"The Good German Syndrome" -- two great threads that go great together!

[nashville_brook]

longtime DU-powerposter arendt and smirking chimp essayist David Swanson, both have rocking threads addressing the authoritarian themes that emerged this week (tasing students, airport geek chic incident, MoveOn censuring). Swanson does a bang-up job shining a light on the standing broad jump that fascism took this week. arendt vents philosophical on the same. they are both describing "The Good German Syndrome."

David Swanson's "We Have Nothing But Fear"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1882377&mesg_id=1882377

arendt's "We Don't Do Nuance"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x1882859


My two cents -- To side with the authoritarians in any of these cases you submit, is to say "well, I WOULD COMPORT MYSELF better," therefore, the free speech issue or the overuse of force issue is eliminated.

the same phenomena is described in the famous Martin Niemöller poem lamenting German apathy that enabled the Nazi rise to power. "When the Nazis came for the communists,I remained silent; I was not a communist. When they locked up the social democrats,I remained silent; I was not a social democrat..." etc.

An authoritarian regime on the march will always come for the weakest, least likable targets first. "The Good Germans" will then affirm their "goodness" by distancing themselves from the tasered, incarcerated or beaten "idiot" who "brought it on themselves." Good Germans pat themselves on the back for their pragmatism and ability to see the "obvious" danger in speaking out (they'd be more polite), wearing geek chic or calling attention to themselves in any way that might raise the hackles of "homeland security."

If ever there were a line to draw in the sand, this is it. You are either a DEMOCRAT (in the full meaning of the word), or you an APPEASER. Our government is at war with us on the battlefield of personal freedom and security. This is where we are supposed to stand our ground: behind the rule of law. Every time we give ground, we allow the state to move "the rule of law" backwards, covering fewer and fewer people, until one day, they come for you.

[proud2BlibKansan]

1. K & R

:applause:

[KoKo]

2. It sure as hell is seeming the "Good German Syndrome"is back....and thanks for

putting the two links side by side. K&R

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

103. I just finished reading both threads and feel really disturbed at what I read.

Both pieces seemed akin to anchors being offered so that our way or direction isn't completely lost in a sea of oppressive political, economic and social manipulation.

I was stunned how many not only rejected a mere offer of an anchor but also appeared bent on destroying it.

:shrug:

What's disturbing is not so much the lack of focus or center as the apparent intent to destroy all focus or center. It's as if "balance" is BAD, reasoned perspective is BAD, and an examination of reality is REALLY BAD.

Disturbing.

[KoKo]

121. I think most folks don't realize that there's a "DESTROY IT ALL" mentality...

where the replacement is some "Supply Side" Global View of ONE WORLD..where trading by the rich goes to help the impoverished poor. What those "Supply Side" idealist MISSED as that the country that has all its corporations and jobs going to poorer countries eventually bleeds dry the exporting of jobs country for the advantage of the country where the jobs went.

The Rich Get Richer off this Scheme...but eventually the WHOLE WORLD IS BLIGHTED! Raped of Resources sold to Conglomerates ...wrapped in CIVIL WAR over the taking of these Resources and the wage parity becomes something that would make Dickens' England seem "generous." :-(

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

142. Yes. A consumption-driven existence paves the way to non-existence.

It's all so unecessary. There is plenty to go around and then some e.g. replenish.

I NEVER thought of humanity as a disease on this planet until the last decade or so.

I still do not consider "humanity" the disease but rather cancerous cells of humanity as the disease.

:shrug: Those cancerous cells keep popping up and we are failing to combat them, for some reason.

[emlev]

135. Here's another companion link

Later You Can Say You Didn't Know

[tavalon]

153. I had a sig line 3 years ago that said

"It's not 1934, it's not even 1984, it is 2004 and I am NOT a good German!" So, it's been happening for a while. I think it has just reached critical mass with people recognizing it.

[Jed Dilligan]

3. No. 5 was me

We should keep this "Good Germans" meme alive.

[nashville_brook]

5. thanky -- memes should be the least of our worries -- but we really DO need them!

[Jed Dilligan]

12. Here especially

The nature of this form of discourse is such that some genres need to be dismissed in shorthand.

[nashville_brook]

16. i'm sick to death of dismissing, "ignoring" --

there's been so much pandering to authority lately i hardly recognize the place. the Authoritarian Voice on DU is drowning the rest of us out. i'm quite guilty of not wanting to engage in the mess. let it go, let it run it's course.

it's course, of course, it straight through the middle of where we all live. we have to stand firm and not let them plow any farther.

[Jed Dilligan]

17. Intellectual dismissal doesn't mean lack of engagement

But engaging them here is a purely intellectual exercise. At least I'm coming to believe that.

[nashville_brook]

21. best to let their words stand as proof of purchase -- see downthread.

[melody]

4. Thanks for posting this -- excellent stuff n/t

[Ripley]

6. And look at the floodgate of Good German behavior ..

They are attacking anyone of us who points out their Authoritarianism. I was told to go get myself electro-shocked, but hey! That's not an attack or anything. :eyes:

As an artist I find it sickening that so many people are ready to throw one more group of people under the bus. The similarities to 1930's Germany are STRIKING.

But make no mistake, many are not simply "brainwashed" or "ignorant" or "naieve" No. They are willingly participating.

[nashville_brook]

9. wow, you bring up some good points. "authoritarianism" is where the rubber is meeting the road!

i'm so reminded of when i was studying art/philosophy in high school and college in the 80s and EVERYONE from b/f to mother to extended family attacked the education on the grounds that i needed to submit to the authority more and get a "real education." at the time i was working on a theory about hegel's ideealism in modern art -- that artists are naturally at the front lines of social critique, it's our job. trouble is, too few people know the language of art anymore. at least there's Green Day.

yes, the similarities are STRIKING and the one that's got my attention right now is the economic downturn -- a very un-arty concern (except that i might as well paint my little heart out now b/c i'm not making any money 'in the real world'). remember: it was the depression that fueled Hitler's rise to power. i think the next great agony we face could be that the economic dire straits created by Bush will fuel more SHOCK DOCTRINE such as what Naomi Klein describes:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kieyjfZDUIc

[Ripley]

22. And they're not even trying to be subtle anymore.

"How DARE she wear something with a BATTERY on it and hold playdough???!!!!!" She is a troublemaker. She is a freak. She has no common sense. She should be punished. She got what she deserved. Then..

"She made crappy art." Everyone's a critic. Gee, I wonder if she had a Thomas Kincade pinned to her Talbot's jacket if she would have been harassed?

And people will refuse to see the similarities. "Well, we haven't chained them." That's a line from an Art of Noise song that keeps coming into my head. It was a white British woman speaking of the native South Africans during apartheid.

[nashville_brook]

82. the lyric that keeps popping into my head is "Maybe partying will help..."

As I look over this beautiful land,
I can't help but realize that I am alone.
Why am I able to waste my energy?
To notice life being so beautiful?
What of the people who don't have what I ain't got?
Are they victims of my leisure?
To fail is to be a victim,
To be a victim of my choice.
Maybe partying will help.

[corkhead]

182. Another Minutemen fan.

:toast:

[nashville_brook]

185. double nickles is on my "top 5" that i would need on that deserted island.

[Mythsaje]

164. I faced the same thing with my writing...

I know exactly what you mean.

[sicksicksick_N_tired]

104. I agree with you. The choice to engage in such behavior is terribly disturbing,...

,...and appears to be growing exponentially every day.

I can not say for certain, though, that all such behavior is a conscious choice or an unconscious decision to succumb to literal brainwashing imposed day after day after day for the last, at least, 7+ years,...more likely decades,...just a little more of it over time.

[cali]

109. One juvenile post

hardly represents anything, much less succumbing to literal brainwashing. I have a far more nuanced take on these incidents and although I certainly see over reaction on the part of the authorities, I do not see it as a prime indicator that we live in a fascist police state. In fact, I think that's hyperbole. Our democracy is vulnerable and frail at this time, that's different from the "fascist' claim.

And guess what? I live in an MSM free environment! Can you say the same. That's right. I have no TV, no radio other than NPR, and I don't read Time or Newsweek. I read Harper's, The Nation and a few more esoteric periodicals.

[ProudDad]

169. If it quacks like a duck...

Fourteen Defining
Characteristics Of Fascism
By Dr. Lawrence Britt
Source Free Inquiry.co
5-28-3


Dr. Lawrence Britt has examined the fascist regimes of Hitler (Germany), Mussolini (Italy), Franco (Spain), Suharto (Indonesia) and several Latin American regimes. Britt found 14 defining characteristics common to each:

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism - Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights - Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of "need." The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause - The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial , ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc.

4. Supremacy of the Military - Even when there are widespread
domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized.

5. Rampant Sexism - The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Divorce, abortion and homosexuality are suppressed and the state is represented as the ultimate guardian of the family institution.

6. Controlled Mass Media - Sometimes to media is directly controlled by the government, but in other cases, the media is indirectly controlled by government regulation, or sympathetic media spokespeople and executives. Censorship, especially in war time, is very common.

7. Obsession with National Security - Fear is used as a motivational tool by the government over the masses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined - Governments in fascist nations tend to use the most common religion in the nation as a tool to manipulate public opinion. Religious rhetoric and terminology is common from government leaders, even when the major tenets of the religion are diametrically opposed to the government's policies or actions.

9. Corporate Power is Protected - The industrial and business aristocracy of a fascist nation often are the ones who put the government leaders into power, creating a mutually beneficial business/government relationship and power elite.

10. Labor Power is Suppressed - Because the organizing power of labor is the only real threat to a fascist government, labor unions are either eliminated entirely, or are severely suppressed.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts - Fascist nations tend to promote and tolerate open hostility to higher education, and academia. It is not uncommon for professors and other academics to be censored or even arrested. Free expression in the arts and letters is openly attacked.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment - Under fascist regimes, the police are given almost limitless power to enforce laws. The people are often willing to overlook police abuses and even forego civil liberties in the name of patriotism. There is often a national police force with virtually unlimited power in fascist nations.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption - Fascist regimes almost always are governed by groups of friends and associates who appoint each other to government positions and use governmental power and authority to protect their friends from accountability. It is not uncommon in fascist regimes for national resources and even treasures to be appropriated or even outright stolen by government leaders.

