Are you pretending?

[blindpig]

This is a little something I came across on the internets. I think it bears pondering.

There is much pretending throughout the progressive and liberal community in my view.

Success and the good life, credentials and status, position and privilege must be protected, at least for people like "us." At the same time, our position and privilege is dependent upon playing a certain role. We must pretend that we are not defending privilege and position and must pretend that we are for the downtrodden. We must pretend that privilege and position is all earned, and that anyone could have anything that we have. We must defend the system of dog-eat-dog competition without allowing that to be too obvious. So we pretend that introducing "fairness" rules and regimens into our personal life nullifies all of the things we do to attain and preserve the spot we have clawed our way to in society.

Sometimes this balancing act is fairly easy, since there are so many people willing to help us keep the facade up and since reality doesn't intrude into our "reality based" fantasy world, but once in a while something like the Bush administration arises and calls our bluff.

When our bluff is called, there is no amount of time and energy we will spare in internecine warfare arguing fine points of what a liberal is, or what our position should be on each and every minute issue and sub-issue and variations on every issue. These arguments can never be resolved, because there is no basis of consensus. Actually there is a consensus, but an important component of the consensus is that we never talk about it and we must pretend that it isn't there.

The consensus from which liberals and Democrats operate:

We are the better people. We are smarter, we are humane, we are more compassionate, we are better informed. We are better citizens, we are more cooperative and realistic. We are winners, not losers, and we deserve everything we get. We are spiritually superior. We are centered and balanced, calm and insightful. We are on the right side of history. We are building a better world.

The general public does not realize that we are the better people, and the ones who should be making the decisions. This is because Republicans are able to take advantage of the people's stupidity and ignorance and turn them against us.

Most of the problems in the world are the result of stupid people running things. If we smart people were in charge, all of the problems could be solved with science and technology and rational social planning.

Class analysis, and the struggles of working class people against tyranny have no place in modern society. They are obsolete and passe, and only something that we read about or see in movies. Romantic as those stories are, they are no substitute for hard-headed practical reality, whether we like it or not. This is a matter of being a mentally healthy, modern, well-adjusted adult in society. None of the lessons from history apply, because things are different now. Only strange maladjusted people are attracted to obsolete political ideas. They are all obviously losers, and are a great danger, almost as much of a danger as the Republicans are.

Since politics and economics in the traditional sense are dead, we embrace a new paradigm of self improvement and self-actualization. Anything that interferes with our focus on ourselves and our pursuit of creating ourselves as an actualized being is to be rejected. The way to achieve the perfect society is first to create a perfect self. Meanwhile, so long as the authorities do not interfere with our self-actualization, we must comply in all ways with that authority. This allows us perfect self-expression within perfect social conformity. Anyone who attacks our personal choices is the enemy, and anyone who attacks the social system based on personal choice is also the enemy.

Others, however, who do not share our values are not to be given personal choice, when and as we can prove that their personal choices are wrong, often with convoluted claims that their choice impacts us somehow. We support the police state and massive incarceration of people, so long as they are being harassed and imprisoned for the right reasons. Any variance from our idea as to how people should be is the right reason, by definition.

We believe that we must “be the change we wish to see,” and the change we wish to see is more people like us: polite, talented, beautiful, intelligent, calm, successful, clever, enlightened. So we merely need to be ourselves, focus on ourselves, and serve ourselves. Those who cannot or will not become like us need to back down and get out of the way.

We fully support aristocracy, capitalism, corporate domination, and consumerism, provided that they support our self-actualization and afford us the personal lifestyle choices we prefer.

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Please do not count me in your 'we'. I do not agree with what you have written.

[electropop]

79. I completely disagree with the O.P.

This was apparently written by someone from the right.

[DancingBear]

117. Why would you think so?

It is as apolitical as one can make it.

I find it rather fascinating that whenever one shines a light the bugs scurry and everyone sends the exterminator home.

There is much truth in it, which is perhaps why so many are so quick to condemn it.

[seabeyond]

161. there is much non truth in it which could also be a reason people

dont buy it. they might not even be "scurrying" .

[seabeyond]

2. this isnt my reality. i could go further, but would take time. n/t

[mongo]

27. True. But *some* of this describes the DU gestalt to a tee

Anyone who attacks our personal choices is the enemy, and anyone who attacks the social system based on personal choice is also the enemy.

Others, however, who do not share our values are not to be given personal choice, when and as we can prove that their personal choices are wrong, often with convoluted claims that their choice impacts us somehow.

[seabeyond]

36. dupe

[seabeyond]

37. dupe

[seabeyond]

38. there may have been truth thru out the post. i couldnt get past the

first major paragraph of being told who i am, what i think from a total stranger. not to mention how far off the person is in telling me what i think. this isnt how i see life. this is not what i think or feel. i dont see limited resoucres. i see over abundance. i totally think opposite of this paragraph.



Success and the good life, credentials and status, position and privilege must be protected, at least for people like "us." At the same time, our position and privilege is dependent upon playing a certain role. We must pretend that we are not defending privilege and position and must pretend that we are for the downtrodden. We must pretend that privilege and position is all earned, and that anyone could have anything that we have. We must defend the system of dog-eat-dog competition without allowing that to be too obvious. So we pretend that introducing "fairness" rules and regimens into our personal life nullifies all of the things we do to attain and preserve the spot we have clawed our way to in society.

[omega minimo]

101. It was written by an enemy of the left to give you fuel for your fire

:hi:

[mongo]

174. And of course truth is only true if presented by a vetted person

and then anything the vetted says is always true.

[omega minimo]

181. You 're still confused. The piece was not written as anyone's truth. It is a farce.

[mongo]

183. And the part I quoted above

describes you perfectly.

[omega minimo]

186. You're still confused. You attack what you don't understand.

[caseycoon]

3. I strongly disagree

:thumbsdown:

[bryant69]

4. This is Democratic Underground

I think what you are looking for is Marxist Underground.

This isn't that.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[omega minimo]

30. *Huh?!*

:wow:

[bryant69]

49. Good comeback

That really puts it in perspective

Bryant

[omega minimo]

104. How did you get from that bogus OP to Marxism?

:shrug:

[DireStrike]

122. I think he picked up the baton of materialism and ran with it

until he got all the way to socialism.

[bryant69]

159. From the OP

"Class analysis, and the struggles of working class people against tyranny have no place in modern society. They are obsolete and passe, and only something that we read about or see in movies. Romantic as those stories are, they are no substitute for hard-headed practical reality, whether we like it or not. This is a matter of being a mentally healthy, modern, well-adjusted adult in society. None of the lessons from history apply, because things are different now. Only strange maladjusted people are attracted to obsolete political ideas. They are all obviously losers, and are a great danger, almost as much of a danger as the Republicans are."

Obviously the author is describing how he thinks things are and how they are the opposite of what they should be. Democrats have relegateid class analysis and the struggle of working class people against tyranny to the dustbin of history. Class analysis in particular gives it away.

Bryant

[Bluzmann57]

5. Had to read this twice

because I wanted to make sure that it wasn't some kind of joke. That is some of the most arrogant bullshit I have ever read. If a republican/conservative placed that, then he or she should be ashamed. If a Democrat/Liberal placed it, then he or she should be doubly ashamed. Liberals, conservatives, centrists, we are all American citizens and one group is no better than any other group, no matter what some may think.

[Demit]

6. Twaddle.

[havocmom]

7. Somebody, call the Roter Rooter guy

Quick!

[Donnachaidh]

8. I think a coffee enema needs to be applied here.

:eyes:

[Dhalgren]

9. That sounds something like the "intelligentsia" of the French

Revolution. The Terror was a direct result of this attitude; not that the intelligentsia necessarily instigated the Terror, but that the attitude of the intelligentsia "allowed" the Terror to form. I do not hold any of the views you have listed (except for a slight superiority complex that I am noble enough to deal with :P ) but then I am pretty much a classic communist so the ideas don't really relate to me....

[Kerrytravelers]

10. Huh?

I have no idea who you're talking about, but I don't put myself in your category.

[bryant69]

11. Another entertaining point

All of these posts criticizing your writing probably just confirm, in your mind, the rightness of your position. Because naturally we (who disagree with you) are all still pretending.

Must be nice.

Bryant

[kiahzero]

15. Unfalsifiable assertions for the win! (n/t)

[ecstatic]

12. Definitely not a pretender, but the illegal immigration issue

kind of exposes a little bit of hypocrisy on our side.

I thought, first and foremost, we were about ensuring that the poorest among us are taken care of. We are supposed to be the labor party. Obviously it would be nice if we could take everyone from around the whole world under our wing, but realistically we have an obligation to the American worker first. Then we have an obligation to make sure workers from third world countries are not exploited by corporations (neither here nor abroad in their homelands).

My passion about these issues is not some front. As far as social issues go, my hope is that we can get to a point where the laws are on the side of civil rights. We will not and cannot convince people to stop being racist or homophobic. As long as the law is on our side, who cares what bigots think?

[noamnety]

146. I have to disagree with that

"I thought, first and foremost, we were about ensuring that the poorest among us are taken care of. We are supposed to be the labor party. Obviously it would be nice if we could take everyone from around the whole world under our wing, but realistically we have an obligation to the American worker first. Then we have an obligation to make sure workers from third world countries are not exploited by corporations (neither here nor abroad in their homelands)."

Who exactly is "us"? Why are they inherently more deserving of having their needs taken care of? I can't find a moral basis for that belief.

I see a bit of nationalism in it, and I don't mean that as a compliment. I have a hard time seeing the idea that we are better than others or more deserving of resources as too dangerously close to white supremacy. I'm not saying it IS white supremacy, but I think it comes from the same place, that collecting of people into "us" and "them" and deciding that one of those groups deserves better than the other.

I don't know how we take care of the poorest among us, and then, only then, have an obligation to the rest of the world to make sure they aren't exploited. What if the least painful way to take care of the least among us requires the exploitation of others? What if the easiest way to get the least among us fed is to exploit farmers in another country? Is that morally acceptable?

