We Are Not Advocates Of the NSA Or Police States. We Are Reality Based & Advocate Facts

[ElboRuum]

117. No.

DU has always been a sort-of-nation-at-war-with-itself and with the demise of Meta, these threads serve to remind everyone that just because two people call themselves "progressive" doesn't mean they agree on a goddamn thing. I like that kind of gutcheck every now and again.

I like how we all like to think of ourselves as kind and principled people and then read threads where basically we call each other insulting, labeling names and conflate each other with the worst traits of our enemies simply on a basic disagreement on perception and degree.

I like how we all like to think of ourselves as somehow more learned and educated and ever so much more scholarly than the average bear and have the temerity to imply it or outright state it.

I like how they reveal how exclusionary we've all really become, and how completely willing we are to see people who only agree with us partially as a troll or a plant or an "operative". That last one is my favorite, it conjures images of smoke-filled back rooms... VERY conspiratorial.

I like how these threads all really lay bare all of our shortcomings not only as political junkies, but as people. It takes the conversation out of the rafters and back down to earth where we can start thinking about it rather than pontificating about it.

I'd like to say that this complete polarization of DU into the redpills and the bluepills or whatever the labels are these days was as valuable and necessary as some would suggest, but it seems more or less a justification of its own end to those who like to inhabit the fringes of the continuum.

I have always believed, unlike some of my more 'principled' cohorts around here, that our lack of unity in either principle or platform or priority has not been a political strength. It is a liability. I know this because our opponents use it without fail to undermine our ability to change things for the better. Does this mean I am for lockstep belief and faith in a particular leader? No. Far from it. In fact, I don't even think the progressive movement is political in nature, rather is a major shift in attitude and values at the societal and personal levels, and therefore does not even REQUIRE a political head. However, I would be remiss that there isn't a political component to it. It is in this component that it fails.

It fails because political movements are like amoebae. They can only move if most (not all, but most) of its innards are moving in the same direction. If an amoeba churned in its innards like we do, it would be utter chaos on the inside, but motionless looking in from the outside. It may be true that some bits of cytoplasm aren't going to like all of the directions we are going, but that doesn't mean that going there isn't necessary to other ends.

And that's why I think a good meta thread is good every once in a while. It is one of the few ways that you can get a real impression of what the issues are, not with progressive views, but with progressive people. Whether anything comes of that depends on the individual and if they're here because they think of this place as a forum for ideas, conjecture, and reason, or as just a sounding board for their own views.

Yeah, it's a train wreck, but it doesn't have to be a pointless one.