14. Fraudulent Elections - Sometimes elections in fascist nations are a complete sham. Other times elections are manipulated by smear campaigns against or even assassination of opposition candidates, use of legislation to control voting numbers or political district boundaries, and manipulation of the media. Fascist nations also typically use their judiciaries to manipulate or control elections.

[RaleighNCDUer]

188. If you are in a MSM free environment, then you may have an

innacurate view of how bad things are getting.

I was watching the MSNBC coverage of Amadinejad's visit, and throughout their commentary about him being banned from the 9/11 site they flashed background pictures of mobile missile launchers and marching Iranian troops, neither of which had anything to do with what they were talking about. The propagandizing was obvious to me, but how many watchers were seduced by even this heavy-handed onslaught?

It's one thing to hold yourself above the fray -- it is well documented that those who watch less TV news are less fearful of their fellow citizens -- but it is another thing entirely to no see how pervasive the advertisments for authoritarian and militaristic mindsets are becoming.

A major aspect of the 'good german' syndrome was those who said "I refuse to be made afraid by a bunch of thugs - we are a civilized people and all this will be over soon enough."

[nashville_brook]

136. i think we get engaged in social exchanges, and

tend to repeat those that bring us pleasure and avoid those that bring us pain. we want approval. we don't want to burden those we love.

when we say "go along to get along," all these things are in play.

[TahitiNut]

7. Those who engage in civil disobedience are the ripest targets for the "blame the victim" crowd.

Isn't that what civil disobedience is all about? Exposing one's self to the heavy hand of autocratic rule? Those who LEAP to the 'side' of power to defend their own choice to comply are truly the "good Germans." Alles in ordnung.

After all, how much trouble can it be to just wear a simple armband? Are they ashamed of their religion? It's not like behaving lawfully is that difficult, right?

:eyes:

[nashville_brook]

13. remember RED FRIDAY? we should bring that back, or are we too scared to self-identify?

if everyone knew that wearing red on Friday was a silent protest of blood spilled for oil, would you do it? could you take the stares? would you feel safe? would you have to explain to your supervisor?

it's worth finding out.

[TahitiNut]

18. Absolutely, I would.

(I only refuse to wear green or orange.)

[nashville_brook]

20. is that a football thing? :)

[TahitiNut]

24. Nope. It's aesthetic and reactionary (i.e. Viet Nam). I'm actually a Packers fan.

While not a cheesehead, I've perenially supported the Packers if only because they're municipally-owned. I'm alos supportive of teams whose fans brave the winter weather - Lambeau Field and Rich Stadium, for example. Fans who eschew the indoor stadia are my kind of fans.

[nashville_brook]

36. i'm totally glad i asked b/c Packers was exactly what i was thinking...

[YankmeCrankme]

171. I thought it had something to do with the Irish, the orange and the green lol nt

[Mythsaje]

166. I won't wear green or orange on St. Pat's day...

And, actually, I won't ever wear orange because I hate the color.

[Mythsaje]

165. It would be pointless for me...

I wear red every day at work. :shrug:

[BlooInBloo]

8. (shrug) Many/most DUers are authoritarians at heart - what's new?

Many/most Americans tout court are. And not a single one of either group will admit it, which allows it to continue. That's all well-known.

[nashville_brook]

10. "well known" and "appealing to authority" are each functions of each other

they are yin and yang. flotsom and jetsom. frick and frack.

[BlooInBloo]

23. That's "flotsam and "jetsam".

[nashville_brook]

33. thank you for the spell checky -- i hope i got "frick" and "frack" correct.

:evilgrin:

[Jackpine Radical]

161. I hate fricken fracktured spelling.

[lateo]

11. K & R

Excellent links.

[femrap]

14. k and r nt

[cali]

15. I'll only address Mr. Swanson's piece:

Let me commence by saying; I value intellectual honesty. A lot.

From Mr. Swanson's piece:

"A University of Florida student asks inconvenient questions of a U.S. senator. Police tackle him and shoot him with a taser. Onlookers, including the senator, either cheer, do nothing, joke, behave as if all were normal, or yell at others to let the police do their jobs. Not a single person seriously protests. Only the one victim is hauled off to jail. Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat.

A television newscaster announces that planes were delayed in Boston's airport and tells us the name of a college student, shows us her picture, and tells us that we should blame her. He tells us to give the airport security guards credit for doing their jobs. They mistook her school project for a bomb. Again, we must let the "authorities" handle things."

What's wrong with that passage? Mr. Swanson attributes Mr. Meyer's arrest to his "asking inconvenient questions". If that's true, the police had no business trying to remove him. But there's lots of evidence that it's not true. Andrew Meyer bypassed a long line at the end of the forum, grabbing an open mike, and rambling on for approx. 2 minutes. He did not allow Sen. Kerry to answer his purported questions. His mike was turned off, not by the cops but by the those running the forum. And they're the ones who called the police. Did the police handle it badly? Yes. The tasering is enough to come to that conclusion. But resisting arrest is not a wise option. Flailing your arms about and swinging at a cop is not wise action. It's hardly the stark black and white picture that Mr. Swanson paints.

As for his slur towards Senator Kerry, I find that despicable. Not because I'm a great Kerry supporter, but because there's more than enough evidence to support that Kerry did what he could to ratchet down a tense situation. That evidence has been posted repeatedly in many DU forums.

Mr. Swanson's account of what happened in Boston, neglects a description of the student's attire. Do I agree with him about the media response? Yes. And I don't think she should have been arrested, let alone prosecuted. BUT, I do think it's common sense not to wear what she wore to Logan Airport. And stopping her was appropriate, albeit with less general hysteria.

Mr.Swanson states:

"Fascist-friendly media outlets love the story because the senator is a Democrat, but they don't tell the story right. Progressive media outlets don't tell the story, even though they would tell it right, because the senator is a Democrat."

He wants it every which way. And provides no evidence for his assertations.

Sadly, Mr. Swanson has some good points to make, but his OP is littered wiht distortions of truth, and that cheapens it to the point of worthlessness.

Sad.

[nashville_brook]

26. Swanson isnt' "trying to have it both ways" -- he's saying "we lose either way"

there's a major difference, and it's the most salient point of his piece: that FEAR is driving us into submission. that real courage is standing up to the mob...to the "dominant myth."

[cali]

31. But what about his dishonesty?

He fundamentally misrepresented what happened in FL and nothing he said about Kerrys's behavior is true.

Real courage doesn't involve lying to make a point. Or ommissions that are vital to the truth.

[arendt]

27. Just back from brunch. Other thread locked. Wanted to thank you for your acknowledgment about...

who said "neocon disruptors". And, if you would notice, I put it in quotes in my response.
In quotes is, in situations like this, my shorthand for "I'm not buying your phraseology".

Anyway. That's all in the past. Let's stay with this thread.

----

"He (David Swanson) wants it every which way. And provides no evidence for his assertations. Sadly, Mr. Swanson has some good points to make, but his OP is littered wiht distortions of truth, and that cheapens it to the point of worthlessness."

Well, these are your assertions, and I see no reason to OBJECTIVELY value them any more than Mr. Swanson's. Subjectively, it just reinforces my opinion of your POV, as someone who refuses to connect the dots about the creeping police state and the militarization of our aiports. You accept most of what he says, on a point by point basis (you see the dots); then you dump all over him at the end (not only refuse to connect them, but beat him up for so doing). And you really like the word "hysteria".

What baffles me is why, with you obviously being capable of making a logical argument, you always have so many blanket dismissals and denunciations.

Really hoping you will turn down the insult level.

arendt

[cali]

46. I apologized for that on the other thread.

Just as you apologized for referring to DUers as pigs. Perhaps we can leave all that on the other thread?

Mr. Swanson claims that Andrew Meyer was tasered for inconvenient questions. That is not an accurate narrative. It simply isn't why the whole disastrous incident took place. There's video and eyewitness accounts all over the web.

He furthermore unjustly criticizes Kerry. Again, there's tons of evidence that Kerry did his level best to defuse the situation, and was willing to answer Meyer's questions. It's on tape.

The rest of your post is simply aimed at insulting me loftily telling me I don't know how to connect the dots and accusing me of "dumping" on Mr. Swanson. Something I did not do.

I don't want to get into the whole insult thing with you.

I'll hazard a guess that you think of yourself as a well read person, so I'll assume you're familiar with the great novelist and essayist, E.M Forester. One of my favorite quotes comes from him. It's both marvelously simple and profound:

"Only hypocrites cannot forgive hypocrisy"

[arendt]

59. Can you stop with the insults and just make a point? It is really tedious. n/t

[cali]

62. I give up.

You're playing games that are far too strange for me. And you've been insulting me at a fast clip. I'm done trying to hold any discourse with you. The up is down and down is up stuff has no appeal.

Peace, arendt.

[nini]

29. "Good German" is used as a tool when there is nothing else to add to discussion

The overuse of that term makes me crazy and I have seen it here numerous times when the poster has nothing else to add to converstaion and uses it to insult another poster.

I do not blindly follow anything and am more than able to look at a situation and come up with my own conclusion without the help of the press, DUer's or anyone.

I agree with you in that Swanson had good points yet uses HIS own interpretation of a situation as an example to tell others if they don't agree with him that we're somehow evil and stupid. THAT arrogance scares me as much as the blind loyatly to the right, and is not better than what he accuses others of when he calls the Good Germans.

[madfloridian]

37. I have been called Good German here at DU by both left and right.

I am not sure what that means, to be considered that by both sides of the aisle.

[nashville_brook]

50. it's a literary narrative as i use it -- authoritarian ideology.

[Tyler Durden]

186. Sort of like using "Jewish Influence" when you mean "The current Israeli position"

Right?

Try it. See where you get. Personally, "The Good German Syndrome" is as ethnically racist as "Jewish Influence."

