But I don't get why they have to pretend that they don't understand what we are about. There is a difference between someone coming on a board and saying, "OK, tell me what you guys are all about." And someone coming on a board and attacking the members for not being politically in-line with the poster's viewpoint or "beliefs". That I don't get.

I think we need to rename the board or something, so that at least these "visitors" can't claim "ignorance" (even though that might be the easiest claim for many of them to make). This whole thing with the 911 forum and what it has unearthed is revealing and maybe even valuable and I am not saying that anyone needs to be kept out. I just think a little less ambiguity would be a good thing.

Just a train-of-thought kind of thing...

its some of the phony passive aggressiveness I've seen. I mean, whats the deal? Is there some unseen third party they are trying to sway? By acting like they "agree" with us and then insisting on that basis that we have to defer to all of their reactionary bullshit

Is anyone honestly confused about where anyone else stands? Maybe they're trying to sow confusion on this point?

As the other way round. You wanted political purity and so now you have it and lots of it. Happy Holidays!

I just don't get it, Dave. Very mysterious. People disagreed with you about a few things. Why is that such a problem? No one tried to enforce "political purity" - whatever that is. Now you show up to toss a little insulting barb on this thread. WTF? What is going on?

So long as Bush was in office, that was the "glue" that held people together and many people seemed left-wing. It is truly stunning to see how few actually were. But we didn't change - they did. If you go back and read old posts you can see that - the people on the boards were sounding more left wing then they do now. Obama has had some sort of magnetic pull on people - pulling them to the right. Merely mentioning that in even the most benign way incites an incredible amount of hostility in return.

When we first came back, chlamor was recycling old posts we had made. Back in '05 those posts were well received. Now, the very same ideas - the same posts - were viciously attacked. Obviously the others changed somehow, not us. That is so clear, so unambigous and beyond doubt.

our fault, because...what? We disagree with someone? If all you Liberals are so thin-skinned that any disagreement causes you to short-circuit, how do you see that as someone else's fault?

You say,"Up!" and I say, "Oh no. You are all wrong there! I think it is definitely down! And I say that because of 'X,Y, and Z'!"
And instead of making your argument and showing your proofs, you get all personal and go on the attack. And you say we want "purity"! That is a laugh - it is exactly you Liberals who are so hungry for exclusivity that you go completely nuts at the very hint of disagreement. Find a mirror, Dave, and study it for a while...

Could it be that as long as Bush was in office people could comfortably flirt with being radical, with left wing ideas? It was safe. Left wing ideas were tolerated, could be considered, because they were in service to the cause of getting rid of Bush.

We are saying the same things now that we were saying 4 years ago here. Then we had a lot of support, now we are facing nothing but hostility. What caused people to be supportive of ideas then, and oppositional to them now to such an extreme fanatical degree? Were we useful then but a threat now? The only thing that changed was that Democrats were elected. Was that the only thing people were really interested in all along?

I think that during the Bush years people had a nice little comfortable niche, had clarity, felt a purpose, belonged and had an identity. Now the rug has been pulled out from under them. They don't want to be reminded of that, and we are reminding them.

One thing that is consistent: there is always a scapegoat to blame, to see as the cause of the problems, to use to scare people. It was Bush, and then Cheney, Rove, and then Palin and now Lieberman. For the CTers it is a shadowy cabal, "the illegitmate government," or the "PTB."

the status quo. They just did not (and do not) grasp what the "status quo" is. They think in terms of "a few bad apples" or a "criminal conspiracy" or "the Jews" or whatever. They are Liberals and Progressives and never, never think in terms of systems, classes, or that a Human Being means being Human. It is all a mythological story with them of which they themselves are the heroes. I don't think we will ever find common ground with them; I think that they are truly enemies...

Incidentally I've spent a lot of time with serious socialists and none of them talk or write anything like the PI folks on this forum. Nothing close. You guys sound like something out of a 1950s psyops manual so how do you expect anyone to take you seriously?

that the person to ask about "serious socialism" was Lupercalio .. eerie

and you've answered your own question

You see, these Liberals even think that all "socialists" must sound just alike and "socialists" cannot disagree with one another, because then one of them is not a "socialist"! I don't think these folks even listen to they are saying. Every word they speak makes a statement that they are looking for "purity" and exclusivity and "we are the leaders". They are the stars of their own little movie and they are pissed that no one comes to see it...

