Dehumanizing the enemy

[helderheid]

This is actually from:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=203&topic_id=167943&mesg_id=167943

on compassion and anger:

There is great wisdom in realizing as humans, we are all capable of dehumanizing and it's the dehumanizing that is our downfall. I am sure * and co do not humanize the troops in Iraq dying, nor do they humanize the Iraqi's who are also dying (and in greater numbers). Our downfall is dehumanizing * and co. It robbs us of our very soul and our power. With compassion and recognition of all people being from goodness, we gain our strength. No ONE wants unfair elections. No ONE wants their neighbor to die. No ONE can tolerate cruelty when they witness it. It's the mass idea that "THEY" are evil and "THEY" will harm us and "THEY" aren't like "US" that kills us, and that includes the left demonizing the right.

God I hope that made sense.

[RevCheesehead]

1. Right on the mark.

The enemy is NOT a human.
Iraqi civilians are "collateral damage."

Our soldiers are NOT our brothers and sisters - they are HEROES. Notice how this elevates them to a higher-than-human status, for their sacrifice is made for a greater good (and who could argue with that?). Notice the odd discrepancy between honoring the fallen, yet refusing to allow the media to photograph the caskets returning to the US? Once they're safely home with their families, they resume their human status, which is now combined with the hero status.

One of these soldiers who died was from a neighboring town, just 10 miles from here. All of the businesses put up signs, saying "Thank you, Jesse, you're a true Patriot." All the flags were lowered to half-mast for a week. Then we forgot about him.

[Fortunato]

51. very astute point...

...in noting that we can "dehumanize" people in positive ways as well as negative ones.

As soon as people are removed from being individuals with their own detailed lives, hopes, dreams, or beliefs, and instead are identified with a concept or cause (as an "enemy" or "hero" or "martyr" or "good soldier" or whatever) -- whether for the purposes of their veneration or damnation -- we've now violated their unique personhood, nor can we truly relate to them as well.

Election fraud would never happen if people would respect other individuals as much as they respect themselves.

[RevCheesehead]

62. Or simply "to love your neighbor as yourself."

That does not mean "more than yourself" or "less than yourself."

That Jesus - damned fine guy!

[lonestarnot]

66. Iraq War NOT; Bushilter War Correct

[lonestarnot]

67. Looks like your doing a fine job of exposing the rhetoric

[Lefty48197]

2. The Nazis used to dehumanize the Jews

accuse them of being genetically inferior and more disposed to doing all sorts of unsavory things. It's easier to murder people when you have convinced enough of your people that your victims aren't actually human beings.

[Griffy]

4. Used to?... they still do.. they are not all gone! nt

[Lefty48197]

17. I'm sorry, I meant the pre-April 1945 Nazis

but not the others.

[PaganPreacher]

56. Unintentional irony?

"I'm sorry, I meant the pre-April 1945 Nazis, but not the others."

Such dehumanization of your political "enemies," in a thread dedicated to dehumanizing your "enemy."

Irony, to be sure. Was it intentional?



The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[Lefty48197]

68. I have no trouble understanding that the Nazis were in fact human beings

that's what's so scary about it.

[PaganPreacher]

70. Needed a setup line,

to deliver the "iron knee" punchline.

The Pagan Preacher
I don't turn the other cheek.

[helderheid]

71. just look around.

[hippiechick]

22. Yes, here is an excellent read ...

The Survivor, by Terrence desPres.

He chronicles first-hand accounts of concentration camp survivors and discusses the various head-games the Nazi's played to convince
themselves - as well as the internees - that the Jews weren't human.

Made them live like animals, so many began to lose their identity as 'people'. Fortunately, there were many, many proud folks there who fought to retain their dignity and kept records - any way they could - to tell the story.


:hippie:

[Eloriel]

36. Did you have a link to share or something?

Book title? Something?

[hippiechick]

38. Please read my original post

The Survivor, by Terrence desPres.
Oxford University Press, 1980.



:hippie:

[zann725]

61. Speaking of Nazi's, did anyone see the History Channel show last night...

documenting how German SS Officers were recruited to work after WWII as Intelligence Officers here in the US of A?

Scarey, very scarey. They had the names and pictures and everything.

That puts a lot of things over the last 60 years in perspective in terms of wars, and torture, etc. And one mustn't forget the Bush family ties to Nazi money during WWII.