And don't quote the Holocaust or Iran: this has nothing to do with either one; both of the above phrases are ridiculous and racist.

[nashville_brook]

47. "all that is required for the triumph of evil is for us to do nothing" is not reducto ad hitlarum

the "good germans" were victims of their state terrorizing them just as our state is terrorizing us.

[nini]

58. When someone uses that term here it's in an insulting way

Since you disagree with them you must be a 'line-toting head-up-your ass 'follow the fuhrer' ignorant wimp.

The problem is the overuse of that term here by posters who don't have a better comeback to someone's point other than to accuse them of practically being a nazi sympathizer.

[arendt]

61. So, just as with the MIT student, people who use it right must bow to the brainless? n/t

[nini]

69. Not at all.. However the fact is it is used as an insult here

I'm stating a fact about the use of it here - the 'brainless' have manipulated the meaing of that term here.

If you don't agree - I promise I won't call you that ;-)

[cali]

60. I'm sorry, but one liners do not an argument make

and degree counts. Could we get there? Undoubtedly, but it ain't an exact paraallel by any means. And you know what? I'm leery of the government, uneasy about it, but not terrified.

I have a book for you, if you're really interested in the psychology of the "Good German". Not an easy book by any means but a worthwhile one:

Diary of a Man in Despair: A Masterpiece About the Comprehension of Evil
By Friedrich Reck-Malleczewen, Paul Rubens

This is the true and compelling diary of an anti-Nazi Prussian aristocrat who lived through mankind's darkest era, only to die in a concentration camp on the eve of the Armistice. Though not widely known, the diary is considered one of the most important documents of this period, describing in unforgettable terms how a psychosis enveloped an entire society, enabling Hitler's rise to power, and the Nazi regime. This accurate account of the forebodings of an unsung visionary exposes in chilling... (see more)

http://search.a1books.com/cgi-bin/mktSearch?act=showDesc&code=gbase&rel=1&ITEM_CODE=0715630008

[arendt]

68. This (content, not title) is the clearest thing you have said. Thank you.

You say that you are "not terrified" of the government.

Well, I am. Corporations run our country. The corporate media is a propaganda machine. The citizens are misinformed and distracted. The Constitution is in shreds. The top of the military is riddled with Rapture nut-cases, and evangelism is rampant INSIDE the military. The government has instigated massive, illegal wiretapping. It has suspended habeus corpus in spite of being told by the Supreme Court that it could not. These are unprecedented events.

Just because you aren't terrified doesn't mean that there aren't legitimate reasons to be terrified.

One liners do not an argument make. No. But, that one liner is shorthand for all of Edmund Burke's work. Does he have to quote huge chunks of Burke and then commentaries on Burke in order for you to "connect the dots"? Would you have been telling people not to worry too much about Robespierre and Danton in 1792? (I'm not talking about the entire French Revolution, just those two individuals.)

I am trying very hard to avoid inflammatory prose. I just want to see what it takes to move your worry meter off zero.

I humbly request that you respond to this particular post without any insults.

arendt

[cali]

87. I'm going to try very hard to say this as civilly as I can

Do you not realize that you started off by insulting me? You said; "This (content, not title) is the clearest thing you have said. Thank you."

I'm sorry you can't see that as condescending and thus rather insulting. Was it even necessary to make that comment?

It's a two way street. You don't want to be insulted, don't insult, and I'll try the same approach.

I refuse to buy into the terra, terra, terra whether it comes from the left or the right. And I'll grant you that I live in a place where progressive politics flourish and authoritarianism withers on the vine. That does impact my thinking, and when I travel, I'm always more on edge.


It is a mischaracterization to say my worry meter is at zero. I'm deeply concerned with the direction of this country. I believe that we are on a slide toward global irrelevance. How it all plays out is something i'm humble enough not to predict. But I don't care for the hyperventilating fear, fear, fear meme. That's a conscious choice.

And no I don't buy the bush will stay on in office, or the martial law script. I explained why before.

Maybe it comes down to this: I prefer hope. That doesn't mean being blind to the dangers of the current regime or the corpocracy.

[cali]

48. Yes.

I too find it disturbing.

[arendt]

53. Oh, now we are on the way to banning certain previously accepted phrases, are we? n/t

[arendt]

54. How do you feel about the "being Hitlerish" comment in post #35? n/t

[renie408]

88. Accepted by who? You?

And how do you get from "I find it disturbing' to "banning previously accepted phrases"? Exxagerate much?

Gosh, I am starting to think your mental superiority might be...umm...all in your head. It is a pretty simplistic (and curiously Republican-like) viewpoint to overreact so drastically to any kind of concern over your opinions. Gee, it looks like you don't like to be questioned, no matter how reasonably. Seems like you might be a little authoritarian, huh?

[cali]

93. are you sure you're addressing the right person?

I don't think I've said anything about "banning prevously accepted phrases".

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[renie408]

95. My comment is in reply to #53...

That's who I was intending to respond to and that's how it looks on my computer. Does it look like a reply to you? I actually wrote it in defense of your comment...sorry if it looked like I was responding to you.


I think I get it...I meant that "banning previously accepted phrases" was a strange extrapolation to make from "I find it disturbing".

[cali]

100. Oh, thanks.

I get it.

[followthemoney]

113. Let's not forget the Good Jew, who in his faith in the benevelence of

authority followed reasonable orders to enter the shower or train.

Belief in the reasonableness of authority led them to comply, one small step at a time until there remained absolutely no escape and their fate was sealed.

How many of us have been ushered into "free speech zones" that have turned into "keep it to yourself zones?"

[cali]

114. What??

Your knowledge of history is sadly lacking. The Jews didn't have the opportunity to refuse to get on the train or enter the gas chamber.

[followthemoney]

117. Your ignorance in appalling! Jews DID resist, but not enough. nt

[cali]

125. Please.

yes, there was some resistance. But those were Jews who managed hide and join with the Resistance in Poland, France (I suggest reading Marc Bloch's Strange Defeat) and other occupied countries. For the people being loaded into cattle cars. shot en masse or herded to the gas chambers, there was virtually NO opportunity for resistance.

try again.

[atreides1]

178. The Opportunity was small, but it was always there

Here's examples of resistance:

Sobibór was the site of one of two successful uprisings by Jewish prisoners in a Nazi extermination camp — there was a similar revolt at Treblinka on 2 August 1943, and a revolt at Auschwitz-Birkenau in October 1944 which led to two of the crematoria being blown up was unsuccessful and all the escapees were killed.

On October 14, 1943, members of the Sobibór underground, led by POW Alexander Pechersky, succeeded in covertly killing eleven German SS officers and a number of Ukrainian guards. Although their plan was to kill all the SS and walk out of the main gate of the camp, the killings were discovered and the inmates ran for their lives under fire. About half of the 600 prisoners in the camp escaped. Only about 50 escapees survived the war, however. Some died on the mine fields surrounding the site, and some were recaptured and shot by the Germans in the next few days, but survivors' accounts also indicate that many of the escapees were killed by the Polish underground and civilians, including a massacre of ten former prisoners on or about 17 October 1943 in the forest to the south west of the camp. Many of those that did survive were hidden from the Germans by other Poles, at the risk of their own lives.


On January 18, 1943, the first instance of armed resistance occurred when the Germans started the final expulsion of the remaining Jews. The Jewish fighters had some success: the expulsion stopped after four days and the ŻOB and ŻZW resistance organizations took control of the Ghetto, building shelters and fighting posts and operating against Jewish collaborators. During the next three months, all inhabitants of the Ghetto prepared for what they realized would be a final struggle.

The final battle started on the eve of Passover, April 19, 1943, when the large Nazi force entered the ghetto. After initial setbacks, the Germans systematically burned the ghetto block by block, rounding up or killing any Jew they could capture. Significant resistance ended on April 23, 1943, and the German operation officially ended in mid-May, symbolically culminated with the demolition of the Great Synagogue of Warsaw on May 16, 1943.

According to the official report, at least 56,000 people were killed on spot or deported to Nazi concentration and death camps, mostly to Treblinka.



Yes, resistance meant death, but so did getting on those trains!

[renie408]

146. I am not sure that is fair. If you are being ordered onto a train by armed guards...

what do you do? It is a sort of a 'damned if you do, damned if you don't' situation. Also, a lot of those people, by the time they were being ushered onto trains and into incinerators, had been starved, experimented on, and beat down in ways a little more serious than simple authoritarianism.

I understand your point, but I think in your efforts to make it you have jumped a little far.

One thing I found interesting when I was reading a biography of Einstein was how many Jews actually AGREED with Hitler initially. Right up until they figured out that part of his plan was genocide.

[followthemoney]

195. Milton Meyer wrote "They Thought They Were Free." He said...

many Jews stayed too long in Germany because they could not foresee the terrible things to come in their highly civilized nation. Many also saw the danger and fled.

My point is that an insanity had its grasp on Germany and yet in its early stages opinion was divided among the future victims.

How many on this board have thought a better future could be found beyond the reach of this nations insanity and yet stay? And if things began to get really ugly here what resistance would be possible against the heavily armed domestic peace keepers?

Some will laugh and say that this could never happen here. That same laughter divided the Jews of Germany and prevented an early and meaningful resistance.

[rucky]

156. He should've focused on the laughing and cheering...

of the audience when the police grabbed him, and left it at that. It seems like an inappropriate reaction, unless it was happening on the Jerry Springer show. That was not the sound of a crowd that felt threatened.

[scarletwoman]

19. Excellently said! k & r (nt)

[RainDog]

25. here is some nuance for you

edited to note that this post was chiefly in response to the arendt thread in the second link from the op.

Hannah Arendt, as you surely know, was very astute in her observations on totalitarianism, noting that the black or white view can stem from either the right or the left... or in Hitler or Stalin in her view in her moment in history. It can stem from the best of intentions, as viewed by the person who oversteps the boundaries of individual freedom of thought and belief and action that is within a culturally construed and societally understood concept of the two... i.e. you are free to think that sacrificing pigs on your front porch is the way to god, but if you do it on your stoop in Park Slope, you're likely to find you have stepped outside of the boundaries of that culture.

sometimes that's a great thing because it creates positive change. but those who do this also face the reactions of those using a different measurement. The ultimate arbiter is the agreement of what constitutes legal and ethical behavior in a society.