[sadiesworld]

188. Who exactly is us?!

WE are U.S. citizens who have every right to expect that our ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES place the welfare of the people THEY HAVE BEEN ELECTED TO REPRESENT above the interests of the corporate elite and citizens of other nations (as if they really give a shit). That isn't nationalism and it sure as hell isn't white supremacy...it's REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT.

[noamnety]

191. It's nationalism

Specifically, it's this definition of nationalism:

the policy or doctrine of asserting the interests of one's own nation, viewed as separate from the interests of other nations or the common interests of all nations.

It's what I hate about nationalism, it is pure greed and selfishness with a dose of supremacy mixed in, excused and disguised under a cloak of patriotism.

We ought to be electing people for the common good, not our own self-interests.

So if I elect someone to town council, her job isn't just to protect my city's self-interests; her job is to manage my city in a way that promotes the common interests of everyone. Let's say the issue of waste disposal comes up on the agenda. Even IF it costs everyone in town extra to build an appropriate sanitation system, even IF some people in town can't afford it, she needs to vote for that sanitation system to treat our own waste, if the alternative is sending raw sewage or other waste downstream to another town. It doesn't matter that she wasn't elected to represent them. It matters that it's the socially responsible thing to do, for the common good.

[Greyhound]

13. Judging by the replies so far, me thinks you've struck a nerve here.

It is not nice to hold a mirror up to our most cherished delusions.

There are a couple of points that could be debated but, by and large, this is an accurate assessment of our society and the primary reason that we will continue to plunder the rest of the world until it is too late to change.
:kick::hide::kick: & R

[seabeyond]

14. first paragraph.... if i say this is not me, that i do not believe this,

he is wrong. then he "hit a nerve for me" that it is someone holding a mirror to me and i dont want to see. i am not allowed to say, no i do not think this. i am wrong. i dont know who i am. but someone on the internet knows me enough to tell me who i am and what i think. this is reasonable to you?



Success and the good life, credentials and status, position and privilege must be protected, at least for people like "us." At the same time, our position and privilege is dependent upon playing a certain role. We must pretend that we are not defending privilege and position and must pretend that we are for the downtrodden. We must pretend that privilege and position is all earned, and that anyone could have anything that we have. We must defend the system of dog-eat-dog competition without allowing that to be too obvious. So we pretend that introducing "fairness" rules and regimens into our personal life nullifies all of the things we do to attain and preserve the spot we have clawed our way to in society.

[Greyhound]

195. Not you, us. I don't see how we can deny it, just look at the record.

Even when we do manage to do the right thing, we have to drag the Party Elite along kicking and screaming the whole way. They are the elite and they are determined to remain the elite, and they will do whatever they believe necessary to accomplish this.

How many justifications have you read here from (presumably) democrats, defending their right to drive an 8 mpg land-barge to the grocery store, or defending discrimination against some class or other because it would mean less profit for some corporation?

[kiahzero]

16. Yeah... if we disagree, we're just agreeing!

:think:

[sinkingfeeling]

17. The writer is talking about our society...it says 'liberals and progressives'.

[bryant69]

18. Hmmmmm

A - "Are you a child molester?"

B - (angrily) "No I'm not - how could you assert such a thing?"

C - "judging by your reply, me thinks A struck a nerve here."

Bryant

[petgoat]

71. Yeah, so where's the anger come from? Why not just answer

calmly: "No. Are you?"

[bryant69]

72. Because wild accusatiosn wild up the blood

But you are right the correct response to thie argument is that I'm not a Marxist or Socialist and I've never claimed to be. I'm a moderate democrat. So if you are going to hold me up to socialist standards, I'm not surprised that i don't measure up. I'm not trying to hold up to those standards.

Bryant

[DireStrike]

121. I did... see below

I guess some of those angry are partisans, but plenty of others are probably just working on the assumption that this is some sort of satirical denialist piece.

http://www.giveupblog.com/2006/09/denialists.html

If one assumes it is written by a right winger, it can only be seen as an argument from metaphor(5) with some impossible expectations(4) thrown in. These at the least give it the feel of denialism. Here's a quote from the same blog about Jack Kerouac:

"This is what sucks about denialists, all the work you have to go into disproving BS that they can just make up on the spot. This guy is pulling stuff out of his ass that isn't even superficially believable."


The post rings false instantly for so many people by asserting a bad definition of liberal or progressive ideology, similar to the light in which one imagines Freepers would see it.

[sui generis]

21. I'm with greyhound here

I think it's human nature that mostly everyone thinks of themselves as "good" and "benevolent" or "acting in the best interests of"

Why does it bother anyone to admit that?

The post maybe goes a little too far to make the point, but who cares of it's delusional or reality. What does it matter?

Are we going to start administering some test of sincerity before we stop doubting ourselves? At some point you have to be what you believe. Defenders are what they defend. What's wrong with considering yourself a defender of noble American ideas as a liberal?

[Greyhound]

35. Thank you, we are definitely in the minority here.

I find the adamant denials almost funny, we really don't like the face looking back at us from the mirror, do we?

While the Mexicans are still in the streets, fighting for their rights, for how many months now? We ignore both their struggle and the fact that we are living under a cabal, installed by our corporate master's agents, and say "what can I do about it anyway?"

There are more than a couple of debatable points in the OP, but the general assessment is pretty on the spot.

[seabeyond]

41. dupe

[seabeyond]

42. did you see the video by faithless... the one not allowed on mtv

it was amazing not only showing the parallel worlds of u.s. and iraq, but it went beyond that. the absurdity of living as we do among the horror of what others in this world are experiencing. way more profound than just showing a parallel, but blending it.

i have thought a lot about that the last handful of days, watching that video. there is much to be said about that. but i think just the start of what the op says, for me anyway, is really far off,... how we are. and i am not much into honoring us as less when it isn't called for. i dont think that is a way to progress forward.

[Greyhound]

196. No, nothing but the occasional broadcast shows here.

Just couldn't justify spending $60 p/month just to see Olberman and Stewart anymore.

[seabeyond]

205. i saw it on the net, from a post on du

but..... i would love to get rid of my cable. mtv? i dont even know where it is on cable. have never seen it on my channels. i used to love mtv when it first came out, so many years ago. omewhere along the way i pretty much turned off tv and about the only time it is on is for stewart/colbert and a dvd. my kids dont watch much either. tv hasnt been turned on yet nad it is almost 5 on a saturday.

hubby (the repug bah hahahahha, teasing) wants cable and HE doesnt watch much either. go figure.

[uppityperson]

44. Your argument is like this conversation...

#1 "#2, you are a child abuser."
#2 "No I'm not."
#1 "You are denying it, therefor you are."


Sorry, doesn't work.

[nashville_brook]

54. the Mexican conflict definitely comes to mind here --

i've lost track of all the abuses that have led to the standoff in Oaxaca, but i know a large part of the conflict is due to the unverified and likely stolen election.

when Americans were faced with this in 2000 and again in 2004, the left didn't take the route of collective action. as a matter of fact, the right was able to get away with feigning the appearance of collective action in the form of the Brooks Bros Brigade. the Brooks Bros could "afford" to riot, b/c they were PAID to do so and promised a return on their investment.

regular folks like us have to ask off from work which carries some pretty steep risks depending on what your line of work is. "i won't be coming into work today... yeah... i'm participating in civil unrest..."

so -- there's an evil catch-22 -- once you're IN THE SYSTEM with your jobs and your mortgages and your kids, you are MUCH LESS LIKELY to act for a "collective good" outside of your family. that's called End of Ideology -- it was popular in the 50s as a utopic scenario for ending social unrest... basically, just "buy everyone out." once everyone has a NICE POT TO PISS IN, they generally STFU.



there's another parallel here to the Federalist Papers, specifically number 10, which talks about factionalism. madison was arguing for the need of the Constitution to guard against the country breaking up into factions -- the irony is, i think we have guarded so well against factionalism that we no longer have a republic for lack of interest.

[Katzenjammer]

58. Madison and factions

By 1802, Madison had matured to the point where he accepted factions and claimed in print that there ought to be more democracy, redistributive taxation, and an end to the elites getting whatever they wanted. What a big change from the Fed. Papers days.

[nashville_brook]

62. "factions" ... competing interests... have we lost them with the unions?

sure there's Dem and Repub -- but we are quite aware of both party's adherence to corporate money and corporate interests.

so, functionally, we could say we have the factions of "corporate interest" vs "consumer interest."

we i venture out into "public" i have to acknowledge that by "public" we are usually talking about Target, Publix or Home Depot and the action i am usually taking in "public" is buying stuff. so, factions appear again in the guise of "Target" vs "Wal-Mart."

Coke or Pepsi.

Paper or Plastic.

Ford or Chevy.

[Katzenjammer]

70. Good points, but I don't know how to respond. Could you expand a bit?

It might be that I'm just not following completely yet.

[nashville_brook]

82. yah -- it seems that the problem now isn't "factionalism," rather it's the absence

of factions. it's a cliché that a large part of our American Apathy is that we identify too closely with our corporate-interests to the detriment of our public-interest. a concrete example of this is found in state and local economic development. lure the corporations in with no regulation, no taxation and no expectations (that's only a small hyperbole). once Dell or Nissan or Saturn sets up shop, everyone will have jobs and live happily ever after. meanwhile the companies pollute, hog resources and even outsource to Mexico -- the people in the community have been given no choice but to become boosters for the corporate interest.

we are VESTED.

we are serfs, and the maddening thing is that we trade our power for serfdom almost every time we are given the opportunity.

who wants superb public schools for all children?
who wants universal healthcare?
who wants a living wage?

the people.

who runs our system of regulation and taxation?

the government.

what does the goverment run on?

corporate money.

why don't we have those things, again?

[Katzenjammer]

193. Okay, got it now. And of course I agree.

"the maddening thing is that we trade our power for serfdom almost every time we are given the opportunity."

This is the line where you nail it right to the church door. Brava!