[HawkerHurricane]

3. The enemy is never human...

they are other. You want the list?

They are Redcoats, Spics, Rebs, Huns, Krauts, Japs, Gooks, and Ragheads.
Not human. Because it's wrong to kill humans. They must be something else.

[genieroze]

11. You forgot one, liberals. eom

[HawkerHurricane]

21. I only included the ones we shot at.

They aren't shooting Liberals.

Yet.

[genieroze]

25. not yet. lol eom

[FreeCajun]

50. Shooting at them around here...

Its gonna get really bad.

[helderheid]

5. the point is

It's wrong for the right to do this. It's also wrong for the left to do this. We must carry compassion for everyone - including the right. We must fight for what we believe in but NEVER dehumanize those we disagree with.

[genieroze]

12. bologna, neocons aren't human, they are monsters. eom

[helderheid]

15. Just as we are to them

[genieroze]

24. Whatever.

We are not the ones trying to ruin the country for profit.

[helderheid]

26. I understand

I do! Believe me I have really struggled with this. You're right, but dehumanizing those we disagree with will only cause more suffering. No one wants to be "evil". * thinks he is part of the last great battle between good and evil and believe me, he doesn't think he's on the evil side, even though most would say he's closer to the anti-Christ.

[Carolab]

33. You say

"and believe me, he doesn't think he's on the evil side, even though most would say he's closer to the anti-Christ."

Why should I believe you? Do you know him personally?

I do not dehumanize *. I see him as an uncaring, selfish, tool of the neoconservative agenda. I see him as a spoiled, failed brat-man of a powerful, corrupt father who is trying to prove that he can succeed where his father failed. I see him as completely out of touch with ordinary American citizens and unconcerned with their fate. He's a human being--he's just really screwed up. What are we supposed to do, "reach out"? Give me a break.

[helderheid]

34. I see him the same way

hence why I said I've really struggled with this.

No I don't know him personally. Just watching in horror.

[regularjoe]

54. Also, there is a difference between people who voted republican

and that politicians that are doing terrible things. A lot of voters are unaware of the terrible things.

regularjoe

[regularjoe]

14. Good point. Plus, people are more receptive and openminded

when you treat them with compassion. If you start attacking them right away they get defensive and refuse to listen to what you have to say.

regularjoe.

[Ladyhawk]

27. They don't listen to what I have to say, anyway. :) n/t

[indigobusiness]

6. I've been wanting to see those words

for a long time now. Thanks.

[helderheid]

7. Namaste

Together this fight for truth is a rightous fight. Compassion for all, as well as the truth. Thanks for saying this. :)

[indigobusiness]

8. Shanti

...

[helderheid]

9. Did you see/hear this??

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x176654

[indigobusiness]

10. No, but thanks.

He is always interesting.

[helderheid]

13. kick before bed

:kick:

Night all

[hootinholler]

16. Yes, But ...

I also need to stop anthropromorphizing my tools. They hate it when I do that!

I have to agree enough to nominate this. This is the way Ghandi went, and before him, ummm, who could I be thinking of? JESUS?

-Hoot

What would Pagans do?

[helderheid]

20. Wow thank you!

I've never started a thread that was nominated before! :) Glad it's ringing true for some.

Living in Utah, I'm faced with this everyday. I am a non-Mormon living in a very Mormon neighborhood. There is a long history of "us" vs. "them" between Mormons and non-Mormons and I could choose to react to fear and ignorace and hatred with the same, but I've chosen to drop judgment best I can (I am only human!) and yet still be totally who I am. I belong to a Utah moms list and we've embraced that we're from all over the map on beliefs. So long as I don't attack, I've not been attacked but EVERYONE knows my political beliefs and I am quite vocal in a respectful way. It's opened up the taboo topic of politics and has been really a wonderful experience. I think if more people openly talked about politics, we might see even more change (even though Gore and Kerry won and yet weren't in power).

I need more coffee. Anyway, thank you. :)

[Amaryllis]

18. Yes! Working on voter reg and GOTV I encountered many Republicans

who were as upset about Bush as I was, who were voting for Kerry. I don't like it when I see DU'ers referring to them as repugs and repukes. Many of them are very good people. My best friend from college (thirty five years ago) is Republican and she is very concerned about voter suppression and e-voting fraud. But no way I would refer her to DU because she would be put off by the way people talk in generalizations about Republicans as though they are all evil. They are not all mini Karl Roves. By generalizing about them, we alienate some who could be allies in this fight.