On this board, I have said that I think the police are taser-happy and such actions as a matter of course are wrong, wrong, wrong. To me this is obvious. Not so to others. Where is the societally accepted boundary, and is it ethical?

I didn't really reply on the thread about the Fl. student because I think the police were entirely out of line, but I also think the student shouldn't have continued to resist. MLK and Ghandi, for instance, did not have to resist an arrest to make their point. In fact, they made it because they did not resist arrest.

so, while the police were wrong, the student could have handled the situation better.

the MIT student should not have been charged with any crime if the moment wasn't a stunt. however, the student should have responded to the person at the information desk when asked about what she was wearing. The person at the information desk had a responsibility to protect every person in that airport, and no matter how you want to dismiss the moment, if I were in the same position, I would have tried to stop this person. How was the info person supposed to know she was an art student?

In all these cases, there was over-reaction. But in your case, there is over-reaction too.

How dare you claim that you can define someone politically by your standards only? That is a form of totalitarianism. Only those you deem "righteous enough" may enter the kingdom of the democratic party? What makes your stance any different than some fundie religious person who claims their doctrine is the only allowable one for those who claim to be christian? -- or muslim, or hindu?

Real life is a mass of differences, contradictions and mistakes. Democratic government is supposed to reach consensus within those differences.

I left this board for three years or so because the "conversation" became so full of bullshit, arguing over the number of angels on a pinhead, accusations and counteraccusations... and it seems that is still the case. Not just from your pov, but from others here too, on the side of a more conservative pov.

it's really too bad because the admins have created a great site for a national and international conversation. it's too bad the internet seems to give rise to the worst in people, too often, when talking about things they hold dear. I try to imagine I am face to face with people, rather than typing to myself for my own ego on the screen. If I were speaking in person, would I use an insult or an ultimatum?

I'm certainly not an expert on some basic communal thoughtfulness, but we could all do better. Rather than post after post of opinion-flaming, what about spending some time doing research on a topic and explaining it -- not an "I post using quotes -- anyone with an online bartlett's etc. can do that. why not add something to the conversation that provides people ways to discuss issues OUTSIDE OF the small no of people on this site?

anyway, I know this post was intended to be a mutual masturbatory experience for those who don't like it if others don't march in lockstep to your and their pov, but I am really tired of all this petty arrogance. So what, I know. but just thought it would be helpful to hear from someone who doesn't fit either of your categories. Not that I think it will matter.

[Ravy]

28. Well put! Agreed (nt)

[Jed Dilligan]

30. So being liberal means being open to the viewpoint

of the mob of heavily armed musclemen subduing the scrawny college kid?

[RainDog]

38. thank you for making my point

if you read my post, you would see that your remark in no way addresses the issue.

instead, you ignore my disagreement with police actions in that incident. I knew this post would get such a response, but I made it anyway. those who want to misconstrue will. knock yourself out. please. for any who want to continue this line of straw mannequin thought, please consider this post as an answer.

[cali]

67. Frustrating, isn't it.

I appreciate your posts.

[nashville_brook]

32. whoa nelly. this is quite smelly. you've got some fire in yer belly.

i didn't start your fire. i imagine it's been burnin' since th' world's been turnin'.



"the societally accepted boundary" you wonder about is... The Law -- and here it is:

776.05 Law enforcement officers; use of force in making an arrest.

--A law enforcement officer, or any person whom the officer has summoned or directed to assist him or her, need not retreat or desist from efforts to make a lawful arrest because of resistance or threatened resistance to the arrest. The officer is justified in the use of any force:

(1) Which he or she reasonably believes to be necessary to defend himself or herself or another from bodily harm while making the arrest;

(2) When necessarily committed in retaking felons who have escaped; or

(3) When necessarily committed in arresting felons fleeing from justice. However, this subsection shall not constitute a defense in any civil action for damages brought for the wrongful use of deadly force unless the use of deadly force was necessary to prevent the arrest from being defeated by such flight and, when feasible, some warning had been given, and:

(a) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon poses a threat of death or serious physical harm to the officer or others; or

(b) The officer reasonably believes that the fleeing felon has committed a crime involving the infliction or threatened infliction of serious physical harm to another person.

I've bolded the most relevant portion. Here's what we need to know:

(1) Police are only acting legally in the use of force if an exemption is permitted by this statute;
(2) The police had no reason to believe that a handcuffed student, on the ground, with 6 police and 1 student, represented any threat whatsoever to them or anyone.

Consequently, those police are not justified in the use of the taser.

If the police declared they intended to arrest him, then they were justified in physically restraining him to cuff him. Once he was cuffed, and outnumbering him 6:1, there is no possible justification for the use of force. So to my reading, the officer using the taser was committing battery, and each other officer holding him down was an accessory to the crime.

[RainDog]

40. okay, one more time before I go

did you read the part where I said that the use of tasers was out of bounds? I never wrote that the police were justified.

maybe this is part of the problem, people don't read for "nuance." They read to disagree.

[Jed Dilligan]

44. So what's your point?

It seems you came in here looking for disagreement yourself, if you bury your view on the police action in a long anti-anti-authoritarian rant.

[nashville_brook]

45. all that is required for the triumph of evil is for us to do nothing -- you took that way off track

[RainDog]

159. one last note

that quote is attributed to Edmund Burke, a supporter of the American Revolution, but then considered a conservative British-Irish politician opposed to the French Revolution. He's still considered a moderate conservative -- today probably analogous to Hagel or Olympia Snowe, unlike the right wing authoritarians of his time or this one. George Will loves him. Over time, his way of thinking was labeled "liberalism" in the classic sense -- not like the current understanding. Karl Marx thought Burke was a disgusting shill for the bourgeoisie.

He and Thomas Paine were polemical enemies and Burke tried to trash Paine's Rights of Man.

But the quote does resonate, doesn't it? He wrote when France was involved in mass slaughter of their fellow revolutionaries when one group decided the other wasn't revolutionary enough. The revolutionaries' inability to combine to form a working republic led to Napoleon's claim to emperor and the French empire. --of course, these same revolutionaries declared war on Britain and Austria, etc. because those nations backed the monarchy. These same revolutionaires imprisoned Paine because they didn't consider him revolutionary enough ... they questioned his loyalty to their cause... he didn't know if he was going to get out of France alive. I don't think it could be accurate to claim that Paine was not revolutionary enough... but that was the accusation against him.

Life gets complicated sometimes.

Burke also wrote: When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle.

peace

[TahitiNut]

167. Burke never wrote (it has not been found) the "triumph of evil" quote so often attributed to him

It's regarded (conjecture) as a evolution/paraphrase of the quote you offer: "When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall one by one, an unpitied sacrifice in a contemptible struggle."

Thus, the parentage of the "triumph of evil" is, at best, bastardized.

http://tartarus.org/~martin/essays/burkequote.html
http://tartarus.org/martin/essays/burkequote2.html

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Edmund_Burke#Probable_misattribution

[RainDog]

177. and...

that phrase I quoted is from Thoughts on the Cause of the Present Discontent, written in 1770. It's available online for free.

the other phrase- triumph of evil - is attributed to Burke, as I noted. I didn't say "quote." Since, as you note, it is considered a bastardization of the quote I noted, I quess I don't see your point, other than to agree that Burke is the person attributed with the bastardized quote that gets typed all over the internet, most often without any context about the person who is credited for the quote.

anyway, yes, I was aware of the issue surrounding the quote. thanks for sharing the information with others.

[renie408]

39. THANK YOU!! n/t

[arendt]

43. Well spoken. But, I am beginning to feel like I'm in a hall of mirrors.

If I wanted to (and I don't) I could make the argument (intellectual game) that what you said is merely you trying to impose your standards upon this discussion. That gets back to the original point: when is approval of authoritarian tactics no longer an acceptable stance in a supposedly progressive community?

I am getting quite a lesson today on just how hard it is to answer that question and still keep things democratically open.

If you will step outside the cycle of POV denunciations, I think you will agree that many people at DU are concerned with the creeping escalation of pointless authoritarian incidents in our country, and the acceptance of those incidents by an increasingly fear-conditioned populace. Authoritarians are classic "thin edge of the wedge people". As Churchill said, (paraphrase) they are burglars who try all the doors and go in the one that's open.

The question is, where are today's equivalent of the people who said: "Live free or die". Give me liberty or give me death."? And, would they be shouted down by a mob if they said so today?

You could really leave out the "mutual masturbatory experience" insult. It cheapens the rest of your argument.

arendt

[Ripley]

52. Sorry your other thread got locked.

I appreciate your writing, thanks for coming back.

I believe many people are being obtuse on purpose. Wish I could just write it off as "paralyzed with fear" but I think many more people subscribe to the "America First/America Right or Wrong" mindset than the cowed into submission camp.

[arendt]

56. "obtuse on purpose" - like it. Simpler than "aconnexia dotsosa". n/t

[nashville_brook]

65. good question! how far should progressives ride the Authoritarian Tiger?

"We have an opposition political party afraid to oppose anything. We have grassroots groups that swear obedience to the opposition party, even as the useless unopposing party condemns the activists. Those with the power to end national crimes are afraid to do so. They fund the occupation of Iraq and promise never to impeach anyone, all as part of letting the "authorities" handle things. And citizens play along, pretending the Democrats have no power and, in addition, shouldn't use it. They base this on the theory that by not using any power you are most likely to acquire more power. This is thinking driven by fear. We have almost nothing but fear now driving our national decisions, and it is beginning to scare me."

i might tattoo this on my arm.

