General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPosts that lead to discussions.
I wish more people were interested in the roots of modern political thought and that talk based on a historical examination of the impetus for modern political ideas generated more discussion. I sometimes get a bug up my butt after a bit of reading that seeks to start that discussion, but without much work, it goes ignored. Maybe it's me, my ideas, my posting style, but I suspect it's the academic nature of the subject matter. Is that the case? is juxtaposing the founders ideas and culture against the modern ideas such as those ideas held by the tea party too boring and meaningless to the real world to warrant a bit of back and forth? It's just that it seems that the tea party claim the root of their ideas taps into the era of the founders. I think maybe they misinterpret. I think a discussion of those misinterpretations could be valuable in arming yourself for public discussions with them.
Just sayin'. Political history is way more sexy than people give it credit. Let's talk about it.
Jim__
(14,045 posts)General Discussion seems to get most of its traffic on hot news items; and since it does get a lot of traffic, anything that doesn't generate a quick response tends to drop pretty quickly. Also, how academic are your posts? If you're an expert in American political history and your posts reflect that, most people are probably not going to feel qualified to respond.
There is an American History Forum (or Group). That type of post might generate more responses there. There is also a philosophy forum.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)recs, and tumbleweeds. I'll find a more appropriate forum here.
bemildred
(90,061 posts)Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)My ideas are probably full of holes that look like juicy ripe fruit to anyone looking to prove somebody wrong.
Response to Jim__ (Reply #1)
Ed Suspicious This message was self-deleted by its author.
think
(11,641 posts)are rare anymore.
Taking time and effort to create a well thought out, researched and vetted post seems like an act of utter futility in the Twitter age.
Perhaps, like you mention in your personal accounts, my writing style or the issues I choose to discuss just weren't to the liking of most others.
Regardless, I surrendered.....
bemildred
(90,061 posts)OffWithTheirHeads
(10,337 posts)I've been here since DU had about 750 registered users and I can offer some observations.
First of all, DU has changed a lot since back in the day where you would probably gotten a lot more traction. If you look at my post count, you will see that I don't post often but it' rare that my post does not make it to the greatest page. Not braggin, just sayen. Things I have observed;
1. Your headline needs to grab peoples attention and make them want to learn more enough to click on it. Don't take this personally, but the only reason I clicked on this post is because I was bored.
2. Once your post has been clicked on, just like with a good book, your opening lines need to suck people into wanting to read more. Which means that the idea you want to talk about needs to be presented in a way that makes it interesting.
3. Be concise. Don't write a book. In these days of short attention spans and multiple distractions, too much info too soon will cause people to wander off. Get the discussion going and get into more detail as the discussion evolves.
4. USE THE SPELL CHECK. I don't spell for shit but I'm a prolific reader and can spot a misspelled word by others a mile away. I hate when I see a good post here spelled like a teabag sign. It makes me wonder about the verasity of the poster.
Finally, always read your post before you hit the post button. In these days of auto spell, etc. it is real easy to have a post not Read as you had intended.
Edited to add, see, even though I was being careful, I fucked up a few words.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)Spider Jerusalem
(21,786 posts)The most important works for understanding the roots of American political thought in the era of independence would be as follows: Magna Carta, the Petition of Right, the English Bill of Rights of 1689, Blackstone's Commentaries on the Laws of England, John Locke's Two Treatises of Government, Thomas Hobbes' Leviathan, Baron de Montesquieu's Spirit of the Laws, and a few other things.
The founders didn't really have any original ideas; not unless grafting Montesquieu's tripartite "separation of powers" onto a modified version of the British system of government (with an elected president instead of a hereditary king, and appointed Senators instead of hereditary lords) counts.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)His "Common Sense" and "Rights of Man" are must reads. And they stand out among the works of his contemporaries because he wrote them in a style designed to spark the interest of every person, not just the intelligentsia.
Ed Suspicious
(8,879 posts)accessible, and since I'm still in the process of reading the more antiquated (by antiquated I mean older, less easy to read, not outdated and unimportant) documents of the European old guys, I would approach it from a more modern and seemingly apparent and relevant to the layman angle. The tea party thinkers never seem to reference Locke, but they talk the hell out of Thomas Jefferson.