[regularjoe]

19. Very True. Kick for compassion. n/t

[Amaryllis]

44. Not just compassion. We are shooting ourselves in the foot if we are

alienating potential alllies by talking about Repubs in a way that generalizes them all into "the enemy." Many of them would be allies in this fight for fair elections-certainly all the ones who voted for Kerry because they were so alarmed over what Bush has done and will do.

[Eye_on_prize]

48. Bingo - our only real enemies in this struggle are those people who

knowingly committed election fraud, either by directly participating in it or by stonewalling investigations, etc. These are high crimes against our Federal and State governments and voting public at large, regardless of party.

We are learning who these criminals are, and we are finding more out every day in terms of whos and hows. We have sharp attorneys pursuing it, we have whistle-blowers and affidavits pilling up, we have Congressional support with Conyers et.al., Kerry's increasingly supporting it too. It's obvious to most of us that the general public deserves to KNOW about these investigations if we are ever to heal this festering wound in the body politic; and that's why we are so outraged at the MSM's adament reluctance to cover it, with notable exception of KOlberman.

Sure, even when presented with evidence, many Repubs. will initially cop a plea of innocence out of blind loyalty, but I think many of the more honest ones (there are some left, right?), the ones who really do love this country will come around with information and time...but ONLY if we give them an opportunity to do that. If we don't even know how to talk respectfully to these people, do we REALLY expect them to listen to us? I think this is **profoundly** important for our struggle to succeed, to clean up our act in this regard pronto.

This ALSO relates importantly to the 'what's up with Kerry' discussions: if Kerry had struck a high profile on Nov 3, hadn't 'backed down', had fought to the bitter end, yadda yadda...think about it. Does anyone seriously believe this wouldn't have 'partisanized' the issue in a heartbeat? Does anyone believe this wouldn't have catalized a blistering sunami of sore-loserman insinuations before we'd had a chance to investigate (much less be able to *prove*) what really happened, that crimes were committed, how it was done, et. Now we have a lot of evidence, so now's the time to up the anti, but not in a partisan way.

To summarize, I humbly suggest that we consider connecting these dots and behaving accordingly.

DOT 1 - Civic duty, not partisanship: I think it's more appropriately my civic duty -- not my partisan passion -- to expose election. I can still be (and am) passionate about my civic duty. It may therefore be wise to moderate language to be non-partisan & hate-free, which would reflect a genuine presumption of innocence towards individual Republicans we talk with about it. This is what 'they' need in order to to be able to *even hear* what we're saying and to keep focused on the evidence, rather than rancorous partisan pissing matches.

DOT 2 - The Kerry factor: for some reason, all the burning issues about Kerry make a LOT more sense to me from this perspective too. I almost don't care if he ever steps up to it, in a way, as long as the crimes are exposed to the public in a convincing way rather than covered up. Then, let history take its course. From what I've seen on here regarding the technical ins/outs of Congressional proceedure, it is highly unlikely we can put Kerry in the Whitehouse fighting this on partisan grounds. They have the votes. It's that simple. Open and shut.

DOT 3 - The Empowerment Vibe: Stepping into this perspective feels more empowering to me, because it's simply about saving our democracy by appealing to everyone's (Dem or Repub) civic duty to their country in order to make sure there is a full public reckoning with what has happened...that criminals are prosecuted and laws rewritten to insure this NEVER happens again. I notice that the sense of desperation about wanting Kerry more involved is replaced with a sense of knowing that whatever happens, I'm doing the right thing by my all my fellow citizens, regardless of party.

Having said that, I'm not stuck here either... just wanted to spin this out to see where it went. I'm a lowly newbie here, but I love what DU is doing, and it feels great to register my thoughts here, so thanks to DU for the opportunity. Hope its useful somehow.

[Amaryllis]

49. This is exactly what has been my experience in talking to Repubs ...

My best friend from college (this was 1966-1970) actually voted for Bush AGAIN (she listens to Fox and Rush). I gave her Outfoxed to watch and that put a chink in the wall. She knows me and knows I am not wacko and is slowing starting to question as I give her more info about e-voting in particular. She is actually starting to entertain the idea that maybe they did steal the election. I am always careful to point out that both parties have been involved with election tampering in the past and that fair elections are a non-partisan issue.