[nashville_brook]

47. i'm with greyhound and sui here too -- so, WHAT ACTIONs do we do?

here's my contribution -- it's my HOPE that "talking the talk" readies the person to "walk the walk" and commit to some sort of collective action.

for me the question is "what action"?

the essay assails CONSUMERISM as not-appropriate ACTION. i'm totally down with that. it's not enough to buy organic and do yoga. the world doesn't care how moral your buying habits or exercise habits are. the world needs actors right now. but ACTION requires SACRIFICE, and our suburban, consumer-oriented lives don't encourage "action." we have to GO OUT OF OUR WAY for that.

so, what does ACTION look like?
is it posting daily on DU?
is it driving voters to the polls?
is it feeding the homeless?
is it working in community groups?
is it performing radical poetry?
is it raising wonderful children?
is it spiking trees?
is it eschewing toilet paper?
is it eating vegan?

the essay is saying it's NOT ENOUGH to merely CONSUME the IMAGE of righteous action -- you have to also ACT. can't disagree with that.

[ProfessorGAC]

23. Nonsense

Your statement of support is just as disingenuous and intellectually convenient as the OP. If we think the OP a pompous bit of neomarxist blather, than we are pretending, we are delusional, or we are protecting our own "status". Or, conveniently, if we disagree, than it means it struck a nerve.

Why can't it be that the OP is just a narrow, two-dimensional and sophomoric rant rather than a meaningful exposition of opinion? Why does it have to be that i disagree because it hurts my feelings? Simply not the case, and that makes both you and the OP wrong!

The Professor

[Greyhound]

32. Rather than attacking the messenger, why not address the issue?

This reminds me of "Not one damn dime day", remember that? An economic protest among those of us that feel the '04 election was stolen, like the others before it. Here on DU, the bastion of Democratic Activism, we heard how we couldn't forego the double shot, half-caf, skinny latte, no foam please. Or the unbelievable sale at Wal-Mart and I'm just totally booked this Saturday so I had to get it today, and the Escalade needed a fill-up anyway so as long as I was out.:eyes:

We are all for "equal rights" unless it becomes inconvenient. Once that happens, we need a laws in our communities that criminalize poverty, to get all those dirty people off the streets. Speaking of laws, why do you suppose this is the only first-world country that overwhelmingly supports the death penalty, in spite of all the evidence that shows it is utterly ineffective in deterring or preventing crime and we now know for certain that we have, in fact, executed many innocent people over the years?

We want to save the earth (when we really mean save us, the earth isn't going anywhere, even if we cause our own extinction) unless it means that I can't drive an 8,000 lb. truck to the grocery store to pick up some industrial toxins to over-feed my family if I want to.

We demand universal health-care, as long as it doesn't hurt my stock portfolio by taking money out of the insurance industry, and thereby forcing me to get my medical needs from the *gasp* same places that those icky poor people go for theirs, we should make some kind of tiered system based on my ability to pay, unless I get really sick and then I think I'm entitled to the very best and latest treatments, regardless of the costs.

We want to "end the culture of corruption" in our government, except for the corruption that brings those billions into my state and employs my family, that is just fine.

We want everyone to be able to make a working a full-time job, unless it means I have to pay the true cost of the products that I use.

We live with the delusion that "someday I'll be on top" and therefore are loathe to demand any sacrifice from those that really are on top.

[uppityperson]

46. 8000 lb truck? stock portfolio? Boy, sure wish I had access to those.

I'd sell the truck and buy a decent scooter. Do you buy fashionable clothes every season or year? I don't. I am self employed, trying to make ends meet, yes even have a quite old computer (but a computer none the less which I am grateful for). I think you and the OP are generalizing too much as to whom "we" is. That is my complaint.

[sui generis]

91. I think everyone is trying to differentiate themselves as quickly as possible

ironically, the point.

It's silly, and reverse snobbery for having little is as silly as snobbery for having too much.

Why is everyone judging the OP? This was something that begged discussion, not judgement. I read between the lines also without assuming the crash position, that the gist of what was being said here, whether it applies to middle class do-gooders or the have-less do-gooders is that we collectively believe that we are superior to the things we defend against.

Yes there was some gloom in the statement and some things that don't apply to me either - so what? I'm comfortable enough in my liberalism not to freak out and eat our own like many on this thread have.

:shrug:

[uppityperson]

95. not meaning to be a reverse snob, just annoys me when people assume

assume how I am without knowing and make judgments on me based on their assumptions. I truly have lived this way, it has worked for me mostly and I am grateful for the breaks I have gotten. We each must find out own way and try to hurt as little as possible along the way.

I have been jumped on here for posting things that others took as value judgment rather than start of a discussion and now am guilty of it myself. Onward.

[Greyhound]

96. Well said, as usual.

I have to admit that the initial replies took me by surprise. I though we had a little more honest picture of ourselves here.

[leeroysphitz]

139. If people didn't feel their cause was superior why would they bother? nt

[ProfessorGAC]

155. Because It's Intellectually Dishonest, sui

That's why the OP is being judged. There is no "reading between the lines" necessary. Any discussion point framed in such a way that forces the reader to either agree or accept that the disagreement is rooted in selfishness or delusion is intellectually empty. It's an unfair point of debate and should be treated as such.
The Professor

[nashville_brook]

180. i don't think it's intellectually dishonest to defend one's position

if the passage the OP posted for discussion has tweaked some noses, then a defense is completely within reason.

there's plenty of examples in real life when claims are unfairly made and we totally applaud those who defend their injured sensibilities. like when Cheney said that everyone against the war is committing treason. that was an unfair/ugly assertion and we defended our positions.

the realm of human experience has to have more play than you're either selfish or selfless.

i think this piece can be critiqued for style, but i'm not so sure on substance. it's confrontational, and while that's generated plenty of heat, we're waiting for the light to shine... but, we'd be dishonest to claim that there's NO TRUTH in it. most DU'ers would gladly on this bandwagon if it were couched in less-inflammatory language. generally we all have a problem with outsized consumer culture and i believe that's the root of what's being criticized here.

[Greyhound]

94. Any broad generalization like this is just that. In my reply I used a few

examples of things I have read right here on DU. The abject failure of "not one damn dime day" is a prime example, but it doesn't mean that nobody withheld financial support for that day, just not nearly enough of us.

I think this post, rather than a specific indictment of all liberals and progressives, is indicative of the general lack of willingness to make the real sacrifices that significant change will entail. The government will never do it, their paychecks and graft depend on nothing changing except in insignificant, cosmetic ways, and the writer was pointing out the lack of will to do it ourselves.

[loyalsister]

111. We want people to shop locally

but don't want to install automatic doors so that people with disabilities don't have to ask to get in.

[atommom]

144. Good questions all. There are a lot of points here that bear questioning.

Truly accomplishing what we want to accomplish could entail more sacrifices than many of us are willing to accept. How can we, as a society, solve that problem? Is it possible?

[Greyhound]

149. I used to think it was, I've become less certain as the years have passed

and thing just keep getting worse and worse.

When I was a teenager and the country was duped (I believed) into voting for an idiot that knew how to deliver his lines, I thought, "well this sucks, but as soon as the consequences start to get noticed, they'll wake up and realize what a monstrous mistake they made and we'll fix it in a couple of years." We re-elected him and accelerated the disaster.

It's been over 30 years, massive lay-offs, once an aberration and last resort is now accepted as SOP. They destroyed the unions and the laid-off workers got nothing, they broke up our means of production and shipped it to china, The S&L's were looted with no consequences, They gave away our right to self determination in the name of a "new world order", they gave legal sanction to slavery in our "protectorates" to protect their contributers, and on and on and on... All the while the amerikan sheeple have stood dumb, bleating only a little when it effected them or those they knew, but not too much, that might upset the shepherds.

Three decades of a steady, unceasing, march to a nightmare only hinted at by George Orwell, and still we hear the idiocy repeated endlessly by people of both political stripes.

Does it really have to get so bad that we bring about another civil war?

[atommom]

156. I hope not. But so many unbelievable things have happened that

I don't think we can rule it out. :( Maybe our relative comfort here has made us (as a society) too complacent. I've been following politics for years, and am still trying to effect change, but it's often hard to be optimistic.

[ProfessorGAC]

154. Attack The Messenger?

You think too highly of your first post. I'm attacking the message. And, i'm not about to attempt to find a solution to a problem that fits within the gross misanalysis of the OP. IMO, the OP is an attempt to find the solution in all the wrong places.

One does not indict one's allies and expect cooperation. Go ahead and indict away. Call me lazy or uncaring. I know the truth, and the truth is i'm neither.

And, btw, you failed to address my point, which i guess i'm supposed to interpret as attacking the messenger. My point was, in case you forgot from yesterday, that the argument in the OP, and that which you supported was intellectually lazy and disingenuous, because one cannot argue the opposite without being told one is delusional. That's too convenient by half.

The Professor

[Greyhound]

198. That is utterly ludicrous, I could certainly make the counter-argument

on this issue, but I don't make arguments against my own beliefs, at least not without a very large check attached.

[Brazenly Liberal]

69. The OP didn't strike a nerve, but you sure did.

And it's this one: It gets on my very last nerve - strikes it, if you will - when this sort of silly, specious babble is inserted into a debate. Disagreeing with someone doesn't mean they "struck a nerve."

If the response had been insanely out of proportion to the initial charge made, you might have a case. But the OP leveled a pretty offensive charge against a very large group of people. It is well within the bounds of reasonable response rate and intensity that there would be this many objections and this many people would find the assertions offensive and/or ridiculous.

[Greyhound]

199. I'm sorry, did we get health-care while I wasn't paying attention?

Did our government suddenly start taking positions in favor people over corporations while we were napping? Oh I know, they must have brought in the magic elves to repair and supply all the schools last night, and hired the thousands of teachers to use these new facilities so that we now actually do educate our kids. Right?

How many issues do you need, or is it just easier to pretend that now that we're coming back into the legislature next month, all will be made right?

[w4rma]

87. No. 'We' just don't like being mischaracterized. The op is incoherent and insulting.

It jumps to conclusions that there is no basis in reality for. And the op doesn't even try to justify the conclusions made.

[Vidar]

204. Only too true.

[HughMoran]

207. Interestng...

better keep hiding in that chimney, I don't think this is a place where much self-reflection happens.

[stepnw1f]

19. Sounds Like Somebody is Resentful

You do not speak for me or my Liberal friends. Sorry.... nice try though. Really.