[Ripley]

81. That'd be some big ass tatoo.

I guess there is a fear underlying much of people's inactions and submissiveness to authority these days. But I think a lot of it is laziness. It's easier to just say "that PROTESTOR, that NONCONFORMIST" did something DUMB and they deserved it. People like rules in their lives and they like to follow them because then they know where they belong. Then they fit. The pressure to belong to groups is HUGE. And I don't just mean the Nascar Dads or Soccer Moms. I know some Mac guys who make up one of the weirdest tribes I have ever seen and the funny thing is that they believe they are iconoclastic because they are Mac guys. Duh. They think they are immune to such low-brow stuff as advertising. Apple has a real slick hip marketing campaign that convinces its customers that they are slick and hip and smarter than everyone else, so they get away with charging all that dough.

But play-dough? IT COULD BE A BOMB!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111

[nashville_brook]

84. i feel so bad for that young woman -- when you're an art student, at that age...

you don't have your wits about you. you spend every waking hour in the studio. your head is full of ideas and they might not all be "acceptable" ideas, but you play with them and roll them over and work them out.

i would find it very difficult to FEEL SAFE in my work after that. my inner critique would be stamping "stupid" on everything. i'd flail between wanting to be accepted and feeling sorry, to, being outraged to the point of blacking out.

[Ripley]

96. Actually she is in the electrical engr/comp sci department.

I believe she is not an art major. But she considers it Art and explained what it was. The whole point is that we are now supposed to blame the victim of heavy-handed authority instead of blaming the incompetence of authority figures.

My father had a pacemaker and therefore had to get wanded instead of going through the metal detector at the airport. They asked him to remove his hat and a security person rubbed his bald head. Um, w.t.f.? And recently I heard that in Colorado they set up roadblocks to take blood and saliva samples from random travelers.

QUESTION AUTHORITY.

[cali]

102. QUESTION DOCTRINAIRE THINKING. DON'T BUY YOUR IDEAS WHOLESALE

[renie408]

108. NO...the saliva and blood thing...

that was taken out of context and people ran off with it. At a routine traffic stop, cops allowed a private research group to ask for voluntary samples of saliva, breathlyzer and blood. Now, it may have been inappropriate to allow a private research group to use a public traffic stop, that I wouldn't argue with. But it wasn't THE POLICE that were taking the samples. When I first read about that, I thought the Colorado police were taking DNA samples. That was not the case. The information was being used by a private institution researching the number of people driving after having consumed alcohol. I don't agree with allowing this, but it is starting to be morphed into something it wasn't.

[nashville_brook]

131. ech -- sorry, it's still the CREEPIEST story from this week.

we're stopping you on this dark road at night to ask if you'd like to participate in a random drug test by letting our assistant here poke you with a needle -- it's all clean, we swear.

no thanks. and don't stop my travel to ask if i want to participate in a "study" and ask for BLOOD. that's just wrong.

[renie408]

144. Oh, I agree

I also think I read that some people who were stopped didn't realize that it wasn't mandatory. Which makes me wonder why only five out of 200 complained. I don't think it was appropriate. But from some of the posts I read on the subject, I got the impression that the 'government' was doing the testing.

[nashville_brook]

155. well, "the government" in the form of the DOT or St Troopers had to arrange the road blocks

We Want Your Blood, Inc., can't just throw up a road block anytime they want. the activity was totally sanctioned and it's totally appropriate to hold that government body responsible.

[Ripley]

173. No kidding.

GOVERNMENT WAS INVOLVED. And here's the kicker.. Some folks seem to think it's "okay" if it was a private company doing that for "research" instead of the police doing that.

When, oh when did we become a nation of people so accepting of this outright ILLEGAL AND INVASIVE SHIT?

(Thanks for the thread btw, brook.)

[nashville_brook]

183. a poster above negates condemnation of this b/c "only 5 in 200" complained...

holy crap -- THEY ARE AFRAID TO SPEAK UP. the company has their blood and saliva, for crying out loud. they don't know how that may be used against them.

MANY YEARS AGO i was assaulted by a police officer. it was a clear violation of my "rights" and i tried my level-best to bring charges against him, but, as a college student living on tips, i couldn't hire a lawyer. i didn't complain to the police department -- it didn't even occur to me b/c i wanted my anonymity back. i was scared.

a year later there was an article in the local paper that this officer had been fired for "assaulting women" during the course of duty and was being let-go because of the 18th complaint against him. That's 18 women not including me. wow. imagine how many women he beat up who didn't complain.

you're very welcome for the thread -- it's been a pleasure chatting with you in particular.

[Ripley]

193. Back at you.

Having been away from here for a very long time it is indeed a pleasure to chat with old friends like you!

I'm terribly sorry that you had to go through that crap with the police. I had to go through something similar and it sure opens your eyes, eh?

About that Colorado thingy. How on this beautiful Blue Planet could ANY American think a roadblock requesting blood and saliva is mandatory??? That just goes to show how submissive people have become if they think that our government can mandate that our bodily fluids be siphoned and swabbed any old time just because we are driving our cars on a road where they surreptitiously set up a roadblock.

Sheriff's officials were apologizing after they helped set up and run five separate checkpoints over the weekend.
They said workers for the Institute for Research and Evaluation were overly persistent in their demands of innocent travelers.

Sequeira said he repeatedly asked if the questioners were law enforcement officials and said he was not interested in participating in the study, but still was not given clearance to leave.

He told the newspaper that he and his family were approached by two researchers, and even after his repeated refusals, officials offered his wife, who was driving, $100 to get the couple to take part in a breath test.

This is only one story. But adding them all up, or connecting the dots if you will, is becoming alarming. Frankly I never understood how the random roadblocks they have been conducting around here for a few years were legal in the first place - where the police request your driver's id. They SAY they are trying to catch the "bad" guys.

Does anyone remember this?

Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.
--Benjamin Franklin

I should be able to travel freely in my country without Corporations or so-called Governments demonstrating stormtrooper type tactics!

[RainDog]

71. where?

well, I was at a 4th of july parade back in 2002 and had a hardback copy of Greg Palast's "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy" with me. (note the Fl. guy also had a book by Palast...strange, huh?) I held it up as pols walked by. I called out "The Bush junta is fascist." People with children were lined up in lawn chairs across the street. a guy next to me with tats and a harley shirt asked me "why don't you shut up? you're scaring my kid." He said this as he smoked a cig. and held it down by her face. don't get me wrong, I'm an awful cig smoker too. but his standard was somewhat diff. than mine.

I turned to answer the guy and a policeman took me by the arm. He said "just ignore him." When the people across the street saw the policeman hold my arm, (not hard, btw, or in any intimidating way...) they thought he was going to take me away. They cheered and clapped and yelled "We just want to enjoy the parade." (insert irony here.) The policman didn't do a thing to me except try to prevent an argument from escalating. He didn't grab me in a harsh way. However, if I had started to scream at him and fight, I think the moment could have ended differently. I was free to continue to say anything I want, and one of the demo pols came over, asked to see the book, we developed a conversation over the course of a few months because he had retired for health reasons. He was instrumental in working to provide humanitarian intervention during the whole Bosnia/Serbia/Croatia mess, whether you agree with that intervention or not. He told his son that "I get it." Sadly, he died of cancer by the next year.

I was also visited by the fbi along with quite a few others in town because of my involvement with UPJ. I'm about as dangerous as hydrangea. The fbi was (and probably still is) flying over my town doing who knows what.

I know very well about creeping authoritarianism and I oppose it.

Yet, here I am seemingly feeling the need to defend myself and others if we don't share the exact same pov as others. Isn't it possible that people can be on the same side but differ on various issues? I am pro-choice, yet I can understand a person who is not. I do not agree that their pov should be law, but I also don't agree with absolute rights to abortion... and most people don't.. just as Roe v. Wade did not, either. that's the nuance that gets lost in that issue, for instance. But if someone doesn't think abortion is right, they, imo, should have some sort of social answer for birth control and adoption and childcare and poverty... that's where most anti-choice lose their argument because it becomes an issue of pregnancy as punishment...if all life is sacred, then it's sacred after it's born, right? o/t but want to get beyond the idea that this is simply about tasing or reacting to a shirt.

So, yes, my post was aggravated because I am so tired of people claiming who can or cannot be a democrat. that was the real purpose of it. why say something like that, unless it is to impose your one true beliefs as a judgment on others? I jumped into the flames because I felt like my experience of the last few days contradicted your pov and it was worth saying it.

[blondeatlast]

107. Excellent points--what gets lost in these arguments is the wisdom

borne out of sheer stupidity on both sides.

I think most DUers are closer to your POV on both issues but the threads become so heated that good discussion is trampled and many of us give up and wander away. I came close to quietly stepping away from DU this week when the one poster called out the admins--all I could think of was, "Out of their frustration, they created this marvelous community that they allow us to use and you want to bitch and moan?"

Instead, I read through the responses on that thread and was gratified to see that even now, most active DUers are broad-thinking, intelligent, and yes, set in many of their beliefs, often quite opposite of mine. That's a great neighborhood pub, IMHO--and I don't walk away without learning something every time I visit.

[leeroysphitz]

34. My thoughts on authoritarianism can be summed up perfectly

by the lyrics to the Rage Against The Mchine song "Killing In The Name".

[nashville_brook]

55. Killing in the name of -->> lyrics

Some of those that were forces are the same that burn crosses

Killing in the name of

And now you do what they told ya
But now you do what they told ya
Well now you do what they told ya

Those who died are justified, for wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
You justify those that died by wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
Those who died are justified, for wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
You justify those that died by wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites

[leeroysphitz]

74. You left out the GOOD part.

Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Huh!

Killing in the name of!
Killing in the name of

And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
But now you do what they told ya
Well now you do what they told ya

Those who died are justified, for wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
You justify those that died by wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
Those who died are justified, for wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
You justify those that died by wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites

Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Some of those that work forces, are the same that burn crosses
Uggh!

Killing in the name of!
Killing in the name of

And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control (7 times)
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control
And now you do what they told ya, now you're under control
And now you do what they told ya!

Those who died are justified, for wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
You justify those that died by wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
Those who died are justified, for wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
You justify those that died by wearing the badge, they're the chosen whites
Come on!

Yeah! Come on!

Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Fuck you, I won't do what you tell me!
Motherfucker!
Uggh!

[nashville_brook]

78. damn! you're right! thank you!

[renie408]

35. I am getting a little sick of the 'good German' thing. Isn't it a little Hitlerish

to attack people for believing other than you do? Or to castigate an entire race of people?

[nashville_brook]

41. it's not an attack -- sorry if you take it that way -- the "good german" narrative is about

the transformation of culture thru the manipulation of perceptions. "good germans" as the narrative goes, were VICTIMS themselves, as no one would pick that route if not under the duress of fear.

that, is the point of Swanson's piece. my piece and arendt's -- the banality of "evil." all that is required for the triumph of evil is for good men (sic) to do nothing.

[arendt]

51. ? Making a historical reference is "being Hitlerish".? Wrong..its called making an argument.

Its called defending your point of view. A lot of people on this board see the police state being advanced. Then they see other DUers defend those advances, and they are upset. So they defend themselves.

We are now in the middle of a self-defense spiral. Just what the people who stoke the fires with their "she was lucky she wasn't shot" posts desire.

I know there is rule on DU that you can't call someone a Nazi. So, is "being Hitlerish" a "work of art", a "stunt", or just being dumb?

arendt

[nashville_brook]

57. the lesson from history is that fear/terror is behind authoritarianism.

evil is quite banal.

[renie408]

64. Hey, can you write a post without denigrating someone's intelligence?

Cause I have only read a few of your posts, but in each one you ended by insinuating that the person/people you were addressing were less intelligent than you are.

"being Hitlerish" is none of the above. Would you rather I said you are being 'Rove-ish'? Attacking members of your group on a personal level who do not fall in line with you? Calling someone a 'good little German' because they don't agree with you doesn't really do YOU any credit. Any more than picking articles that describe both incidents that you referred to your 'nuances' post as innocently as possible did. Meyer did a lot more than 'ask inconvenient questions', which you know very well. Did he deserve to be tasered? No. Did he deserve to be removed? Yes. Now, call me a good little German if that makes you feel good about you, but personally, I am uninterested in your opinion. Or in your five page verbal masturbations. Just because it took you 5000 words to write it, doesn't make it nuanced. Usually it just makes it self-indulgent.

[spoony]

83. The very argument they're making denigrates the reader's intelligence

[Cleita]

70. Unfortunately, too many Americans are behaving like "good

Germans" toward others that they disapprove of and dislike like immigrants or Muslims. The incidents are described in the papers, I'm sad to say. I think it's up to us who don't think like "good Germans" to denounce those who do if for no other reason than to save them from being further propagandized by those who stand to gain from a nation of complacent lemmings.

If we don't stand up for those who are being demonized by an ubber class then they will come for us eventually, just like Rev.Neimoller said. Also, if you don't know about the Rev., he was a staunch supporter of the Nazis at first until disillusionment set it. He too ended up in a concentration camp and was freed by the allies at the end of WWII. There was before then no one left to speak for him.

[renie408]

85. I agree 100%. The term shouldn't be used to describe people who

disagree with Andrew Meyers or who think the MIT student situation wasn't TOTALLY ridiculous.

Hey, I am all about the comparisons between this administration and the national mindset and Pre-Nazi Germany. But the way the phrase is being thrown around the DU isn't accurate. It is being used to attack people who even minimally support any kind of order. Black and white thinking is dangerous on either side of the spectrum. Nazi Germany was bad. But so is complete anarchy. There is a place in between and that is where we need to be.

[Forkboy]

42. K&R...really good post.

Thanks.

[bbgrunt]

49. great post. thanks--I really appreciate your efforts

to establish the root of the problem in a fully nuanced manner.

[nashville_brook]

77. that made me smile -- :)

[Cleita]

63. Although there hasn't been an immigration thread lately, this

quote in your OP reminded me of it:

An authoritarian regime on the march will always come for the weakest, least likable targets first. "The Good Germans" will then affirm their "goodness" by distancing themselves from the tasered, incarcerated or beaten "idiot" who "brought it on themselves."

It seems like the Minutemen on the border are displaying thug behavior by raiding encampments of immigrants and destroying their belongings. Well, they are illegal you know. The same thing happened in Germany with the gypsies.

[nashville_brook]

72. we are told that national ID cards with RFID chips are to protect us "immigration."

and we are told that Halliburton-run prison camps will be used for illegal immigrants run amok.

"immigration" is very much the favored out-group. they have no rights to begin with. it will be easy to whip up bogus "righteous indignation" using immigrants as the bait.

right you are. and dare i say that this was also the case in the 30s in germany. "National" Socialism was a form of "nationalism." the "other," the immigrant or any out-group, THREATENED a strong "german state." and blah blah blah.

[spoony]

66. So if you aren't being a confrontational asshole, you're a nazi. Nice.

Glad we set that straight. Guess I'll rig up some silly putty and wires and head off to the airport whilst screaming about Kerry. :crazy:

[scarletwoman]

75. Way to fucking miss the point. (nt)

[spoony]

79. No, that was pretty much the point: If you don't approve of people

who engage in cheap, uncivil publicity stunts and worship them as heroes of free speech, then you're on par with the people who ALLOWED THE FUCKING HOLOCAUST.

That was the point. And it is the biggest load of bullshit currently infecting the thinking here.

[nashville_brook]

86. nope -- that was not my point. but, do continue with that expired pony.

[spoony]

90. you invoked that image; you cannot disown its consequences

You cannot call someone a Good German and turn around and act like you are misunderstood.

You have made a trite, offensive argument that reveals a remarkably binary and shallow thought process.

[cali]

97. Then what was your point

beyond mouthing platitudes? Seriously. You need to be specific about things instead of indulging in one liners, and easy quotes. In any rhetoric class, in any debating class, you would have gotten an F.

[scarletwoman]

98. No, that is categorically NOT the point!

It's about whether or not you defend the responses of AUTHORITY because you've judged the object the authoritarian response to be an "unworthy victim". (see Chomsky & Herman, Manufacturing Consent for their elucidation of "worthy" and "unworthy" victims)

A wise teacher once said: "Whatever you do to the least of my brethren, you do to me." I'd rephrase it a bit and say that whatever you justify being done to the least of your brethren, you are justifying having it done to you.

Which is basically what Pastor Niemöller also said: "First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist." (etc.)

The point is, if you are willing to stand aside, keep silent, and/or make excuses when the power of the State is used to abuse ONE individual, whether you agree with what that individual did or not -- then, you are essentially consenting to the power of the State to abuse ANYONE it chooses.

And THAT is what makes a "Good German".

sw

[nashville_brook]

127. spot on. thank you! love the term "unworthy victim" -- been ages since reading

Manufacturing Consent. think I'll pull it off the shelf just for kicks.

[scarletwoman]

147. Thank you. Just trying to help -- you started a great thread. (nt)

[Ripley]

101. What cheap uncivil publicity stunt are you referring to?

Who worships that person?

Why do you deride someone for their free speech?

The Good Germans reference does not have to ONLY be used when discussing the most horrible progression of Nazi Doctrine to the Final Solution. When people use that term they are hoping that the analogy will be acknowledged and considered before it is too late and something as awful as death camps could evolve here on US soil. And you know that.

"Currently infecting?" So we are sick? Are you in agreement with that other DUer who thinks I/We should be subjected to electroshock thereapy and locked away?

[cali]

105. I can't speak for that poster, but as someone

who finds the "good german" argument on the shallow side and not a good fit with the current incidents being invoked, I'd like to say a few words. I do not condone any juvenile comment such as the one made to you. But I find the outrage about the Circuit city, UF, and Logan incidents, somewhat misplaced. I'm far more concerned about the secret spying on Americans, about the perversions of justice such as the selective and wrongful prosecution of the former gov of Alabama, about Blackwater, and the demise of Habeas Corpus- just to name a few things.

[cui bono]

141. What is wrong with being concerned about all of it?

The little things are all conditioning, whether you want to attribute it to something intentional or not, that's how they function. Once you are conditioned to accept a certain amount of authoritarianism you will be faced with more and more until all of a sudden you realize you have no real freedom left at all.

By the same token, first they taze the students, then the... you know the drill, then they taze you and there's no one left to speak out.

Yes, people are being Good Germans. And I'm shocked at how many people on this board completely miss the point and think this is about the student. It's about the actions of the "police" and how people are so accepting of them.

[renie408]

106. Seriously...out of curiosity...

Why did you make that bizarre and rather LARGE mental leap? How did you get from 'currently infecting' to 'you should have electroshock therapy and be locked away'? That isn't what they were saying and you know it. Why exxagerate and twist their comment to fit your outrage?

I am NOT trying to start a fight with you here, but that seems like the kind of leap that the Republicans make when they hear Chuck Schumer say, "The lessening violence in Anbar is despite our troops." and get "Chuck Schumer thinks American troops suck." out of it.

[nashville_brook]

129. you should read John Dean's writing on authoritarianism --

Understanding the Contemporary Republican Party: Authoritarians Have Taken Control

"There are two types of authoritarians: leaders (the few) and followers (the many). Study of these personalities began following World War II, when social psychologists asked how so many people could compliantly follow an authoritarian leader like Adolf Hitler and tolerate the Holocaust. Early research was based at the University of California, Berkeley, and it focused primarily on followers, culminating in the publication of a The Authoritarian Personality (1950) - a work that broadly described authoritarian personalities. The book was quite popular for decades, but as the Cold War ended, it had been on the shelf and ignored for a good while."

http://writ.lp.findlaw.com/dean/20070905.html

[cui bono]

140. You think it's all about the student but it's about the cops getting out of hand.

And no one doing anything about it and people on this board saying the kid deserved what he got.

And yes, those who sit by and watch police brutality and excessive force and do nothing, and those who argue that the kid deserved it are being "Good Germans". And one day they will come for you.

[nashville_brook]

76. nope -- the point is the syndrome -- the banality of evil.

but, nice try.

[spoony]

80. What evil? Being opposed to cheap and dangerous stunts?

The very thought of invoking Nazi Germany in relation to these latest events is the only evil going on here.