I am looking at this thread and I don't know what you mean. Give us a hint...

Are you open to new members who might not yet be at the same place you are?

OK, I'm going to say this because some of my fav DU posters are here, Two Americas, blindpig, OG, LWolf (not sure if she is still here) - you guys DID and DO some good over at DU but then there is a disconnect when you come over to PI - some of you just seem meaner and more defensive.

Yeah, I get that this is your home so you have every right to kick off your shoes and be yourselves and I even understand the anger - finally!!! but I think it makes you less effective. I don't know what your end goal is - do you want people to listen to you or not?

Should they agonize and wallow in despair? Pour on the hyperbole while ultimately shutting down any real discussion by ending with .. "but nothing can be done"

What is happening over at DU that is "effective" in any sense of the word?

Will people only listen to us if our end goal is to shit talk the Democratic Party -- while concluding that our best course of action is to kiss the DPs ass?

You said we did some good over there. What was the good? If we don't keep going further -- or if people we're talking to are setting their feet and refusing to move -- what is the significance of any good that was done?

Do you just want someplace where people can talk in circles endlessly and get their indignation off their chests .. without having to take the next step?

about improving the system we live in; rather we are talking about a completely different system. We are done with the capitalist "democracy" of the US empire. We are now trying to learn and teach ourselves to be able to analyze and critique thought processes and ideology and to promote class consciousness (at least that is what I am trying to do). So I think a lot of the anger and resentment we get from Liberals and Progressives is the fact that we are not talking about the same things and it upsets those people.
Liberals and Progressives want to anguish and lament over the "state" of America and how can we make this country better; I think that we, here, are past that kind of thinking and are looking to what's next.


ETA: We are not selling anything. Anyone is welcome to come and explore and learn, but if someone cannot handle adult criticism and serious analysis, then maybe this isn't the place for them. That is my take...

I can't speak for anyone else. I don't want people to listen to me. I want serious people, who have a Marxist class analysis, to help me understand the relationship of the reform struggles, I'm involved in, to class struggle and building mass working class movements. I want help in recognizing when the moment is right to agitate around a broad political program, instead of civil, human or workers rights issues. And I want help developing an approach to the propaganda that fuels that agitation.

I want those same people (those already here and those who may be here in the future) to help me identify Capital, as held by private equity firms in a globalized economy. And I want help in developing a strategy that makes public the human faces of Capital in order to fight it.

I don't even know where I am, let alone trying to be involved in a project to get new members to come to the same place.

How do you expect non-leftists to come here?

Know this: You are in need of AA - attitude adjustment.
We don't need to rename the board- that is a red-herring.
What we need is for posters to not get flamed for no reason whatsoever.

Your posts are a permanent record.
You cannot hide from them.

I appreciate your apology regarding the TIA avatar "negros".
That is a good first step.

Keep it up.

I can say with absolute certainty that none of the returning members came back with any hostility or agenda or plan - though we were all relentlessly accused of that.

By the way, I have no interest whatsoever in being popular, "effective," nor to be a better salesperson, to convert anyone to any beliefs, to "grow" anything nor to be "successful" at the expense of changing what I am saying - which is the same things I was saying 4 and 5 years ago. So the charges we keep hearing that we are "losers" in some way because we are not pleasing people or are "alienating potential friends and allies" with the implication that we are trying to be popular or sell something or convert people to something, are completely without merit in my view.

What is happening is that the handful of members who had gradually gained control over PI over the last couple of years were demanding a certain gentrified bourgeoisie set of standards, and are accustomed to being able to enforce that by whining to admins at the various boards and also accustomed to having admin support them when they form little red-baiting attack packs. I see those calls for "politeness" and Dale Carnegie salesmanship to be a covert way to suppress those who are expressing left wing ideas - I am certain of that now after recent events here.

Of course we are defensive. We have been under attack.

And yes we have "bad attitudes," if by that it is meant that we are not catering to gentrified upscale suburban notions of pleasantness, which in my opinion are not politically neutral, but rather are for the purpose of excluding any social commentary from the political discussion so as to protect those who claim to be on the political Left but are actually defending the ethics and morals and sensibilities of a decidedly reactionary class of people, the liberal and progressive "middle class" defenders of power, privilege and social status.