[loveandlight]

20. you've made quite a mistake

I believe the description you have laid out belongs to a pampered white middle class in this country, indeed, but to equate this with the liberal/progressive movement is a stretch. The self-actualizing me generation you refer too may indeed be the focus of what gets play in the media and what gets defined as "liberal," but believing that is really what the progressive community in this country is all about is just falling for the right wing media bullshit. I think you are the one who doesn't see clearly.

[stepnw1f]

24. Or If You Listen to Right WIng Pundits Stereotype Liberals

Which I believe is the case here.

[FredStembottom]

22. Mostly, I don't get this.......

Some kinda Marxist rant, maybe?

I dunno, but I gotta go self-actualize myself by loading and then unloading about 3000 pounds of freight by hand as I enjoy the privileged position I occupy known as delivery-guy.

[omega minimo]

25. Another Frank Luntz gem?

[Sapphire Blue]

26. No, but I *am* pondering... where you found this, why you posted it & what you're trying to say.

[Zodiak]

28. Hmmm....I see some of this in the culture

But it is mostly absent from the progressive community I see here. Most here understand that we are in a sick society and our neccessary participation in that society makes us guilty by association....it's not a delusion.

It is also something that we work against every single day.

Now the DLC politicians, pro-business centrists, and pro-torture moderates who reside in the Democratic party while enabling a corporate, proto-fascist takeover of the US, there is a lot of this delusion. But I don't think it is a delusion....it is a deception. I also do not think any of those Democratic politicians can rightfully be called liberal or progressive, either, and people in the netroot community are far from welcome to come and play in their reindeer games.

[Vincardog]

29. This is what is left in the stock trailer after you take the Bulls out.

I call BS. The pretender here is the writer of the OP.

[Dora]

31. Pah.

Nice easy way to give all of us here a big fat "Fuck you and all your ideals" backhand.

Who the heck recommended this tripe for Greatest?

Nice job at post-and-run, Blindpig.

[uppityperson]

33. where on the internets did you find this?

I disagree with the premise the rest of it is written on, by the way. Wondering where you found this, who wrote it, etc?

Edited to add the following:
"Success and the good life, credentials and status, position and privilege must be protected, at least for people like "us." At the same time, our position and privilege is dependent upon playing a certain role. We must pretend that we are not defending privilege and position and must pretend that we are for the downtrodden. We must pretend that privilege and position is all earned, and that anyone could have anything that we have. We must defend the system of dog-eat-dog competition without allowing that to be too obvious. So we pretend that introducing "fairness" rules and regimens into our personal life nullifies all of the things we do to attain and preserve the spot we have clawed our way to in society."

I do not see myself as defending privilege and position and not the downtrodden, or as you say pretending. Privilege and position SHOULD be earned, but much is inherited and/or stolen by making wage slaves out of others. "anyone could have anything we have"? Having been a downtrodden person and managing to not keep up with basic bills, but marrying into being a home owner, that is 1 way but not all can do this. How the hell am I defending the system of dog-eat-dog competition? "fairness rules" means what?

Posting a copy of something you found elsewhere, then not returning to discuss it strikes me as not a way to open communication, but to accuse and then disappear. Bah.

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

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

[uppityperson]

50. I found that also, was hoping OP would give more info

thanks. If the point of this topic is talk is not enough, I agree. If the point is all "we" do is talk, I disagree.

[Generic Other]

34. I smell poop on this thread

Did someone forget to wash his hands?

[No Exit]

39. Hey, "Rush Jr.", it doesn't take much to be "better people" than today's republicans

Being "a better person" than warmongering chickenhawks, who claim to support "free trade" while taking corporate welfare, and who claim to be "Christians" while screaming "Kill the ragheads", is not difficult.

I feel quite humble, really.

You need to turn off the radio until it offers something besides screaming wingnuts--people who couldn't even stick it out in college long enough to get out of junior division, and who now presume to tell the rest of the populace what to think. My radio has been off for some time now.

[More Than A Feeling]

40. Shorter OP: Durn Librul Elitists!

The projection is astonishing. No doubt the writer is thinking, "There's no way they could actually care if everyone gets an equal slice of the social opportunity pie! They must be in it to find a way to lord over us the way we lord over them!" :puke:

[smoogatz]

43. The usual bullshit stereotype.

Built on a lot of bullshit assumptions about who and what progressives are. Here's the only true part: "We (progressives) are smarter (than conservatives)... we are better informed." That, in fact, is quantifiable truth. The rest is nonsense--no more true or pertinent or worth discussing than any of the rightwing's other tired, discredited, ridiculous "opinions" about progressives, or the war in Iraq, or anything else.

[DancingBear]

120. This quote here scares the shit out of me

Here's the only true part: "We (progressives) are smarter (than conservatives)... we are better informed." That, in fact, is quantifiable truth.

You could not have written a more elitist reply if you had a week to think about it.

Please, do us a favor and show this quote to the guy who doesn't vote because he thinks both sides of the equation stink.

When he asks you questions that pertain to him (like maybe why his $35/hr. job now sits in Mexico) run a buch of "information" past him.

He'll love it - maybe he can use it to pay the phone bill.

For the next DU fundraising drive maybe instead of a bumper sticker they should hand out mirrors.

Christ knows we ain't looking in any now.

[DireStrike]

123. I partially disagree

At the current time, we are better informed than conservatives. That could change any time, if, say, the party were to become flooded with partisans. But I'm pretty damn sure it's true now.

Smarter... that's rotten ice there.

[smoogatz]

132. Right. The key to appealing to working people is to pretend we're stupid.

Just as stupid, in fact, as the incompetent Republican dipshits the voting public has already turned against. Or maybe we should just (finally) learn to ignore the elitism concern trolls, who still think that a command of actual information is somehow not going to play well in Kansas. At this point, I think most Americans would embrace a leadership that actually knows what it's doing.

As for your "guy who thinks both sides of the equation stink" and whose "$35/hr job now sits in Mexico," tell him to wake the fuck up. If he thinks the Republicans are here to help him, he's delusional. We need a serious dose of good old economic populism in this country, and the only party in a position to deliver that agenda are the Democrats (and only then if they can be surgically removed from the DLC/corporatist wing of the party). FDR did more for working people in this country than Reagan, W and the rest of the faux-populist good-old-boy Republican dumbasses ever have or ever will.

As for my initial statement, it's true. NPR listeners--plain old, garden-variety liberals--are far better informed and better educated than Fox News conservatives. Generally speaking, the facts support our worldview, while theirs is built on misperception, misinformation, and outright wingnut fantasy. You can look it up on the internets.

[nashville_brook]

45. a ramble on this vintage-1970 critique (The Greening of America vs Collective Action)

and i recently engaged it to counter a poster on another board who was claiming "what we all needed to do... was become moral beings individually... and the world would heal itself." i call this The Greening of America. recycle, do your yoga and give to charity and all the world's ills will fade away.

they fade away only for the blissed-out yogi. he took major offense as is his right as a righteous man of morals with awesome flexibility -- flexibility in his limbs rather than his mind.

so, in a way, i totally appreciate this essay -- in another way, i believe it could be modernized. fellow DU'ers are reacting to the heavy-handed language... i did too. had to read it twice to get the gist.

here's a word-picture of some of my friends -- private Montessori school for the kids... backyard bbq's with rented inflatable jumpers for the kids to entertain themselves while the adults enjoy their keg of Guinness and discuss "green" politics (naderites)... personal yoga training... BMWs, SeaDoos, and beach vacations... housekeepers!... organic food bought from upscale neighborhood green-grocers (one family actually buys an organic cow once a year to be fed and slaughtered to spec)... and summer evenings of baseball watched on giant plasma screens in their Restoration Hardware-furnished turn-of-the-century Arts and Crafts homes.

but, it's "for the kids..." is it not?

if it were just "for the kids" then why is there a constant dialog at the bbq's about "living the simple life." all kinds of pretension goes into maintaining the image of boho-chic downmarket-a-tude... but the reality is that it's all show. the so-called "morality" here only goes as far as the kids who are kind of used as an excuse to consume. all the idealism i knew from them in college... the hours-long rants about the not being bourgeois saps... it was show. plop a couple of kids into the equation and voila! family life is bourgeois-tastic.

"we do it for the KIDS."

[Richard Steele]

51. No. nm

[info being]

52. That's me. No apologies though. I can be brutally honest about myself and live with myself.

I think the idea that some sort of utopia can result from smart systems and policies is a bit silly. I think we progressives do fall into this trap. I think what we should be doing is tearing down the idea of "mass" movements all together, and putting the individual at the center of everything. The authentic individual. Everything should exist to serve life and, yes, quality of mine. Mine. Yours. Every living creature.

The biggest trap we fall into is that we think we are smart enough to design perfect systems. These systems are, again and again, used against us.

[seabeyond]

53. authentic self. i havent heard that in a long time. this takes me to

our selfish, self. and how that serves us all...... equally. but then that would be in our authentic self, and well beyond the 3d world

[info being]

55. I don't see how it naturally leads to selfishness

I think selfish behavior stems from wanting so badly to fit the crowd that we'll do anything, without tought. When we become aware of that which makes us truly "us", we are comfortable in our non-conformism and the voice of our intuition is allowed to resonate throughout us.

The reason our movements fail again and again is because we ignore the true needs of individuals...to realize the meaning of our lives *as* individuals. You attempt to guilt me into thinking about the third world...that kind of crap doesn't go very far for most people, and if you rely on my fear to not fit into your crowd...how is your approach better than the preacher?

[seabeyond]

60. selfishness in authentic self

will be the best for self in purist form which will always be best for the whole. in authentic self anything we do that is not good for the whole is also not good for self. always the right answer, purist answer is win win win for all.... no losers. if you find the loser in an equation, the answer is not right, is not in purist form. that is how i can identify authentic self comes to selfishness because it will not only be good for me but good for all

now with the other that you say.

i agree. but as another poster posted, what is the specific action one is talking about. is it action and finding authentic self that will allow one to be beyond the winner/loser mentality. is the action raising conscientious and wise children that will be a benefit to society. this is why i am basically opposed to the op. one cannot decide nor see all or have a clue what others are donating to the world.

and guilting people into something doesn't work. but then it is not win win nor is it pure, so cannot work

[info being]

66. I completely accept your position on this

We are saying much of the same thing with different language...and perhaps even without cliche (I hope).