[nashville_brook]

89. i describe the operation of fear -- the "good german" is a "narrative" which means that

points to something larger than itself. like a symbol.

in this case, it's the FEAR NARRATIVE. perceptions are being handled in such a way as to divide and conquer and the mechanism used is fear.

but, don't believe me or arendt or swanson, try Naomi Klein, author of the Shock Doctrine (which is #1 in the UK, but hardly mentioned in the US press).

http://youtube.com/watch?v=kieyjfZDUIc

[spoony]

94. What you are neglecting is that the response to these events

has been appropriate. It is not a part of any "divide and conquer" nonsense, nor is it a symptom of some fascist state that has all of us trembling at the might of authorities. Most citizens would rather police deal with people who are disrupting speeches and walking around airports looking like they're rigged up than let them go unchecked. The things that have happened are the faults of the idiots who are now free speech martyrs. It is not a symbol, a narrative, or any other obtuse bullshit.

[cali]

99. LOL.

The pseudo-intellectual palaver flowing from some here really needs to be punctured. But it never works.

[nashville_brook]

184. you are wrong again -- probably b/c you have strong feelings that are clouding your view

deal with disruption, YES -- but do so within the RULE OF LAW. you don't get to taze someone who is handcuffed. you don't get to THREATEN THE LIFE of a someone wearing "suspect jewelry."

we either stand behind the law, or we fall under it. it's that simple.

[cali]

92. nice try. goes for you too.

repeating that the point is the syndrome- the banality of evil, is pretty meaningless. And do you actually know that Arendt felt that it was a deeply entrenched (think hard drive) part of human nature?

So what's your point? What are you doing? What do you believe others should do? What should JK have done? What should the students present have done?

Talking in stock phrases doesn't cut it for discourse.

[arendt]

73. OUT FOR A FEW HOURS. hate to leave this interesting discussion. n/t

[Cha]

91. Precisely! nashville brook!

I'm not like Andrew Meyer in any way shape or form but tasering the dude..uh uh!

I hope we have learned lessons from The Good German..somebody needs to learn lessons from history!

[earth mom]

110. Excellent Post! We need more of these kind of posts around here!

Many people have left DU because of this very reason. They are either tomb stoned for speaking truth or they leave because they are tired of fighting very obvious well orchestrated attacks. That DU has lost some great minds is just a total shame, because this website could really be so much more enlightening and truthful than it's become.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5420753830426590918&q=RUSSO&total=5530&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

[KoKo]

119. Agree! and another KICK!

[nashville_brook]

132. yep -- i know from which you speak

people expect more from DU and get very frustrated when it doesn't live up to expectation. it's not "DU" per se...it's every person, singularly. so, remember names and "faces." it's not the place, it's the people.

[truedelphi]

111. I want to point out that in April 1993 the ATF and FBI murdered

Some 90 occupants at David Koresh's compound in Waco Texas (Not too far from Mr Bush's ranch in Crawford)

As for the rest of us:
We were told that we would have comported ourselves much better.

We would have never followed an evil Messiah who modelled himself on Christ.

We would have never lived like hippies inside a commune with an overly religious theme.

And sad thing was, most of the nation accepted those murders.

Even KPFA, the left wing radio station in Berkeley CA posited that "None of us would have wanted THOSE PEOPLE as neighbors" implying that if someone is not as you would desire them to be if they were neighbors living next door, you should not oppose their massacre.

No one marched and no one wrote letters to the editor.

Clinton's Attorney General stood by and let it happen.

News teams were forced to make their reports from a news headquarters five full miles away - and
none of the reporters were allowed to be any closer.

[cali]

112. That was an obscenity

No doubt about it. And I'm glad you brought it up. Gotta say though that I don't view Koresh as someone who modeled himself after Christ

[OzarkDem]

116. Wow

That explains a lot.

In all my years I've never, ever met a Dem, liberal or progressive who believes that right wing conspiracy theory.

Very telling.

[cali]

120. There are lots and lots of liberals

who believe that operation was screwed up big time.

[truedelphi]

123. One liberal who stood up was none other than John Conyers

The first time I even heard about Conyers, he was holding hearings in the House, to investigate what happened at Waco.

Among other tidbits I learned from listening to the hearings:
Up to a half billion dollars a day was spent on this operation (Supposedly spent - one reason that the Establishment Government has never encouraged any type of oversight is that many of us in opposition to the Waco Massacre now suppose that much of this money was grabbed illicitly by various people. And of course, have I mentioned yet how close this place was to various Bush family operations?)

One of the witnesses appearing before Conyers, was a young officer (forget if he was FBI or ATF, but believe he was FBI.)

He said to his commanding officer "Look. It is common knowledge that those inside the Koresh compound are heating the place with Propane tank-generated fuel. And we of course have used guns and other firepower against them. Shouldn't we have some fire trucks brought down close to the compound?"

He was told by his superiors that, "There is no money to do that."

Of course after so many were killed, the reason given for the deaths was the massive fire that took over the compound, allegedly from the very use of fire power combined with the propane tanks and gas lines, and the fact that no fire trucks were on hand.

And no, I am not suggesting that those in local Fire Dept risk their lives by manning the vehicles - but fire trucks could have been made available to the two agencies handling this debacle.

And either ATF or FBI could have taken over the manning of said trucks.

[cali]

122. and a little information for you:

this is hardly unknown. From wiki:

<snip>
Despite being informed that the Davidians knew the raid was coming, the ATF commander ordered that the raid go ahead, even though their plan had depended on reaching the compound without the Davidians having armed.<3>

Agents approached the site in cattle trailers pulled by pickup trucks owned by individual ATF agents. It is not known who fired the first shots.<3> It is reported that the first firing occurred at the double front entry doors; ATF agents stated that they heard shots coming from within the building, while Branch Davidian survivors claimed that the first shots came from the ATF agents outside.

Within a minute of the raid starting, a Davidian, Wayne Martin, called 911 pleading for them to stop shooting. The resident asked for a ceasefire, and audiotapes clearly caught him saying "Here they come again!" and "That's them shooting, that's not us!"

<snip>
During the siege a number of scholars who study apocalypticism in religious groups attempted to persuade the FBI that the siege tactics being used by government agents would only create the impression within the Davidians that they were part of a Biblical "end times" confrontation that had cosmic significance.
<snip>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waco_Siege

[truedelphi]

124. Sounds like Wiki research and my research is in agreement

Speaking only with regards to this topic of course.

[Name removed]

143. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cali]

145. Excuse me?

Where did anyone call Janet Reno a Nazi. I like and admire Ms. Reno. If I endorsed a post that called her a Nazi, please show me, and I'll immediately withdraw that endorsement.

I think Waco was a terrible abuse by the Feds. For whatever reason, and I believe it was because she was so new to the job, Janet Reno let the whole thing get away from her.

If you cannot find any post that I've endorsed that calls Reno a nazi, that's just an appalling mischaracterization. I'm not about to go count your posts for insults, but this one is chock a block full of them.

Again from Forester:

Only hypocrites cannot forgive hypocrisy.

Really it's a simple concept.

Oh, and I didn't hijack anything. I didn't bring up Waco. Another poster did, and YOU can't simply decide that YOU are arbiter of the direction of a thread.

[OzarkDem]

115. Revisionist history

No, it was Koresh and his followers who caused that conflagration, no one else.

I'm shocked that anyone on a political forum with Democrat in the name would state that Clinton's AG caused it. That's not only incorrect, its a right wing talking point.

[cali]

118. I disagree

They bolloxed it. Koresh was out jogging the day before they moved in. They could have picked him up then. In addition, any operation that ends up with the death of 80 civilians in the manner this incident did, is hardly a success.

[truedelphi]

137. I did NOT SAY that Janet Reno caused it Maybe RW pundits say that

But I don't

Even Janet Reno acknowledges that her actions were not sufficient.

She was not even 90 days into the Clinton Administration - this was more or less the Clinton Administration's Bay of Pigs - in that it was an operation that had clearly been in the works before the Clinton victory of Nov 1992.

The Clinton Administration, just like the JFK Administration, had a bit too much assurance, whether internal or external assurance I don't know, that the notables from the previous Administration would not let things go as badly as they did.

It is one thing to read in between the lines - in which case politeness and manners might dictate that you simply ASK if that was my intention.

It is another thing to go off stating that your assumptions are my truth.

[nashville_brook]

126. eggsactly. the syndrome can happen within any political persuasion.

if i recall correctly, part of the "justification" of the massacre was that *the children were being sexually abused* by Koresh, thereby putting him in the indefensible arena. in a court of law, we'd have to produce evidence and he'd be offered the chance to refute that -- but that's not what happened. what happened was a massacre and those who sought answers were a lonely bunch, seeming to side with a pedophile and religious nut.

[truedelphi]

138. Agreed. And it was not simply that those who

Sought answers were deemed to be siding with a pedophile - but also most people are unaware that almost every child in the Koresh household had been assigned a social worker.

Those social workers had met those children. THEY FELT HOPELESS and they knew it was inevitable that what happened would happen.

If you hang out with social workers (As I do often) you can only imagine how horrendously terrible that they must have felt during the weeks leading up to the impending massacre - and how Godawful they msuit have felt on the day of the firestorm

Those were *their* children

BTW TIME magazine stated for the record (After it happened) that immediately before the assault on the compound, Koresh had gone about his life like any normal guy would - visiting shopping malls, t aking tapes back to video rental places.

THE ATF and the FBI could have grabbed him at any point in time while he was out in public.

Unlike the impression created by the media, he was not walling himself off inside the compound.

He acted lke Mr Everyman, freely going thither and yon and never once was he even *approached* by agents of the government.

[Cleita]

130. This happened very close in time to the Ruby Ridge shootout

in Idaho. Coincidentally, I happened to be spending my time between Idaho and Texas in those years so I got to listen to a lot of local scuttlebutt about what happened. It was a heavy handed operation by the FBI and ATF. They basically went up against civilians with women and children (true they were armed civilians) in full battle regalia as if they were trying to take out an underground army.