Before the Obama election, I was saying the exact same things and people were not going half psychotic about it nor were they attacking me. Now there is no attempt being made by the complainers to comprehend or respond to what I am saying here, rather people go immediately into attack mode.

The demands for "getting along" and "being polite" is bullshit - it means "please don't express opinions that offend me and that make me uncomfortable" and it has become impossible now to express left wing opinions without a whole bunch of liberals and progressives getting "offended" and outraged and upset.

With Bush out of office and Obama continuing everything that Bush did, the liberals and progressives no longer have a coherent framework to rally around, and no longer have "cover" and would have to fish or cut bait - continue to criticize social conditions from a left wing perspective, or reveal themselves to be on the reactionary and conservative side of all of the issues. Most are choosing the second course, and then scapegoating the leftists who point that out and claiming that the leftists are the cause of the trouble that they themselves are causing.

I don't care if every liberal and progressive in the country is "offended" - so be it. Better to know that than to not. I don't care if the whole clique of cool kids decide that we have bad attitudes and are to be shunned. In fact, if the liberals and progressives are going to choose the reactionary side then it is better that we know that and stop pretending that we are somehow friends and allies.

None of what I am saying here offends or upsets blue collar people, poor people, the working poor, everyday people, nor minority people. It is a very Small group, the educated intellectuals identifying as liberals and progressives who are all bent out of shape. That is not our fault, and we cannot possibly change in order to accomodate that.

Maybe liberalism is dead. It is in complete disarray now - just look at the chaos at Kos and and DU and Common Dreams and Alternet etc. Look at all of the people in meltdown.

I have no problem with those "who might not yet be at the same place" but that is being used at cover for people who never will be, and who are committed and motivated to crushing and silencing the Left.

"The same place" that people are not yet at is a matter of letting go of illusions and fantasies. That may be unpleasant and frightening for people, but there is nothing to be gained by going slowly rather than quickly and getting it over with. People demanding that we go slowly don't want to go at all, are digging in their heels, are desperately trying to cling to the way things were when it was comfortable and easy and clear, when one could "be" a liberal or a progressive and the world all made sense and was safe and secure.

Whether or not people are listening to us has nothing to do with us and everything to do with them. Besides, they most definitely are hanging on every word or they would not be so upset. It is what we are saying they do not want to hear, not anything wrong with the way we are saying it. Before Obama was elected the same people were listening and were not flipping out. Something changed, and it is not us.

It is so late, such a massive crisis is now upon us. Many are in effect saying "no, no, no I do not want to face it." They had hoped that electing Obama (even those who were critical of Obama are affected by this, and that is taking expression in people saying "Obama is not a 'real' liberal" and clinging to liberalism) would allow us to avoid the crisis.

Liberalism is now stripped naked in the face of the onslaught by Capitalism, it has no answers, no comprehensive analysis, no defense, no broad popular appeal, and since the election of Obama no hope and no future.

We here did not cause this massive shift, this meltdown of liberalism. Getting rid of us merely silences those pointing out that liberalism is collapsing, it does not prevent the collapse.

What we are hearing now is variations on "Palin Palin Plain!!!" or else "give Obama a chance these things take time" (those are the two sides to the same coin) or "we need better liberals in office" or else they are viciously attacking the Left, or else obsessing over conspiracy theories or personal choice lifestyle issues more than ever. Anything to avoid facing the truth - that liberalism is in collapse and disarray and people must now face reality and choose sides. Not because I say so, but because that is the point in the process at which we have now arrived. I could not sell people on that, persuade them, nor convert them to this as a new "belief," even if I wanted to. Reality is forcing them into this choice and it is a choice that they are afraid to face.

First of all, they are not yet leftists if they are somehow scared off by anything we are saying. They are now being forced to decide whether or not they are going to be leftists. No leftist would say "could you please be more polite and stop being so upset and aggressive. We need to win friends and influence people and stay courteous and gentrified about all of this." That is what people who are avoiding facing the decision about where they are going to stand - or are in outright opposition to the Left - are saying.