[nashville_brook]

56. and the free market is working so well...

really, the neo-cons are right about that. left to it's own devices, the individual and the market are self-regulating and always right. to be otherwise would be "un-natural." individuals are incapable of making decisions that would be harmful to themselves and therefore to the whole, as an aggregate of individuals.

and so, this is the best of all possible worlds.

excuse me while i go and order my new 60" plasma television. Best Buy is having an awesome sale.. online-only!

:evilgrin:

[info being]

64. Who said anything about economics?

Our authentic selves do not merely relate to others in an economic sense. We transcend systems and economics and create something that feels divine. It is the system in place that leaves us no imagination beyond the system itself...it isolates us by forcing us to "fit it".

Now please try imagining yourself outside of "the mass"...how would you be, ideally, with the ideal person. Does a plasma TV enter into the equation? For me it doesn't. An ipod? Perhaps. Try to make me feel guilty about my ipod and you fail to understand my spiritual need for music. You lose me.

Maybe we should start by accepting each other in a real sense?

[nashville_brook]

75. my ex had a spiritual need for his $40K convertible BMW,

and his BMW motorcycle (a Beakster with anti-lock brakes), and his recording studio and craftsman woodshop... all spiritual need... for the grace of good design and well-made stuff. the last few years, our weekends were spent driving to the suburbs to browse for electronics... or car shop... or procure a tool for a house project that never got done, but by-god, we had the tools should we ever decide to actually do something with them.

i am so down with you on the authentic self thing. for me it begs the question, "how does this self act in the world."

really, what DO I DO to WALK THE WALK? is posting on DU enough? is that enough in a world gone to hell? and how do i commit to walking the walk in a meaningful manner? should i publish a newspaper? did that, actually. the ex was in a band and i told myself that was cool b/c it goaded people to "act collectively" and that's almost like "collective action." it's a constant theme... our powerlessness in the face of horrors like Iraq, Katrina and the Bush Admin, generally. we're college-educated elites surrounded by amazing toys, and honest-to-god, if you were to be a fly on the wall of some of our backyard bbq's you would have gotten an earful of the self-satisfied, bourgeois attitude the OP rags on.

economics enters this picture, b/c the critique is socio-economic and our apathy does indeed seem to have socio-economic roots. the essay the OP posted is really inflammatory in its language -- i'll give you that -- but i totally see the truth there. having a star next to my DU handle is clearly not enough for me... but all i can do right now is cast about in a sea of kindred souls casting about. at LEAST WE HAVE THIS.

it is incredible even to have a "PUBLIC SPACE" such as a "forum" called Democratic Underground. a forum, for crying out loud. a place where people "go" to do nothing but exchange ideas -- as in, "a funny thing happened on the way to The Forum." only 20 years ago, if you wanted to discuss politics and culture with a wide range of people you had to go to a BAR. don't get me wrong, i love bars... but this is clearly an improvement.

i think it's appropriate to a feel a bit of guilt and humilty in this culture we participate in. it's interesting that this idea generated the heat it has. ugh -- it's not well-written -- that's part of the problem. it's written confrontationally and it's too long. it's overwrought and sounds like 70s-era radicalism... and yet, it kinda resonates.

[info being]

83. You are still defining this in terms of how we fit with "the world"

You don't give value to the things that you might want to do just with *one* other person...hidden from the world. Like...if you and I were talking all night with a bottle of wine by candle-light (or doing whatever) ;-)....what authentic self would you express then? I wouldn't care about your newspaper. You wouldn't care how many people know my music. But maybe you'd care to know my music in a personal way, as I pick up the guitar at some point. Maybe you'd see something in my eyes that means something to you. Maybe we'd share a moment of understanding. Maybe none of this would have any relevance to "the world".

Maybe my point is that most people don't have enough of *that* in their lives...cuz we are all too busy trying to be something to *the world*. Maybe my larger point is that we wouldn't be thinking about money or buying more stuff if we were satisfied with our authentic selves in this way...nurturing each other and growing as human beings...discovering ourselves...the selves that have nothing to do with how we fit into society.

There does seem to be a dimesion that we are blind to. If not blind, we tend to discount the significance of this dimension...or is it the world that discounts it?

[nashville_brook]

89. i *do* have a bit of guilt for a prior remark i made on a thread on another

board on this very subject. i came crashing out of the gate with a dialogue i have with myself regarding personal growth vs my hope/desire for a better world. i'm sure the poster was a nice enough guy and prolly meant well when he posted his thought, but it rubbed my fur backwards. it was, "that if all people were MORAL, then the world would become better, naturally."paraphrase is a gross simplification, but it gets at the general gist. the notion transported me back to younger days of sitting around a fire and debating exactly the same thing: can spiritual refinement be enough to affect change? can social change be meaningful without personal spiritual refinement? can someone pass the bong?

my regrettable reaction was to say "snap out of it! your personal yoga practice is doing nothing to bring home the troops."



it's not that i was offended so much by his statement. rather i'm offended at our complicity in our powerlessness. i really believe the storybook version of Horton Hears a Who -- that we all have to stand up and be counted. downward facing dog doesn't count. :)

then i have to settle down and realize that i'm just one girl and can't storm the castle on my own. hell, i prolly wouldn't even know what to do when i got there. i could write an essay about it. i could take some photographs. i could crack some jokes. that's really all i can do.

maybe it's the lapsed catholic in me that feels bourgeois guilt. i hate it. you're a musician... you prolly deal with this too. you have your art and then you have a life you have to live that either *supports* your art or gets in the way. i just spent a decade in nashville watching myself and all my friends let our jobs and our consumer lives choke our art to death. i think this is the place i'm operating out of.

so, The World vs The Spiritual Being -- i can't separate the two. not that i want "to fit in." not by a long shot. :)

yeah, i'm with you -- we all need more ART in our lives. more spiritual communion. right now i need a job and it's pissing me off because i'm really not-well enough to work and i'm sick and fucking tired of carrying water for The World in the form of shitty marketing communications jobs. i need to get off the wheel and find some little something that is meaningful and i can't find it. but this little thread has provided quite the opportunity to re-examine these issues that are so near and dear to me. that's a damn good thing.

btw -- i'd totally be interested in your music! i'm very down with what you say about honoring the authentic self. i think we have hold of different parts of the elephant here. i'm holding the trunk and so i sense a giant hose-like sucking thing. you've got the slender, brushy tail. :)

[info being]

99. I'm down with you too :-)

I will admit that my view is a little different these days...as I have sort of checked out of America and am looking at these things from a distance. The thing I've discovered, though, is that there is nothing stopping you from doing what I'm talking about other than yourself. It is about the way you related to even just a single other person. It has nothing to do with your position in life...but is completely outside of that. In fact, you don't have to do anything...I'll start the process for you.

I'll start by saying that I'd very much like to write to you privately. Let's forget about the audience. You can listen to my music and write to me from my blog: www.abscondo.net.

Maybe we don't fit each other's lives in the way I'm talking about...but what is important is that you are seeking this.

[seabeyond]

105. all good stuff in your post. what i have seen today alone.....

i have turned off news since oct 2004. i turned it on today and combined, maybe watched 45 minutes here and there all day as i walk thru the room. every time it has talked about the "civil" war and the options we have. just today i am seeing how we as a nation are collectively talking our way out of iraq. how did that happen i asked myself? the election. dems aren't even in yet, they have put forth no policy, yet already they are accomplishing. the whole talk of war has shifted. our abilities there have shifted. and why? because collectively as a nation we have told our leaders no

i recognize and honor this,... that we accomplished, and it is not done, but in the universal energy,... and the motion of life, and the way things work, it is done. we will see as time progresses and i 0only say this ahead of time, now because i want you to think if maybe this isn't a possibility. and what people can accomplish thru collective conscious.

[nashville_brook]

179. i pray you are right

i pray that the "vast right-wing" conspiracy doesn't gerrymander the change that's coming. i pray that the disease we've endured for the last 6 years will soon dry up and blow away. i pray that our consciousness directs change.

but i also pray that (we) the powerless may add a tool besides prayer to our repair kit.

[seabeyond]

103. your last paragraph absolutely answers your question about the heat

this thread is taking. now that i have listened to those of you that were agreeing with the original post i can see where you are coming from and the possibility of real conversation. there is so much in your post that i find interesting, insightful and an opportunity to discuss.

just not now cause i dont have time. thanks for sharing all this

[nashville_brook]

176. thanks! shame that the tone of the OP was so confrontational, b/c there's something

there.

[info being]

67. The individual and the market are opposites

The market is a dehumanizing system...the individual, in the true sense, is nearly divine.

[nashville_brook]

77. we are blood enemies -- corporate interest vs public interest

i'm so tired of working for companies with absolutely no responsibility to the employee. small biz is the WORST. at least in large corporate settings your a "human resources" dept that looks out for the interest of the worker.

said this way, we've traded Unions for Human Resources Schmoes.

the individual is indeed divine. we deserve better. actually... we deserve to believe that we deserve better. :)

[nashville_brook]

57. this essay argues against grand social "systems"

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

59. Agree and disagree. Guess that's why I'm an Anarchist.

Power, whether wielded by individuals or groups, is the enemy. Lord Acton's axiom is always true. Even "benevolent" dictators or enlightened democracy" can wield power to the detriment of individuals or the masses. Those who achieve power over others, whether it's the owner of the local grocery with 2 employees, the CEO of GE or Exxon, the tribal chief, the mayor, or the president of the United States, must be ruthless to maintain His/Her/Their power.

That power must be, either taken away, or curtailed and forced to deal with the individuals as real people with their own needs.