She started out, as you said so well, initially copping a plea of innocence out of blind loyalty, but she is very honest and cares deeply about this country and does want to know the truth. She is like so many who, if they just had accurate info, would come around quickly but they simply don't know that they are being fed the official administration spin in their info sources. We must be able to talk to them respectfully if we are to make inroads. I had this same experience working on voter reg and GOTV prior to the election; many undecided voters were willing to listen if approached respectfully and given information.

[Cogito ergo doleo]

23. Rush Limbaugh is a great example of how it's done

Every day, he and every other RW hate radio personality, on the *public* airwaves dehumanize "libruls." The stupid, irrational, unreasonable bleedingheart, mean, evil libruls who want to take every good thing in life away from hard working people-- things like movie popcorn, and being able to greet people with "Merry Christmas."

Never mind that it is a scientific fact that palm oil (used on movie popcorn) clogs artieries; never mind that it's **corporations who are pushing the term Happy Holidays because of complaints they have received from both Republicans and Democrats. He'll find a way to put it all on Dems. I don't care what Rush ingests, and I doubt anyone else does.

Has anyone in Dem leadership ever called to eradicate movie popcorn from production? Has anyone in Dem leadership said that as of a particular date, saying Merry Christmas is outlawed, because if they have, then Dems have become the party of intolerance, and I'd like to see the documentation.

**This Season, Greetings Are at Issue

LATimes.com

"If my corporate allowed it, I wouldn't have a problem with it," said Vandeusen, 20. "I still say 'Merry Christmas,' personally."

A major shift took place in the 1990s, when corporations became sensitive to complaints of customers on both ends of the political spectrum, said Russell Sway, international president of the Institute of Store Planners, an Atlanta-based association of design and merchandising specialists.

"On the one hand, you have a board of directors who's yelling at you for doing anything that offends anyone. On the other hand, you have this group that's yelling at you for commercializing a religious holiday," Sway said.

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=2026&u=/latimests/20041218/ts_latimes/thisseasongreetingsareatissue&printer=1

[OKthatsIT]

28. THE LEFT DOESNT KILL,

DOH?

[OKthatsIT]

29. THE LEFT DOESNT KILL, ...AND

THE RIGHT ARE ABOUT THE CLOSEST THINGS DEMONS IVE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE!!!!!!!!!

[helderheid]

30. Clint Curtis

was a republican.

[Mister Ed]

31. Most Bush supporters are good people with bad information. nt

[helderheid]

32. Yes

And please remember what happened in Nazi Germany. Most of those people were brainwashed into following Hitler.

"Forgive them Father for they know not what they do."

It's easier for many to swallow what they hear on the TV than to question their government, especially if the government is telling the people it is unpatriotic to do so.

[Eloriel]

35. You are WAY off track

No ONE wants unfair elections. No ONE wants their neighbor to die. No ONE can tolerate cruelty when they witness it. It's the mass idea that "THEY" are evil and "THEY" will harm us and "THEY" aren't like "US" that kills us, and that includes the left demonizing the right.

Oh, yes, I'm afraid there ARE people who DO want unfair elections; don't care or would help make their neighbors die; can inflict as well as observe cruelty; etc.

Yes, indeed. Some of them (perhaps all, who knows?) are psychopaths and sociopaths. Some of them are just warped -- their values are turned upside down, like the con men and women whose highest value is getting over on the unsuspecting and gullible.

Then there are those, and I believe some Christian Reconstructionsists and DEFINITELY NeoCons are among them, who believe that the end justifies the means, and their imagined "ends" are so lofty and noble in their own warped minds that anything is possible and nothing is outside the pale.

It's the mass idea that "THEY" are evil and "THEY" will harm us and "THEY" aren't like "US" that kills us, and that includes the left demonizing the right.

And what if those are actual observations of fact on our part rather than some delusional mass idea? What if the enemy, our enemy on the right, really IS evil and really will harm us? What then? Are you proposing twe not dare mention it? That's denial.

[Bill Bored]

39. Take 9/11 for Example

Those who think Bush was just incompetent when he failed to prevent 9/11 will say he's human. Those who think he willingly let it happen to advance the neo-con agenda will say he's inhuman. A subset of the latter group will even say he planned the whole thing.

It doesn't really matter to me because even under the best case scenario (human/incompetent) he should no longer be allowed to hold his office.

