I sense a disturbance in the force.

[benburch]

Friends,

I have noted recently here on DU a marked increase in the level of hostility towards people who express opinions counter to the prevailing opinions here. I've also notices the flourishing of some really insane conspiracy theories (that make my personal beliefs in a Conspiracy look tame) and also of RW opinions dressed up as some sort of Democratic thought. My poll is an attempt to see what others here think about my observations.

[Kellanved]

1. For once, we are in agreement

Especially the anti-immigration thing was - to say the least - unsettling.

The conspiracy theories were always on DU, but they seem to be more visible recently. This may have to do with GD becoming the Lounge in many regards; many threads are posted in the GDs, just to make them visible on *atest.

[marmar]

2. There can be a lot of hostility...

But, quite honestly, I think calling the conspiracy theories "really insane" is kinda hostile. You don't have to agree with them, but why be so judgemental?

[benburch]

3. I call them as I see them.

Just one of my opinions that is counter to the prevailing opinions.

[LostinVA]

6. I agree -- some posters are dressing stuff up and toeing a fine

line, just to get some rather... unsavory and unprogressive views across. And, I don;'rt think it's someone just with a different POV than mine -- I often disagree with people on here, but it's a disagreement in degrees, not having someone post REALLY RW stuff and then screaming I'm wrong, etc. I have put more people on Ignore this past 10 days than I have in 18 months. If I wanted to here anti-victim and John Birch rhetoric, I'd listen to Fox.

(ie disagreeing with Lynnesin about registering for Sudaphed isn't the same as disagreeing with someone calling the Duke rape victim a con artist prostitute who likes rough sex... and is making false rape allegations because that's what alot of women do, and she's just a Tawna Brawley, and if you don't agree that she's a liar and skank then you're a fascist unAmerican).

[TahitiNut]

31. Well, there's "innocent until proven guilty" and there's ...

I guess everyone makes choices. :shrug:

[acmejack]

4. Ok, who are you calling a crazy conspirator?

and I am not hostile! I dare you come over here and say that, freeper punk...

honestly, I think it's a combination of everyone freaking out over I ran and so many folks.

[Lochloosa]

5. extreme stress of seeing WW-III

IMO

[gratuitous]

7. I voted you a nutcase

Because no one else had done so, and that just seemed wrong to me.

Nutcase!

[benburch]

13. And in many way, I am!

I'm a nutcase to think that this country can be saved, for example.

[TheFarseer]

8. There's alot new people and people in general here

there are just going to be alot of different opinions. Sometimes a new person comes in and wants to challenge something that the forum has already "decided" on and that can get ugly. Then you throw in non-partisan issues like immigration and it's going to cause some chaos. Everytime you see something you don't agree with, it doesn't mean that poster is a RWer.

[TheBaldyMan]

9. the spate of 'everbody panic' threads is nothing new, there have been

trolls since the beginning of the internet never mind the web. I have my own opinion of some posters and the views expressed and don't want to expand on my thoughts because this post would rapidly become a rant.

Is it unknown for RW, racist and/or libertarian trolls to sustain attempts at distracting people who could be discussing something worthhile in a measured manner, instead of wasting time on the drivel that passes for argument? I think it is almost certain they do.

[Radio_Guy]

10. insane conspiracy theories ???

"I've also notices the flourishing of some really insane conspiracy theories"

My problem is the name calling. Just because someone believes something different than you does not give you the right to call them "insane." I don't agree with some of your posted practices, but I have never slung mud in your direction. So let's tone down the use of some words like "insane."

[benburch]

12. "Insane"

Believing the planes hitting the WTC were holograms using alien technology from Area 51. That is insane by any definition. Just an example.

[Radio_Guy]

16. OK, those are a bit extreme

But not necessarily insane. Many (not specifically you) have called the controlled demolition of the WTC an "insane conspiracy theory." There is too much evidence of that to ignore it.

[benburch]

20. Repectfully, I disagree with that.

Not only do I understand the physics involved in the failure, but I've worked doing explosive demolition, and I see nothing that requires or suggest that any bombs were used to bring down any of those buildings. Just not needed at all. And ALSO not needed to hang George Bush for what happened, either! It does not improve our case against him one iota, and in fact opens us to ridicule by those who can see, as I do, that there clearly were no explosives.

George Bush conspired to provoke a terrorist attack in this country. Then he conspired to make the federal law enforcement mechanisms ignore the attack plot when it developed. Then he siezed upon the attack he fostered for his own fascistic political advantage, using it to enact his own version of The Third Reich's "Enabling Act", using it to line the pockets of his cronies, and making it the excuse to start a war to improve his chances of re-election in 2004.

In what way would that be improved if we had he himself planting charges in the WTC?

Answer; Not at all. It is enough to hang him for, and should we prevail and take power back from him, I mean to see him legally tried, convicted, sentenced and hanged on that basis.

[Radio_Guy]

25. To strengthen his case

"In what way would that be improved if we had he himself planting charges in the WTC?"

Because public opinion to go to war would not have been as strong if the towers had not come down.