Or, to quote Jefferson on the subject:

"I never submitted the whole system of my opinions to the creed of any party of men whatever, in religion, in philosophy, in politics or in anything else, where I was capable of thinking for myself. Such an addiction is the last degradation of a free and moral agent. If I could not go to Heaven but with a party, I would not go there at all." - Thomas Jefferson

Or, Gandhi:

“In matters of conscience, the law of majority has no place.” Gandhi

[grizmaster]

61. Be careful what you pretend to be, because you are what you pretend to be.

my favorite Vonnegut quote


It doesn't matter what you think you are in your head, the world can only see you as you pretend to be


That self-actualizing navel-gazing stuff is hogwash. Better to spend your time acting in a way you pretend to be and acheiving imperfect good things than live in your own little personal lala land in the search to be "truly good" or "truly yourself" or whatever phrase is on the current self-help bestseller list.

As to this comment-

"We fully support aristocracy, capitalism, corporate domination, and consumerism, provided that they support our self-actualization and afford us the personal lifestyle choices we prefer."

I don't know what your smoking, but that statement has no connection to the way I act in this world.

[info being]

68. You think "the world" can truly see us?

I disagree. I believe a few individuals can truly understand who we are. I would say, be careful about worrying about how "the world" sees you.

[grizmaster]

73. maybe my choice of words was vague

The point of the quote is that no matter what you believe you are, the only way people will judge you is by what they perceive, right or wrong.

The book Mother Night that the quote is from has a main character that during WWII becomes a multi-layered spy/counter-spy (think we know that they know that we know that they know....). After the war both sides consider him to be a traitor even though he was forced into his actions by both sides unwillingly.

So here is a guy who in his head had chosen to be a spy for neither side but was considered an enemy spy by both sides afterwords. The whole story revolves around reconciling to himself that he can hardly be shocked that no matter what goes on in your head you will be thought of as what you pretend to be.

I don't convey it nearly as well as Vonnegut does himself and if you've never read Mother Night I think you'll find it an eye-opener.

Oh, and your comment-

"I believe a few individuals can truly understand who we are"

I don't believe anyone can understand who you perceive yourself to be. But are you so sure their judgments bear less validity than your own self-evaluation?

[seabeyond]

74. you so sure their judgments bear less validity than your own self-evaluation?

a very simple.... yes

[grizmaster]

78. ever have someone tell you they know you better than you know yourself?

well sometimes they're right.

Not about all of you, but certainly about certain aspects. If they were ever right once when you were wrong about yourself then their judgment in that case was more valid than your judgment.

[info being]

86. You're talking about *relationships*

Very different from caring about how "the world", or "the collective mass" sees you. I believe, indeed, that we need the kinds of relationships you describe in order to develope your authentic selves.

[Lilith Velkor]

88. They have been invariably wrong in my case

People who use that phrase tend to be very egotistical and prone to harboring delusional fantasies about others. YMMV.

[grizmaster]

97. you've always been right about yourself

and everybody else has always been wrong?


hmmm... interesting. Who is the one again that is egotistical and prone to delusions?

To be possessed of such perspicacity must be quite a burden on you.

[info being]

98. interesting to watch you challenge her to conformity while knowing nothing

You have actually proven her point about how unlikely it is for others to understand us. You haven't even tried.

[grizmaster]

157. never tried to prove whether it's unlikely or likely

just pointing out that an outside opinion can be relevant and can be accurate, just as your opinion of yourself can be inaccurate and in some cases nearly irrelevant. And ultimately everyone has to deal with the way the world sees them unless they're a hermit. The fact that that judgment may be erroneous is part of Vonnegut's point. How do you deal with it when your perception of self differs from the way others see you? And I mean in terms of taking concrete action, not internal whining about the unfairness of it all.

And much of this has strayed from Vonnegut's point which I was trying make. Let me just say I'm no Kurt Vonnegut, so try reading Mother Night. You'll find his case infuriatingly difficult to brush aside.

[Lilith Velkor]

109. Being right about myself is actually not that difficult

In fact, I'm disqualified from the annual "Test your knowledge of Lilith Velkor" contest because I got all the answers right for ten years in a row and they wanted to give the neighbors a chance to win the Grand Prize. (I still get a free chicken, though. Yay, chicken! :bounce:)

So yeah, that knowledge is pretty easy-breezy. Being right all along about Iraq...not so much. :nuke:

[info being]

85. I completely agree with you :-)

The point is we really shouldn't care about their judgements. We should take what we need from "the collective" in order to support our authentic selves and our quality of life. We should not serve the masses and care at all what they think of us. They will never understand. Period.

[seabeyond]

107. or they will in time as they walk their journey, it is everyones opportunity

i learned a long time ago, how a person can create me is theirs to live, while i may be living the total opposite of what they decide for me. i once had someone on a board go around critiquing everyone. telling them who they were. good guy. full of himself but a good person. and then me.... watch for me. i am pure evil. i am darkness.

i was stunned, shocked then i giggled. here i sit in lite, peace, serenity, love, grace..... children and husband we all love each other. we take care of one another. my extended family and friends. no chaos. people walk in my space and feel...... peace. and this person in his mind created me as darkness. when he looks my way that is what he sees. that is his to experience. but, it is not what i experience. it is a truth for him. it is not a truth for me.

i dont chose to do that for other people, because i know inevitably i will be wrong. it isnt my place, it isnt my job and i will simply be wrong. i will do me,... that is all i am responsible for. and i can do me better than anyone else. i will trust others to do themselves. not making them powerless, or taking away their power, but allowing them to be empowered, as i insist with me.

[madmusic]

63. On second reading...

Change "liberalism" to "conservatism" and "self-actualization" to "faith" and there's something to it.

What does that mean? Not sure, but centrists often argue the Left has more in common with the Right than there are differences.

What does that mean? Not sure, and it may not apply here.

There is something to be said for the concept that those in power and affluence do prefer the status quo, though. As much as we call for change, it can be and is a scary proposition.

[Brazenly Liberal]

65. By all means, feel free to apply that analysis to yourself.

If you think you're a self-serving hypocrite, who am I to argue with you? Applying it to everyone, though, is ridiculous. Thanks for asking, but no, I am not pretending.

[sui generis]

93. thought experiment

just because you try on a jacket does not make you a jacket. It was presented for discussion, not judgement.

How childish the responses on this thread are. And disappointing. Now that jacket fits.

[DireStrike]

124. He provided a solid answer

"No, I'm not pretending."

You're arguing with it. Why? You don't know how much time or effort he spent considering it. Physician, heal thyself!

And yes, I'll look at my own responses too.

[sui generis]

160. durrrr?

I am superior. That's the answer.

Or at least that's what I believe and that is why I persist. This truth does not hurt. I didn't take the statement in whole but considered the parts. My judgement of the performance here was of the abundant posturing that simply was not required here.

[seabeyond]

162. because people see the whole of the post, rather than break it down

as you did,... you suggest they must feel superior, that truth hurts, abundant posturing that shouldnt exist?

kinda like the three blind men all touching different parts of an elephant and saying theirs is the only way to interpret what they feel.

maybe people are not feeling superior, ergo.... the initial rejection of the article. what a concept to accuse them of exactly what they reject in the article in the first place, as you admit you are looking at the article differently than others. a little bit of non truth in interpretation? just as the article is giving us? a little bit of superiority on your part? because you look at the article from a different angle than the majority? isnt that exactly what the article is talking about?

[sui generis]

165. well my irritation

was the speediness with which "open minded" people attacked the presenter rather than the article.

And I'm still irritated for the record. And I don't see anything wrong with viewing oneself as "superior" - humility, false or otherwise, is not a value I hold very highly.

I think life is more complicated than how we view ourselves, so whatever temporal tag we stick on ourselves, tongue in cheek or otherwise, is irrelevant.

No, I do not condone attacking the reporter instead of the news. This is a place where we should feel free to try on ideas to see if they fit, to reject them if they don't, but we should stop short of burning heretics who dared to discuss. Stop short of calling people heretics who dare to discuss.

[seabeyond]

166. honestly i heard people going after what was written.

so i dont see the argument you present. i dont feel superior but i do allow you to chose anything you desire. your right. i can hang with that. i tried humble and never felt comforatble in that, buti dont see superior as the opposite of humble. people disagreed with what the op presented us to review. those that agreed with the op then proceeded to tell us who we are, wht we think regardless of us saying that isnt true. the people that agreed with the poster mounted a superior attitude and defense and began to iject conversation thru that attitude.... where as the people that are accused of this superiority.... have not challenged you all on who you are, and what you think regardless of what you say. putting words in your mouth.

kinda a karma, yin yang, universal kinda thing. what we are accused of is exactly the behavior i am seing from those that accuse us of it.

telling me about holding a mirror up.... as that is exactly what is happening to those defending this article

it really has become comical.

and as far as tags and all.... that is what so many on this board has been rejecting, that the op was tryng to pin on us. all of this seems a waste of time in judgment where it isnt warranted. to discuss the individual efforts are wonderful.... to diss and make less others,... a waste of time, non productive and not my intent or goal in life.

[sui generis]

169. well I didn't see you doing it, but it's in this thread in spades

I just felt compelled to share my gestalt on the thread - because of course I am superior to all of this. :P

And I am unanimous in that.

Positively saintly. :rofl:

Yeah - many here are taking it too seriously.

[seabeyond]

184. cute, cute .... cute..... lol n/t

[seabeyond]

168. my point. this article creates a LOT of people in a way they are NOT

why would one chose to see people in the worst possible way, especialy seeing how people say it isnt true,.. why would someone chose that? it is like the right saying all democrats are not christian. evil, dark, perverted people. when it is not true. yet they hold onto that regardless of the facts presented to them that we are not a dark evil people because that is how they want to see us.

why would you chose and insist on seeing people in the worst possible way? what do you gain from that?

[sui generis]

170. was that rhetorical or addressing me?

got confused.

It's not - you're generalizing yourself.

To reject it on whole means that you won't even consider that "some christians might be evil", as an example.

I think there is knowledge to be gained from thoughtful consideration of an idea, i.e. "trying it on" and then seeing what merit or lack of merit applies to what we know of ourselves or can claim for others.

Yes, I do believe some of us are quite full of ourselves, including myself, often. Does that take away from what we achieve? Not at all. So my point is, what does it matter?

It's not about polar views in my book - worst and best and good and evil and humble and superior and etc. I am one of the most mercurial people I know - I couldn't wear any of these for more than about five minutes, and can certainly wear all of them at least some of the time. Why would I then take offense at a mental exercise?