Everyone I ever talked to really thought that another approach could have been used in both venues that were basically people under the influence of radical cults. In the case of Randy Weaver in Idaho, he was a person who identified with White Supremacists who didn't feel that the government was his government so he refused to comply with demands from the government to turn over his guns. His family was surrounded in their home. Their dog was shot. His son was shot and his wife was shot by trigger happy government agents. All they really needed to do was have a cup of coffee with these people and negotiate with them.

The Texans felt the same way about the Waco affair. In that case they could have saved most of the people living there by getting David Koresh to come out and give himself up. It would have taken awhile but the Texans I talked to felt it could have been done.

[truedelphi]

139. Cleita -Thank you for sharing your observations n/t

[pinto]

160. A simple request, all : Please maintain civil discussion, keep comments on the issue, not the poster

Thanks.

:hi:

[Tatiana]

128. In a way I think this boils down to our ability to question authority.

Whether the authoritarian entity is the President, the government, the police, etc. There is a disturbing social phenomenon where people seem to want to let those in power "handle things" or "do their jobs." Taken at face value, this isn't necessarily a bad thing. But what happens when those in power bungle things? What happens when those in power don't do their jobs or perform their duties poorly?

Then we need to start questioning and protesting said authorities. The sense I'm getting from a lot of posters and Democrats is that they

a) Are uncomfortable with the type of questioning or specific means of protest

b) Want to just let those in authority "handle things" even if they run this nation into the ground. (Hey, that can only spell a win in '08, right?)

Civil disobedience and protest, by its very nature, is an uncomfortable thing. It's not pretty, it's not fun, it's not easy. But it is a time-tested and fundamental vehicle for change. The majority of people in this country think things are headed in the wrong direction. So, it's only natural that we begin to see and experience incidents like the MoveOn ad. Our founding fathers intended for this nation to be part of a participatory form of governance. The Boston Tea Party is but one example of a citizenry saying "we don't agree with this policy and we're going to do something loud/shocking/crazy/unexpected/sensational to express that feeling."

I totally understand and agree with the "Good German" analogy. I fear that in our haste to suppress and stifle individual forms of expression and free speech, we will find ourselves guilty of aiding and abetting a criminal and unjust form of authority.

[Cleita]

133. It's a two edged sword all right.

I wish we, the people, had a simple but effective method to "fire" elected public officials before having to wait for the next election. It should also be a way that can't be abused by partisan politicians like the recall in California that brought us Gov. Groper.

[cali]

134. You've clearly never protested with Bread & Puppet.

Protesting can be lots of fun.

[Zomby Woof]

148. The most authoritarian behavior on DU

Is when those in possession of true and correct thought seek to browbeat even the mildest of the dissenters into conformity.

If you don't support the true and correct candidate, or have the one and only correct interpretation of an event, or when the merits of your argument are deliberately sidestepped because they don't follow ideological prescription, then you are ignorantly and thoughtlessly labeled an appeaser or authoritarian.

It's disgusting, vile, and intellectually dishonest to the utmost degree.

[renie408]

149. Well said. n/t

[Marrah_G]

180. Very well said

[porphyrian]

150. False binary, that Democrat or appeaser crap. We aren't necessarily one or the other...

...and suggesting as much is merely a retooling of the tactics of those nazi progenitors of the "good German" phenomenon. I understand your frustration and desire to snap people the fuck out of it, but you need a new angle. And, no, I don't know what that is.

[nashville_brook]

187. this is about standing behind the law, and refusing to be "terrorized"

there's no binary. everyone is going to have regrets about remaining silent when they could have spoken up.

what i'm talking about standing behind the law regarding the "prosecution" of speech issues. no matter how rude that UF student was, the police did not have the right to taze him *in handcuffs.* no matter how silly the MIT student's jewelry was, the security forced didn't have the right to threaten her life. these are our laws and we they need our support.

[porphyrian]

190. "You are either a DEMOCRAT (in the full meaning of the word), or you an APPEASER."

There's your binary, and you said it, and that's what I was referring to.

I know what you're trying to do, I'm pointing out a major flaw in your process. Don't fix it, I don't give a fuck. But there's where one of the first holes will be punched, and I enjoy saying I told you so.

[nashville_brook]

191. a "DEMOCRAT" as in one who participates in DEMOCRACY -- advocating rule of law

sorry if "the full meaning of the word" didn't work for you.

here's a flaw *you* might consider working on: try being a little less hostile in your generous criticism. making friends is never a bad thing for people with the intention of *working together* (as is the tacit agreement -- the social contract -- of democracy). i hope your attitude doesn't get you in too much trouble, and i would never stand over someone enjoying that i "told them so."

[porphyrian]

192. Look, I'm speaking in plain English. If you don't get it, that's your problem.

I really don't give a shit. Enjoy your ignorance!

[ToolTex]

151. K & R

[kineneb]

152. well, contrary to many, I "get" it

I am not going to argue the case, only that I get what is happening "out there". But there is more to all of this than just the political arguments; the economics need to be considered as well because the two elements feed into each other.

How much of the repression is ultimately motivated by economic concerns (corporatism, globalism, etc.)?
Who or what benefits by the demise of Constitutional rights?
Who or what will benefit by the demise of the American dollar?

In other words, the why is as important as the what.

Remember that many of the corporations that initially backed Hitler were American.

Follow the money.

[nashville_brook]

154. The Shock Doctrine -- corporatists need us to shut up and do what we're told.

like Klein says, the initial shocks wear off. there CAN be a way out. '

oh -- and the list of US corporations backing hitler reads like a who's-who of american biz.

[ProudDad]

170. Many were the same as the ones supporting the current resident's fascist regime

"Remember that many of the corporations that initially backed Hitler were American."

[cosmicdot]

157. knr

and knr for the locked thread

[rucky]

158. Art imitates life. Life imitates art.

And when our cultural standard for "Art" is Big Brother 8, this is the kind of society we get. The kind where a crowd hoots and hollers when six cops pile on a guy - and he asks if anyboy's taping this?! Roll the credits, because everybody in that room was putting on a show. The crowd at the Kerry function was just a few feet away from this guy. They were neither shocked at the heavy-handedness of the cops - nor were they in fear of this guy's increasing hostility. The inquisitor and the cops all played to the audience - everybody put on a show. The crowd loved it! So much better than listening to some has-been Senator.

Seemed to me that Kerry was the only REAL person in that room.

We're living in a society that - when bombs are falling on Baghdad by the megaton - we order chicken wings and turn on CNN.

We used to sit in our living rooms and watch mindless sitcoms on the boob tube. Now thanks to You Tube, we have become the mindless entertainment. Maybe I'm becoming just as inept at connecting with others, but it seems to me that nearly every social exchange between people is staged, played-up and insincere. There are few genuine feelings that are externalized anymore, but no shortage in dramatic displays of emotion.

So it's not like the modern-day "Good Germans" are playing on one side of authority or another. They're just happy to be in the audience and watch the show. And as long as they stay in the mezzanine, they won't be guest starring in the sequel.

[Ripley]

174. Interesting.

I agree with a lot of what you say, except that I don't think Kerry was the only REAL person in that room. He was also desensitized to what was going on. He's used to the Reality TV Show called "Mr. Politician" where he gets to stand on stage and drone on while the audience cheers, maybe sometimes boos and occasionally there's a scuffle.

Big difference from what I can recall about loud, mean hecklers at one of K/E events in 04 and they just said in the mic "ignore them." And Clinton did the same thing awhile back. But today we have someone cutting in line to loudly ask questions for about 90 seconds then

BAM! MASSIVE ATTACK.

But yeah, many people today are incredibly non-genuine and untrustworthy, too.

[nashville_brook]

189. i think you're on to something here, and i'd love to see it fleshed out -- panopticon?

we're not participating -- we're performing.

it's The Syndrome that i'm calling attention to -- not an identity of good v bad germans. the syndrome is borne of fear -- perhaps the paranoia of always being "on stage" in the panopticon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panopticon

[earth mom]

162. Evening Kick! nt

[Mythsaje]

163. "Geek Chic" I LIKE it...

And, for the record, I'm with you on this one. Not that it should come as a surprise to anyone. Abuse of authority, in my opinion, is one of the worst crimes a person can commit. It's repellent.

[ProudDad]

168. K&R

'An authoritarian regime on the march will always come for the weakest, least likable targets first. "The Good Germans" will then affirm their "goodness" by distancing themselves from the tasered, incarcerated or beaten "idiot" who "brought it on themselves." Good Germans pat themselves on the back for their pragmatism and ability to see the "obvious" danger in speaking out (they'd be more polite), wearing geek chic or calling attention to themselves in any way that might raise the hackles of "homeland security."'

Says it all...

[file83]

172. Excellent post. K & R

:kick:

[tnlurker]

175. For later

[tomfodw]

176. We're not the "Good Germans"

The "good Germans" had a very good reason not to protest - they didn't want to be killed by the Gestapo. We have no such excuse (yet).

[nashville_brook]

181. a middle class person has plenty of reason not to "protest"

we have mortgages, kids, car payments and tons of "real life" concerns that are "our responsibility" to attend to BEFORE we go about the work of political activism.

what if we lost our job as the result of being on the evening news in a "die-in."

we spend the most of our day at work -- can you talk about YOUR politics at work? if they are the same as your bosses' then, yeah. if different -- then, no. you'd be "smart" not too.

if you live anywhere in the US not on the Atlantic seaboard, can you afford the time and money to go to DC to lobby or protest?

The vast middle class living from paycheck to paycheck cannot afford to rock the boat. we don't fear violence -- we fear our economic precariousness.

see this thread for a timely discussion of this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=1888767&mesg_id=1888767

[The Vinyl Ripper]

179. When the authoritarians came for the dopers, I remained silent; I was not a doper.

The USA has the highest incarceration rate in the world.

What was the definition of "police state" again?

[NYC]

194. The Authoritarians by Robert Altemeyer.

The Authoritarians by Robert Altemeyer.

http://home.cc.umanitoba.ca/~altemey/