They are scared, yes. But they are not being scared by us. They are scared about what is happening. Obama has pulled the rug out from under them and the crisis is growing and they don't know where to turn, how to assess and process what is happening. We are made into the scapegoats because we are talking about what is happening, that's all. We are not causing liberalism to fail, we are merely pointing out that it is failing. If we stop doing that it will not save liberalism. (Liberalism acting to keep an illusion going that you could be both in support of the ruling class and be in opposition to it, that there were "good" rulers we could support, and "bad" ones we could oppose, a good faction of leaders - "our" leaders - and a bad faction = "their" leaders. Now it is painfully obvious that "our" leaders are no better than "their's." Now what?)

(so do you), that's all. I still will call silliness when I see it. I still will disagree when I do. The problems are not with "attitudes", it is with liberals and progressives refusing to face reality. I won't stop pointing that out. But if you could discuss these things without making personal attacks, perhaps we could at least talk...

to point out when a guy is trying to pawn off his own fetish for despicable individuals like JFK as "progressive heroes" under the guise of Left politics

Guys like Jackie Robinson and WillieMays are fine to look up to, but politically?..pssshh

Its about all of the people who are never listened to and in fact are systematically denied a voice.

And its about figuring out how we can help, in whatever capacity. Mainly its about fighting back.

The notion that you can't be a socialist if you aren't like the other socialists reminds me of the urge toward uniforms. If you're on the team, you wear the uniform. That's simplifying the effect I feel that I've observed vastly for the sake of a simple metaphor... but I think it fits overall and provides a metaphorical frame to examine the experience.

Likewise with the "liberal" label association. I think there is a swath of people who have been raised to think of politics as being a game between two teams. There's the Republicans who are defined as conservative, and the Democrats who are defined as liberal. If you are doing and saying things in opposition of the Republicans, then you are doing Democrat things, and are- by definition- liberal. Now turn the game around, put the Democrats in charge... and whatever they do -by definition- is liberal. If you are saying or doing anything that isn't "Democrat", then you aren't liberal.

It is a perspective that takes loyalty for granted (why else would sports exist but to provide a team to be loyal to, and to cheer?), and somewhere along the way develops the idea that the "leaders" of the "team" are the ones who determine the behavior and even expression of thought which is allowed, rather than the reverse... the behaviors and thoughts of the "team" find expression in the "leader"- who is ultimately responsible to the will of the "team".

A subtle inversion of the entire paradigm from bottom up "power" to top down... reinforced by every middle class soccer mom on a weekly basis during <fill in the blank> season.

Couldn't care less. Liberalism apologism and toadyism is front and center and is not only opposed to discussion of class but openly hostile toward any attempt at class analysis.

And we're just talking about ANALYSIS, not class *struggle*

I'm a new(ish) member and I don't see this mean defensiveness to which you refer. I see a group of people who don't tip-toe around sacred cows, which has improved the atmosphere here enormously in recent months.

What do you think people here are trying to be "effective" at? And what about their tone about it do you think that hurts?

The funny thing is that the 10 or so people here, who happened to all be invited back at the same time and are now being characterized as a "gang" of "Stalinists" and what not are about the most diverse group of people imaginable, as was obvious back in the day when there were hundreds of people posting here - before Obama collapsed liberalism. We only share only two things - an agreement about the terms for the discussion (such that social commentary and left wing ideas can be considered), and we have all been targeted and attacked (we are a "group" because we were all banned, isolated, and declared to be a group.) People are having a difficukt time trying to figure out how to attack us as a group because we are so diverse - they can't get a handle on exactly how to best smear and malign us.

Yesterday I watched a Wings game, and then a Maple Leaf game. I noticed that it is a vastly different experience when you don't care who wins. It is a different game - you see things you can't see when you are partisan. In similar fashion, people who are rooting for the liberal team to win simply cannot see the game the way that those who don't care who wins see it. They think that there are two teams, that which one wins is very important, and that only dullards or the ignorant would fail to care who wins.

Are you willing to do two things? First, keep talking about this. Secondly, suspend your belief that we are somehow your enemies while we talk about it. What harm could that cause?

Can you keep talking? That is the only way to reach resolution.

I don't have any idea what socialists are supposed to sound like, or why that matters.