[seabeyond]

185. mercurial

quick and changable in character.....

i love when people make me look up words in my dictionary. just a blast to me. isnt that a fun and interesting (always interesting) way to be. as long as others are flexible, fun for us too. i can easily see it thru you post over time and only on this thread.

i tend to see myself in all people, all things...
and in no one.

thanks for the pause and something to think about

[Name removed]

76. Deleted message

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

[atommom]

80. That's a pretty accurate description of our society, I'm sorry to say. nt

[blindpig]

81. Why I posted this

Well, it did strike a nerve, didn't it? Yes, I do agree with the writer and to be sure, my glass house is not intact. It is far too easy to get caught up in our passions, hot button issues, personal considerations. Way to easy to confuse what we might want and what is really needed. But in the end it's not about what we as individuals want but rather what people need, justice, fairness, peace.

[omega minimo]

90. The issue is valid but this was written by a Luntz or Rove clone to stigmatize, not reflect.

[w4rma]

106. If you really believe what you wrote then your glass house is shattered to pieces.

You should really quit trying to believe you are speaking for everyone.

[seabeyond]

108. thank you for your reply, but no i dont think the

article is reflective of what you are saying. to throw an article like that out, and when people rebuff it, i do not think is a simple matter of striking a nerve. whereas listening to other people who are better at articulating the meaning of the op or your post here, no nerve struck and can easily agree. so ..... i am ready. i am down with good for the whole.... i do it well. lets

[Warren DeMontague]

115. I think whoever wrote this needs to get off the campus and into the real world.

Sounds like the kind of bullshit my Naderite friends spew.

[Dastard Stepchild]

84. The problem, if you will,

Is that we live in a value-laden society and seem to have a hard time acknowledging the myriad of ways in which these individual and collective values influence every single little thing we do.

I have my opinion and you have yours. If we do not agree, we will always be locked in struggle. Except now please, if you will, magnify this to the level of a nation, and then we can begin to understand why we always seem to be taking three steps forward, two steps back, four steps to the left, two steps to the right, and then one jump into the air.

Consensus may be a lovely goal, but not terribly realistic. At best, we'll agree for just long enough to change one little thing. That others will then disagree with. That will then mobilize those to attempt consensus against our idea. And on, and on, and on like a social policy mobius strip.

[leftupnorth]

92. Someone hand the OP a mirror and a book on psychology bookmarked

on the section entitled "projection"

[JNelson6563]

100. I try to be honest

I've been a member of the "downtrodden" as you say. I know what it's like. I also know that if not for generous support from family along the way (that many do NOT get) we'd have never made it out. That is why I work in politics as I do. I can't possibly help everyone personally so the next best thing (IMHO) is to try to work through politics to make it better for all if I can. For all those parents who struggle to make the bills, have day care, get by...and all those seniors who don't have food or medicine or heat....and the kids who go to substandard schools with no possibility of college......if not for a lucky break or two I'd still be any one of these.

I don't have much more than I need though so I don't have much to feel guilty about and, subsequently, lie to myself about. Not to say your idea doesn't have merit, I think it certainly does and applies to more than would care to admit it.

Julie

[bvar22]

102. I would have no objection to the OP.....

...if it was written in the first person singular.

[kestrel91316]

110. Obvious RW propaganda written to make the Left look like

the proverbial elitists.

LINK??? Or maybe you wrote it yourself????

[Warren DeMontague]

114. I dunno, man. This sounds sincere. I mean, look at the complete inability

to enunciate a clear point, even a phony one- instead, drowning the reader in gibberish.

I fear whoever wrote this was doin' it for real.

[Sapphire Blue]

126. Google "much pretending throughout the progressive and liberal community" for a link...

... to a post by 'mberst' on another forum.

[ReadTomPaine]

215. FYI this person was a poster here as well...

They have an odd profile here now (0 Posts?), but I recall reading posts from an MBerst and remember well this person being an active member of DU.

Interesting find, Sapphire.

[Warren DeMontague]

112. This person seems to be railing against what he views as "self-serving behavior"

Meanwhile, it's one of the most rambling, self-indulgent loads of tripe I've come across in ages.

[Usrename]

173. ROFLMAO!

you're going after the irony with this post, right? I don't think anybody gets it..

:rofl:

[kestrel91316]

113. This reminds me of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion"

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

Deliberate, hateful propaganda designed to put Jews in a bad light.

Now they are doing it to liberals.

Are the camps next??

[SoCalDem]

116. "Found" on the internet(s)? Link?? 4 paragraph rule?

Which are "your" comments? which came from the "found" piece? found where?

[Sapphire Blue]

127. See post #126

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

118. So, blindpig, are YOU 'pretending' to be something you are not? Bears pondering...

[DireStrike]

119. Nope, no pretending here

If I believed all of that stuff I certainly would have to. I don't know anybody who really believes (or even acts as if they do) everything you've written. Maybe a few pieces, maybe a lot... but all of it? I got about halfway through before my bullshit detector started going off. The points are not complementary at all. I'm sure there's some contradiction in there, but at the very least none of them require or even suggest the others. It's not my system of beliefs... or even a particularly coherent one. I'm sure mine is not either. I'm not perfect.

If you feel false to yourself, rethink your beliefs and speak openly about it as your opinion instead of "our" opinion. We can help. DU still does that occasionally.

[Lex]

125. Newt Gingrinch, is that you?

Sounds like you.

[Dervill Crow]

128. What a bunch of bullshit. Of course that's just my personal opinion.

Are you being sarcastic?

I'm not polite, talented, beautiful, intelligent, calm, successful, or clever. I am somewhat enlightened over what I was 30 years ago, purely through the benefit of having 30 years' worth more experiences.

All I want is for my kids to have the chances my parents had to be secure that they could raise a family on ONE income, unlike the four that it has taken me and my husband some years, and to not go up to their eyeballs in debt doing so. A day's pay for a day's work.

I would like to see bad guys punished rather than honored. My definition of bad guy is pretty straightforward: People who break the law. People who fail to perform their jobs adequately and whose incompetence results in others' loss of life or property.

I think that is what is called social justice. Nothing more, nothing less.

This rant may or may not have anything to do with the OP, but it's been a pissy day and I'm in a pissy mood, and that is my first gut reaction and it felt good to put it in text form. :rant:

[mentalsolstice]

129. It's all about dignity IMHO

Yes certain jobs pay more, and some of us live in better houses, drive nicer cars, wear designer clothes, and eat out at better restaurants. I won't apologize that I've had the opportunity somewhat to experience all of the above. However, I respect the role in our society the working class plays. Every person who picks up my garbage, serves me food in a restaurant, helps me with a purchase, etc., deserves the same level of human dignity as I do. This means a certain security in terms of health, safety and welfare. No person in our society should have to choose food over necessary medical treatment, a roof over their head over shoes for their kid, etc. Nor should anyone be prohibited from loving another person.

This is America, after all!

[LeftHander]

130. This is correct. We are simply missing new rules....

We all want to believe that our individual beliefs are the best way.

But what is the underlying fundemental basis for these beliefs?

The OP indicates that it is selfishness...and I agree with that.

An America filled with hybrid powered vehicles is still an America based on a car centric consumer culture.

We will still "want" all the goodies our technological society offers. So yes the OP is correct. We are pretending at what it takes to really make a difference in our future and are still stuck on the comfort and desires we have in this mortal coil we call life.

What the OP is trying to get us to understand is that it is not simply to cast out those who do not believe the same as we do, but it is more to make understanding possible. We do want to be understanding, we do want to gentle we do want peace and prosperity, who wouldn't. The trick is we have to convince people that those things do not come without personal sacrifice. We have to give up our opulant, outrageous lifestyle and adopt and new relationship with the earth and our fellow citizens.

As we go forward I hope we can figure out and agree on the rules that will make life better for all humanity, all colors, all faiths and all the flora and fauna of this beautiful earth.



I saw this image on Al Gore's movie the other day. It was on my wall for years in my youth and is the wallpaper on my work computer

We will come learn that Gods and Goddesses have a place in our culture and in the definition of our morality. we also will understand that for every individual comfort we enjoy someone is suffering because of that and if we can ease the suffering of others and give up some of our selfish desires we can then all begin to move to a more universally peaceful and proseperous planet free of the judgement and conflict we now suffer.

It is our future. I hope we can all start to find ways to embrace it.

[readmoreoften]

131. What's with all the references to "lifestyle choices"? Here we go again.

Is the writer talking about gay rights and abortion or latte drinking and the right to wear white in the winter? Why isn't this clear? Why are "lifestyle choices" somehow antithetical to class resistance? This sounds like the same old bullshit in abstract clothing.

I agree that elements of postmodernism have lead to an acceptance of even the most intolerable aspects of capitalism, or at least an aura of ignorance about class issues. But this commentary is a caricature, and a caricature that demonizes those progressives who are concerned with "lifestyle choices". Now if this simply means that progressives are just as materialistic as their conservative enemies, well, I beg to differ. But if they are talking about other "lifestyle choices" like the "choice" of being gay (no I'm not saying it's a choice) or the "choice" of abortion then the writer is de-politicizing the health and safety of a great many bodies in America and abroad.

I don't know many progressives who don't care about class struggle. I do know many DLC Democrats who fit that description, but not many progressives.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

133. This whole post is a repost from "mberst" on "progressiveindependent.com":

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=202&topic_id=601#12

Post #12 by mberst

[uppityperson]

134. yup.

beware, this was posted in #48 and got deleted. I have no idea why since all it did was give this link.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

135. Maybe links to that site are banned, although I wouldn't know why since I've never heard of it.

And, people link fr.com here all the time.

[Greyhound]

151. Don't know the background but it is one of the sites "that must not be linked"

for some reason.

[Vidar]

202. Indeed PI & Conservative Underground are the dreaded sites

which shall not be named. It's in the rules somewhere.

[Sapphire Blue]

203. oops... you just named them.

[crispini]

142. ah - HA. Sly, very sly.