Now there are also those true believers who are just so taken in by the man and his so called message that there's no reasoning with them. A subset of this group think he's super-human! Those are the most dangerous ones.

[regularjoe]

55. Bad politician doesn't equal average voter. eom.

[Old Mouse]

37. Very good post, thank you

Some refer to this as "tribalism"

Although I think you are correct, I cannot humanize the Bush administration, their crimes are just too great. We do need sympathy for their low level followers, but I do not think they can be converted though dialog.

I worry more about the fracturing of our own community of late.

Thank you for posting your thoughts.

[helderheid]

40. I think some are reading what I'm saying incorrectly...

I don't quite know how to explain this either... I think you pretty well have said it for me referring it to tribalism. I think this administration as individuals are possibly individually truly believing what they are doing is for the better good. That the means justify the ends, and to do so, they have dehumanized those they harm. Perhaps I am giving them too much credit about them believing what they are doing is for the better good.

Past that, I personally must be vigilant not to dehumanize those who are following this administration. I hope this is more clear. Anyway, thanks for the reply and the example.

[Carson]

41. Excellent post. Thanks so much for bringing this up.

My biggest complaint with, and at times it seems a majority, of DU'ers is the dehumanizing of Repubs. The generalizations of them all being "evil." Even threads wishing all *Bush voters to die.

And when I've spoken out against such behavior, more times than not, I'm am ridiculed.

Again, thanks for your insight. It was well appreciated.

[helderheid]

42. Thank you

SO much :)

I appreciate it. :)

[kk897]

43. this is a very interesting thread

There are so many issues involved. I'm thinking now of how most people on the left feel that we have to be better, more moral, than people on the right. "We won't stoop to their tactics," or the like.

Then again there are those who feel that we need the Dem version of Karl Rove, someone who'll do our dirty work to battle "their" dirty work and fight fire with fire.

I believe there were far fewer people voting for Bush that seems, due to Republican fraud and disenfranchisement. I refer to those perpetrators as "'thugs" or "'pugs." Is that dehumanizing, or is it telling it like it is? From my point of view, people belonging to the GOP used thug-like strategies to do a repugnant thing: deprive people their public voice.

On the other hand, many millions did vote for Bush. I have referred to them as "Redumblicans," because it just seems downright stupid to have done so, against the best interests of all Americans. OK, maybe not stupid, but ignorant. We might excuse their ignorance; however, somehow *we* managed to get clued up--why couldn't they? What was stopping them from examining issues logically, reading from a wide variety of sources, and reaching a conclusion? Somehow people learned even before the age of the blogosphere what BS smells like, so we can't excuse them because perhaps they didn't use a computer.

I'm not a religious person, yet the Administration just seems as close to Evil with a capital "E" as it's possible to seem to a non-religious person. Evil must be fought. If you must fight Evil, must you also dehumanize those who are Evil? It's pretty tough not to, especially when they're doing their best to dehumanize you.

There are no easy answers. Guess there never are. Our heros have clay feet. You can agree with some things that a person you detest says (I'm specifically talking about the LaRouche thread). We're through the looking glass here, people. It's a confusing time, and it's a time that will test our individual characters.

Thank you for posting this thread.

[helderheid]

45. Thank you

This is a very interesting post and I appreciate it.

I agree with much of what you're saying. I have to say that for me, it's not about a moral high ground and not stooping to levels. For me, this has to do with spiritual unity and recognition of our interconnectedness.

Let me throw another thought out there - one that had been thrown out on a similar thread:

* is in the position to have awakened so many to the truth.

He woke the apathetic into voting for the first time, or in the first time in years (I am 29 and registered to vote so I could vote for Kucinich in the primaries - first time I registered to vote, and I voted Kerry on Nov 2). He is the best GOTV manager I've ever seen! The Democratic party has never been so unified, and look at how many people were willing to vote for a Dem rather than their true ideals just to rid Bush from the White house. He is the great unifier in this instance.

People who took reproductive rights for granted are now energized.

People who took the environment for granted are now energized.

People who took the integrity of our elections for granted are now energized.

Countless people who once depended on MSM for their news have been disillusioned about what the media is feeding them.

*, who thinks he is the one to bring forth the 2nd coming of Christ, is the one who woke up the world to the dangers of a Corporate world.

I do believe everything happens for a reason - we must be willing to do the footwork.