Also, speaking for myself, I am not hoping that anyone takes me seriously. Who cares about me? I would ask that people take the things I am saying seriously.

When people of good cheer lose their unemployment and health benefits.

When the egg nog isn't strong enough.

When the Florida strip malls are pretty empty and the Sunshine State has 11.2% unemployment.

When even CitiBank has suspended foreclosures... for two weeks... if the government pays them to.

Can't we all just get along?

Just throw another log on the fire and crank up the Pat Boone music.

I'm not sure if I picked that up from the Wire, or from some street thug during my years driving a cab in Oakland... but it somehow seems to apply, "in both directions".

The folks who tell you not voting is a shirking of your responsibility, and then turn around and tell you you're wasting a vote for anyone but the Big 2, seem to me to be essentially blinded by the "game". They've learned the rules somewhere or other, and the idea of changing the Big 2 game is just... it would be like trying to get a baseball fan to take a basketball game seriously. In a sense... it's hard to blame the "player" in this game, it's just the nature of the game that they have learned to play (Ok, it's not that hard to blame them... they're a huge ass major component of the problem as it persists... but it is also easy to feel sorry for them.)

On the other hand, the whole capitalist system is a game... so corporations playing it as dirty as they can, it's hard to blame them... it's just the nature of the system.

Unfortunately, as these two sides of the coin meet, you have people who can or can't blame the corporations for their behavior within the system, but - just as they can't let go of the Big 2, or even ponder existence in any other way than in the context of the Big 2, likewise they can't even begin to ponder the system/game of capitalism.

Needless to say, they can't participate in a critical analysis of capitalism & its class system repercussions- that would be like trying to make them watch a cricket match.

Too "weird" to merit consideration.

Ironically though, it suddenly occurs to me that "weird" can be shifted in the "popular mind" with some ease... for instance, before Dennis Rodman started bleaching and dying his hair- I'd never seen black folk bleaching and/or dying their hair (well, occasional blond highlights around the churches...), but within a couple years of him doing so... I started seeing folks in the neighborhoods (East Oakland, West Oakland, not just the sketchy neighborhoods of North Oakland that border Berkeley) with Fire Engine Red braids, Electric Blue (and not just the hookers headed off to San Pablo), Purple... "weird" suddenly wasn't so weird. (Though a phenomenon I mostly noticed with girls, so maybe it wasn't Rodman... maybe something else... nevertheless a shift of "weird" occurred.)

Maybe just talking about it until some source of "cool" catches on and mentions it, will make it something worthy of consideration. (Obviously not gonna be Obama though, is it?)

central florida, has 12.7% official unemployment. This is more than partly due to thousands upon thousands of construction jobs lost. I met a guy from Florida in Pitsburgh who did molding. He bitched about the Mexicans acing him out by doing shitty work but I think even he knew that was bullshit

I heard over a year ago that new house sales down here had dropped by 75% but somehow they are still doing it with mirrors and building their studio set suburban utopia here. But if you push on the Red Lobster it falls over and you realize it was just a cardboard prop. Looks great on TV though..

When you roll up on these senior communities from the highway, its unfricking believable. They have about two feet of "lawn" between one shoddy home and the next.

of so uncool its cool again in which case it becomes uncool

As for The Cool, I'm assuming you mean this guy:

http://www.lepoint.fr/content/system/media/1/200908/58050_miles_davi_img.jpg

The Grand Rapids Griffins, currently wearing Red Wing uniforms, are starting to play some pretty good hockey.

Damn we had a gang of radicals over here this weekend rolling their own and hitting the egg nog and sharing war stories, and then I get back online and have to wade through the ongoing whiny liberal lamentations...

I think we will soon know which of those Griffins are NHLers and which are not, and likewise we will soon know which of the liberals are with us and ready to play, and which will not be up to the challenge of the big leagues.

So many liberals are saying in effect "do you mean to say we actually need to go into the corners and dig for the puck and take the checks, and that we have to keep doing that for the rest of our lives? Can't we go back to that shootout format where we just skate in unopposed and no one tries to knock our block off, and even if we don't score we win on style points and for wearing a fashionable outfit?"