Oh, what a sneaky little begger the OP is. "Here, let me post this nice piece of codswallop that somebody is doubtless going to google to find the source, and when they follow the trail to its inception, they are going to find this thread bashing DU and Will Pitt."

That's sneaky internet troll-dom, if you ask me, and not worthy of any kind of serious response.

[ReadTomPaine]

216. MBerst used to post on DU as well.

Here's the profile, and "0 posts" entry is incorrect. I used to see this person post quite a bit.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=user_profiles&u_id=132116

[crispini]

136. I am a liberal, and I think this is bullshit.

I was going to pick it apart line by line, but what's the point? Maybe I will later if I'm bored. This sounds like a bad Rush Limbaugh take on progressive values. I think George Lakoff sums up what *I* think our shared progressive values are.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

137. Well since "blindpig" has posted this flamebait they have not returned to

participate in the festivities.

I wonder if they, too, are "pretending".

[CJCRANE]

138. No.

[CJCRANE]

140. Two words - Foley, Haggard.

Who are the real pretenders, LW or RW?

You decide.

[seaglass]

141. Oh wait - I really have the right answer. mberst was talking about himself

not everyone else.

No worries.

edited to remove a message that wasn't very nice.

[crispini]

143. Actually, if you read the thread in the original context,

you'll notice that mberst is slyly talking about Will Pitt.

Which "blindpig" has oh-so-innocently :eyes: reposted over here so we could all follow the trail to its inception and enjoy their criticism of DU to the fullest. :eyes:

That's skeevy internet trolling tricks if you ask me. I no longer think the OP is worthy of any serious discussion.

[seaglass]

152. Yes, I did see that. The amazing thing is that they don't

understand that this is about them. If only us poor DUer sheeple possessed their wisdom the world would be such a better place. Freakin hilarious.:eyes:

[meganmonkey]

145. Truth hurts

:thumbsup:

[seaglass]

150. You must be in a lot of pain. n/t

[meganmonkey]

163. It's hard not to be...

when so much of the world is suffering as a result of the actions of our government. When so few of us (myself included) are doing nearly enough to stop it from happening. When so few of us are willing to confront the reality that our lifestyles are directly impacting a lower quality of life among innocent faceless, nameless people thousands of miles away.

But my 'pain' is nothing but lame self-pity when compared to the real suffering of people who wake up not knowing where their next meal is coming from, whether their house will be turned to rubble by a foreign bomb or a bulldozer, etc. So I won't wallow in it.

Facing the truth and seeking real solutions seems to me to be more productive than relying on delusions and hoping for a band-aid. The problems go too deep to pretend anymore.

[DancingBear]

153. No! He's not talking about us!!

We're good and clean and free and righteous and pure and totally right - and if you don't think so you suck!

Don't make us look in the mirror.

Besides, we wrote letters to Congress yesterday, AND sent MoveOn some money.

The guy down the street just lost his job and is raiding his meager retirement money to keep his house, but he'll feel better when I tell him that we're gonna raise the minimum wage!

Gotta run - can't wait to see what happens on Desperate Housewives!!!

:thumbsup:

(Oh, and thanks for "getting it" - I knew you would. Introspection is a wonderful tool - too bad so few here use it.)

[CJCRANE]

164. It's not a mirror.

It seems to me that the OP is about someone looking in from the outside, just like the posters on progressiveindependant seem fascinated by what goes on at DU.

It's a stylized view of liberals by someone who is perhaps envious for some reason and doesn't really understand what he's looking at.

[DancingBear]

167. Hardly

You are a million miles off base, the GPS system is broken, and the toilets stopped working yesterday.

Other than that...


Here's a hint to help you out, though - take "envy" out and substitute the phrase "completely understands what he's looking at." You see, in order to correctly view the forest you need to step back from the trees. Many of us used to live way back in those trees. Many still do.

No one is complaining about the beauty of the forest.

As for the whole fascination thing, just sit back and when the train is about to crash remember to jump off.

Into the clearing, of course. The whole tree thing can be a bitch if you don't manage it correctly.

Just don't say we didn't warn you.

[CJCRANE]

172. Ok

let's look at this phrase "The general public does not realize that we are the better people" in relation to the idea of "liberals and Democrats" (in the OP).

In case you hadn't noticed "liberals and Democrats" make up approx 50% of the population so they are part of the "general public", not separate from it.

The OP could be accurate in describing a particular person or even the impression he has of certain DUers or a subset of the academic elite somewhere or other defined subgroups. But as a broad generalization of "liberals and Democrats" it doesn't work.

[seaglass]

177. Do you realize how superior you sound? n/t

[Jcrowley]

147. At the end of the day

what matters is not one's "choices", 90% of the planet have no such things, or what one's ideology is but rather how much of the world one colonizes (steals) with one's existence. If you are in the West you are by default involved in much banditry and perhaps what one can do is live with a conscious and minimize the damage. It is important that we recognize this and reflect upon our roles personally and collectively if that is at all possible it what is an extraordinarily self-absorbed culture.

The ensuing generations will care little for any matters other than how clean is the water and is the soil arable. Is the air breathable? That's what they will want to know. All of the self indulgent questions and actions based upon some mythical 'shibboleth of choice' or imperious attitude is merely shadow-boxing in the culture bubble. Unfortunately there is alot of this about.

[nam78_two]

209. Well said as always/nt

[mhatrw]

148. Um, no.

Is that Deepak Chopra or something?

[BlueEyedSon]

158. wft?

[JVS]

211. what fuck the?

[ComerPerro]

171. I think you're full of shit

[lumberjack_jeff]

175. I find more to agree with than disagree.

We believe that we must “be the change we wish to see,” and the change we wish to see is more people like us: polite, talented, beautiful, intelligent, calm, successful, clever, enlightened. So we merely need to be ourselves, focus on ourselves, and serve ourselves. Those who cannot or will not become like us need to back down and get out of the way.

As someone who frequently argues that the impact of immigration on working americans requires us to intervene on american workers behalf (even if it seems uncharitable to the immigrant workers), this rings true.

As someone who frequently argues that the fact that 3 out of 5 college students are women, and that all too many students, for a variety of reasons, don't put their education to economic use implies that perhaps our system of allocating finite education resources to kids is inequitable and inefficient, this rings true.

As someone who frequently argues, (at least until the person I'm discussing the concept with storms off amid accusations of freeperhood and racism) that affirmative action is problematic and that equality is difficult to achieve when one kind of racism is replaced with another, this rings true.

The money quote:
Class analysis, and the struggles of working class people against tyranny have no place in modern society. They are obsolete and passe, and only something that we read about or see in movies. Romantic as those stories are, they are no substitute for hard-headed practical reality, whether we like it or not. This is a matter of being a mentally healthy, modern, well-adjusted adult in society. None of the lessons from history apply, because things are different now. Only strange maladjusted people are attracted to obsolete political ideas. They are all obviously losers, and are a great danger, almost as much of a danger as the Republicans are.

When I get in the biggest trouble here is when I argue for working class people. Nascar dads are to be ridiculed, not helped.

However, unlike the OP, I don't see the phenomenon as based in self-interest.

[kentuck]

178. No. I'm pretending that Bush and the neo-cons are building a better world

By your deeds you will be known - not by what you say or what propaganda you might read..

[Jim Warren]

182. Is there a question here?

Forget the lib/con, dem/pub divisive bullshit and try these:

Do we in America live in a bubble?
Do we live in a trance of every-day-ness?
Is almost everything we know wrong?
Has almost everything we have been taught a lie?

People I know bitch about big-box retail and still shop WMart.
People I know talk human rights and still hire undocumented labor because it's cheaper.
People I know whine about the environment but above all preserve their
mode of excessive mobility.

[omega minimo]

187. Maybe you need new friends

IMHO the OP is bogus.

However, the subject of our choices and spending power is important. Some of us pay attention to it and avoid being hypocritical.


"So we pretend that introducing "fairness" rules and regimens into our personal life nullifies all of the things we do to attain and preserve the spot we have clawed our way to in society."

Not all of us "claw." :hi:

[Jim Warren]

189. No, not friends dear

but many people I know, colleagues actually, around academia.

I think there is something to it, hypocrisy knows no political party.

[omega minimo]

190. neither does Corporatocracy

[Marnieworld]

192. Who knew Ayn Rand was still writing?

Wow. This author is a piece of work. Nothing very "liberal" about the "we" he/she describes. This is the kind of thinking that leaves grandmas to drown in their attics or children to be washed away by flood waters.

It shouldn't be about every man for himself. America should be about all of us.

[Katzenjammer]

194. What an amazing litmus test this thread is. I am impressed (nt)

[Sapere aude]

197. Well, good. Now we all have our cozy pigeon hole to live in.

[Rosemary2205]

200. I feel for you.

One thing I can say is if you are in your "we" then I hope you do something about it because the type of person you described isn't a very nice person.

[LSK]

201. thats a red herring if I ever saw one

Mis-interpret and re-define what liberals are and then attack them.

Red herring.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

206. Well, since the OP has never returned to address this flamebait, one can only guess

what their, ahem, attentions were.

[NuttyFluffers]

208. i often pretend to be an avocado...

i'm filled with creamy yellow and green flesh, high on healthy fats and vitamins, and a big plump seed in the center. my avocado senses also tell me this is a fantastic post of mental gymnastics, emotional masturbation, and self-flagellation through projection. i'm very perceptive for a fruit.
:7

[JVS]

210. Brilliant!

:toast:

[earth mom]

212. Been meaning to post in this thread...

I'd say many around here are in denial thinking they are good dems while they buy their overpriced playstation 3s or add to their stock portfolio...

It needed to be said and thank you for posting it. :thumbsup:

[Dora]

213. Please explain how those actions makes someone not a "good dem"

I don't understand. My mother owns various stocks - I think she's a good Democrat. She votes, she teaches (for 35 years so far), she mentors, and she helps others in need. How does owning stocks make her a bad Democrat?

[riskgamble]

214. I have a personality test for you.

http://personality.selfip.com

This is a free personality test.
You can check out your personality types based on the following three personality theories.

1. Machiavellianism.
2. Authoritarian personality.
3. Risk Orientation.

Feel free to invite your friends to this test.
Thanks.