[kk897]

53. Helderheid...what you said struck me

Helderheid wrote:

I agree with much of what you're saying. I have to say that for me, it's not about a moral high ground and not stooping to levels. For me, this has to do with spiritual unity and recognition of our interconnectedness.

Hi HH: I'm sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you were "taking the moral high ground"! Definitely not! It's just that your original post made me muse about those who do...and lefties often feel that way.

Instead, I find your approach quite intriguing. For my part, I've vowed not to use derrogatory terms anymore and to view the people who perpetrate heinous crimes on democracy not as shadowy, vague figures but as real, flesh-and-blood people. Doesn't make their crimes less heinous, but it does make me feel a little more in control of my own emotions and fears. It also helps insure that I don't automatically dismiss or condemn out of hand any particular population segment---even if they might dismiss or condemn me.

Hm. I guess I do feel that I should be the best person I can be...so I suppose I AM taking the moral high ground!

Boy, do I feel :silly:

[helderheid]

63. heheheh!

Thanks for that! :) You made me chuckle to boot! I needed that. :) I know exactly what you mean!

[helderheid]

46. Google is fun

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=dehumanizing+the+enemy

[helderheid]

47. nite

[marions ghost]

52. There are 2 sides here...

When you have been abused and stolen from repeatedly, it is very hard to fight the abuser if you don't separate from them and draw clear boundaries. Agreed, people can go to extremes in venting their anger and it's not pretty. But expressions of moral outrage can be appropriate. Often we progressives are "too nice." While I don't like verbal extremes either and avoid them myself, I recognise that moral outrage can be a stage to productive growth.

Fraud is real--and huge profits are made every day by deceptive means in this country. Profits Rule Ethics. Check out the statistics on fraud in general, at every level. Election fraud and suppression is no surprise, although the extent of it may be shocking. This condition hurts us all and we should be extremely angry about it.

We certainly don't need to worry about pandering to conservatives to bring them on board. Just get the factual info out there. The smart and basically good conservatives will wise up themselves. The hardcore right wing --the "ends justify the means" crowd--are not approachable by us. Agreed, no point in demonizing them, but keeping a very thick skin is necessary. Compassion is a noble goal, but compassion needs to come from both sides for healing to occur. If a person or group is psychologically incapable of compassion, they will never come around.

Still, I pity the angry, ignorant, aggressive right wingers ("...they know not what they do") more than I pity the crafty, thieving, miserly conservatives presenting themselves as fine upstanding model citizens. Not much mercy for them. They KNOW very well what they do. And they're NOT looking for anything from us at DU...

[texpatriot2004]

57. I was just talking to someone about this very thing, we are

monsters. Dehumanizing is what serial killers and other violent criminals do. We are just like Manson, Son of Sam, Dahmer, and the rest. Murderers...how about that pro-life policy eh!

[SueZhope]

58. do you all remember this from buzzflash?

Anyone who has not read this ,please do
its very moving . I thought of this when reading this post.

http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/04/10/con04415.html

Ugly

A BUZZFLASH GUEST CONTRIBUTION
by Larry Kearney

If God is talking to you and the result is a burned or crushed child, it’s not God you’re hearing. If you find yourself taking revenge in your head on everyone who ever insulted you, however slightly, you are not one of God’s messengers. If the substance of the information you get from your God is that he requires you to kill in his name, the information is garbage. If your word from God recommends punishing the innocent in any way, for any reason, your God is not God at all but your own mind's sump of resentment, greed and the dream of power.

[atxryan]

60. Thanks

Thank you, SueZ, for that link. Great editorial!

[Quakerfriend]

59. Thx hh, for reminding us of our oneness!

:think:

[helderheid]

69. Thank you!

Although I claim Buddhism, I was the birthright of the Logan Utah Friends meeting just about 30 years ago. :)

[mtnester]

64. The simplest example of this phenomenon...

calling protesters "dissidents" (making it sound worse)

Watch folks, see where it goes from there. First dissidents, then insurgents, then terrorists.

Same way in reverse...the * cabal "relaxes" the rules on emissions (making it sound nicer than it really is)

MSM is part of the game...I am, for the first time in my life, scared of my own government and what it intends to do to me.

[ithinkmyliverhurts]

65. Yes, we don't don't dehumanize; we just simply insert * to symbolize

a human's name. Irony is a fickle little strumpet.

You call him *, I'll call him Chimpy.