But I will agree to disagree. Peace.

[benburch]

27. But they did come down...

...and no explosives were required.

Peace.

[entanglement]

11. There are quite a few people here who defy classification

They are right wing on matters of race,nationality and immigration and they nearly always find some external agent to blame for America's economic woes (illegals, China, Saudi, foreigners of any kind). However, they are liberal on other social matters (equal rights for Gays and women), they oppose the Iraq War and support the rights of American workers.

[lonestarnot]

14. Just a nutcase who likes butter.

[Mr_Spock]

15. Mmmmmm, butter!

It's especially good on popcorn, no? :popcorn:

[lonestarnot]

28. mmmmmmm

:popcorn:

[benburch]

40. I prefer kettle corn...

[seemslikeadream]

17. I would prefer that name calling

and denigrating other posters for their opinions and beliefs not continue. All intelligent people here have the opportunity to debunk any theories they are inclined to challenge. And that would be of benefit to all, to have a free and open discussion of any topic. Cenorship is not pretty, of all people here benburch I would think you agree with that.

Jah bless

[benburch]

23. I'm not calling names!

I'm saying that the theories are insane.

Not the people who believe them.

There is a large difference.

I know some otherwise quite sane people who believe some insane things.

Some of them even believe that a fellow was nailed to a cross, had a spear shoved through his heart, lay dead in a tomb for two days, and then got up and walked around...

[lonestarnot]

29. but I like name calling ie bushitler, red rover, red rummy!

so weave me awone!:*

[MamaBear]

18. I voted for the "extreme stress" option, to be nice

I'm sometimes amazed not so much at the seemingly (to me) extreme positions people hold, but the passion they're willing to spend on these positions.

If I could honestly say I were totally reasonable about everything, I'd agree that this was insane.

I'd love to see IRV polls at DU, so I could have also expressed my true love: Butter.

:popcorn:

[Roland99]

19. Freepers lurking and attacking anyone differing from group-think?

[benburch]

21. I am quite certain there is a cadre of very careful freepers here.

They know exactly the rules and what will get one tombstoned here, and tread right up to that line repeatedly and obviously, and then claim that they are the wronged party when you call them on it.

In fact, some honest and very Progressive DUers have gotten themselves banned here for having the temerity to "go off" on these goons, something they try to provoke.

[Individualist]

22. Exactly.

Many of those careful regressives have racked up thousands of posts and have been here a while. They're making an effort to rid the forum of progressives and unfortunately are accomplishing that quite well.

[troubleinwinter]

41. YUP!!!!! And YUP to post #22, too.

[ContraBass Black]

24. I don't think the hostility, gang ups, call outs, or other fighting

Are new or different.

[Mr_Spock]

26. I don't either

Every once in a while somebody gets sucked into a flame-fest or two and feels like they've had an 'epiphany' of sorts. This is nothing new here. There have been several times when people thought that DU was going "off the deep end". Life goes on - and so does DU...

[Loneranger]

30. Agree With You

Agree with you 100% on your post. My son 1st Cav priviledges for posting were revoked by someone in DU for nothing more than posting in veterans topic discussion. My son is a disabled combat veteran of Viet Nam and totally against the Bush War and ways. Why his priviledges were revoked is no mystery to me but check out his posts in the section above that I mention. I see nothing that is right wing or in any way breaks the rules of DU. Also know another Viet Nam vet who got his posting priviledges revoked by DU for the same reason that I think my son and most likely I will soon recieve. Is this how the Democratic party wants to be portrayed? If so, I personally do not think it will do the Democratic Party much good to throw away veterans that vote and think the same way DU is suppose to be thinking. What is wrong with this picture, think a little favoritism to a certain person who comes off as a liberal Democrat but is really got DU fooled in a huge way.

[Robb]

32. Hmm...

Piling on posts with unpopular opinions, conspiracy theories, trolls...

Lack of a Dingbat option in the poll notwithstanding, I'd say it's par for the DU course. :shrug:

[Nederland]

33. DU has always been hostile

...to people that buck the conventional liberal view of things.

I've felt the brunt of that for years. Not that I'm complaining mind you. Heck, having people try to convince me I'm wrong is why I come here.

[lectrobyte]

34. I agree, to a point. I'm not sure if it's disruptors, or just my own

level of impatience, but I find myself hitting the ignore button a lot more lately.

[LSK]

35. seems a lot of people "fearing" Iran's nukes have low post counts

Just saying....

[benburch]

37. They do indeed. nt

[Obamarama]

36. Probably explains why I've been spending less time around here. eot

[Armstead]

38. When has there NOT been a disturbance in the Force?

Can't remember a time when DU was smooth running and harmonious.

The sense that things have chnged seems to strike different people at different times. I've had the feeling too at various points.

What would be unusual would be for there not to be posts about how things have gotten worse lately.

[SmokingJacket]

39. Actually, I don't know what you're talking about.

Of course, I've been working extra hours, and haven't been putting in my usual DU time.

Could you be more specific?