying "so sad that you and yours died (or will, God willing), but we did what was needed to protect our power and wealth. You understand.
Never mind that each plane downing, purposeful or not, each bombing or missile attack regardless of whose insignia is on the munitions, represents the sudden horrifying end of someone who shares vastly more with us on the human scale than their politics or religion differentiates. Yet, much of humanity seems not only to accept this state of affairs but to enthusiastically embrace it. To picnic at the specter of battle, to hand clap and fist pump at the first news of Shock n' Awe Again. And to argue that the Tree of Liberty requires an occasional watering with blood of The Others, be they other nations, religions, ethnicities or political ideologies.
Now, empathy is a concept which has been roundly criticized by some in American politics (you know who you are). But arguing against identifying with another's human condition isn't enough. There is a culture of enmity which serves to vilify any with a perceived Outsiderliness or Otherliness and to justify their mistreatment, whether they are children at the border or villagers half a globe away. And to justify and excuse death-by-bomb with lies if necessary. Not just Joe Shmoe at the bar but the Very Serious People in Suits who populate radio and television talk shows. Folks who should be presenting facts and the careful consideration of their consequences but who twist tragedy into a How to Win Friends and Influence Politicians episode.
Forgive me, but it seems at times, more often lately, that the very word 'history' is too kind and should simply be replaced with 'CSI - Homo Sapiens'.
Posted by IDemo | Sat Jul 19, 2014, 02:25 PM (5 replies)
Of course you have. Again and again.
Folks, listen, the howling idiocy never lets up, even for a single day. The Bryan Fischers, Pat Robertsons, Ann Coulters, Tea Partiers, Dominionists, Libertines, militias. Now, it's fun to chuckle and forehead slap over the latest outrage from this crew, but isn't it time to ask ourselves how damaging these nuts are in actuality or simply to just let it go?
I seriously don't believe that giving each utterance of Beck and company a dredging of reality in the DU Universe is going to bring to the Truth Jesus (the one NOT cradling a baby T-Rex!) those who cling to his every word. When you're as firmly footed in the Tribe of Malicious Right Wing Lunacy as they are, facts aren't going to be particularly convincing.
We are not going to convert them to the gift of sentient reasoning, much less to liberal ideals. Ain't gonna happen.
And if you require a daily dose of RW nuttiness from Raw Story to strengthen your liberal and/or Democratic Party principles, you aren't trying.
That is all.
Posted by IDemo | Mon Jul 14, 2014, 05:23 PM (7 replies)
Everything they say is a calculated attempt to outdo themselves and the Moran in the last Raw Story article in order to gain the smiling, wide-eyed nods of acceptance by the Moran sphere, and the howls of outrage from Democrats. And it seems they can pretty much count on getting the desired response from DU, as if they'd leaned over and pressed a truck horn button after completing the spiel du jour. Angering the Left has become their equivalent of poking a stick at a caged animal. It's a childish pastime that they simply enjoyed far too much to give up later in life.
This first became noticeable to me during the Gingrich/Moral Majority era. It took off with an Acme rocket backpack after then and became the defacto communications mode for much of the Right.
They are not really trying to change the minds of anyone on either side of the Left/Right wall with their tireless Tourette tirades. It's all about getting the eyes and ears of those whose heart rates can be depended on to increase for better or worse because of mind numbing pablum loosely based upon political rhetoric. That, and getting the wallets of sponsors and supporters to open up.
You and I are never, ever going to persuade the mythical hesitant undecided RWinger that those spouting nonsensical gibberish may in fact not have their best interests at heart. Their minds, largely dwelling in the fear/fight-or-flight center of the brain, are not open to reason, be it anthropogenic climate change or a socially responsible government. In fact, recent studies indicate that not only are core beliefs generally unaffected by opposing facts, but can harden against those facts as a defense mechanism. And if you're someone who identifies as a 'Centrist' but who is willing to give consideration to an argument that Obama is a Marxist or that T Rex's shared a bunk with chimpanzees on the Ark, you're no more Centrist than the supposedly sensible David Brooks.
You can also claim that "we must keep our enemies close". That's certainly true, but how about focusing on the real enemies - those who have outdone the Somali pirates in capturing our government and economy, and the political prostitutes in DC who enable them? Replying to every sputtering outrage by the Ericksons and Bryan Fischers gets to seem like an out of breath five year old racing into the room, arms overhead, shouting "Mommy! Guess what Tommy said!" It's usually good for a chuckle, but doesn't add much to the dialogue.
Posted by IDemo | Wed Apr 23, 2014, 08:45 AM (2 replies)
Go to Page: 1