I remember the Griffins. They used to have a billboard that said "Clocks cleaned here"

Do they still have Get Em N Gos? Used to be 39 cent hamburgers. We'd sneak out of HS at lunch time to go eat Get Em N Shit Ems ;)

PS Grand Rapids was one of the most nauseating places to live you could imagine, culturally. Don't know how it is now, but even in '97 the states decline was a hot topic of conversation. I don't think there was anything left of "Furniture City" in 97 which was the last time I was there. My Dad grew up there in the 40s and 50s.

I was watching, and rather than hearing points that were positive and points that were stretched... I just started hearing the same points over and over, and then I found myself not paying so much attention to the points themselves, but rather the grace with which he was able to field and redirect toward his talking points the questions posed by Gregory (admittedly not a terribly sharp wit)... it was like watching the end product of years of practicing the rhetorical equivalent of the Karate Kid's "polish on, polish off".

Quite verbally gifted, though I think he needs to work on his wind. His speech pauses come in strange places, which can sometimes make his words feel uncomfortable to listen to.

And that is the sort of thing that makes me think that my little experiment in giving a shit about the Democrats, just to see what it might be like, a little experiment in "Hope"... is coming to a close.

If you were watching the nightly news and some of the Sunday shows like I was, they played the exact same clip repeatedly. I would think it was a glitch but it happened like 5 times all on the same channel.

He's been working lawn service in South Florida for a time. He's a young guy. He trained as an architect. But he couldn't find a job, so... Florida here we come.

A while ago he came to say goodbye... back to Chiapas. He got a job. No jobs here.

"Good luck on your transition to the Mexican Middle Class, Amigo"

"Fuck the Middle Classes of ALL countries, my friend. Venceremos."

http://www.notmytribe.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/villa-zapata.jpg

No need to go to Grand Rapids when you can bring the Griffins to Detroit.

Half of the Griffin players are up with the Wings right now because of Samuelson, Hossa and Hudler having left and injuries to Kronwall, Filpula, Cleary, Franzen, Zetterberg, Williams, Lilja...

I think there are plenty of people that have come through this board, as well as many of the participants in liberal discussion groups in general, that are perfectly happy negotiating the terms of their (and others) slavery whereas the core group here is essentially unremittingly hostile towards the very idea of slavery.

While we may have different views on what is the best way to mitigate the suffering of the enslaved while we are in chains most of us here still reject the idea of chains altogether.

Now there are also plenty on the aforementioned boards, and some here, such as daveparts, who have essentially suggested that there were once better days of slavedom and if we would only return to such Camelotian times here in The Homeland all things would be okey-dokey. Fuck that.

And there are many who have asked us to "tone it down" or "think about your audience" blah, blah, blah. What the fuck is wrong with people? This isn't a game. Being fucking nice, playing patiently with the sharks and all that crap has brought zero returns. What the fuck are people thinking? These people who are so offended by "our style" or some perceived tone must be living comfortably where they can afford to focus upon such pompous matters of table manners. Personally I'm not interested in that merry-go-round.

Which brings us to liberalism...

...and the joke is: "It could be worse... we could be Detroit."

The result is different, though. On the Panthers, they had a string of injuries, and they started winning.

Makes you think...

I don't think its possible to change someone's mind let alone to "convince them" to "think" a certain way. People pretty much decide for themselves where their interests lie. And, as far as arguing goes, the only time I notice much argument is when somebody shows up to say, "You can't say this or that..."

Sammy Davis Jr.? Ralph Ellison?

The Cool

Looks so straight and narrow there though... it just ain't right.

And said the exact same thing again... twice actually, I think. It was glaze worthy...

because it was like deja vu..if it was NOT the same clip, then he basically said the same thing Word For Fucking Word

I got kinda lazy searching google images ;)

EDIT: my DSL is really slow so it takes forever for images to load

I guess ripping copies off my mom's old records doesn't do much for image recognition. ;)

Of course, intellectually I realize that most junkies back in the day wore suits. Even Burroughs. It's what I tell myself every time I don one myself. It doesn't do much for my recognition skills of faces in a suit though. (Kind of like watching WWII war movies, put them all in those uniforms, and I can't tell half those white guys apart...)

about World War II, one of the ones they shot in Italy.

I can't believe I actually watched it but it was notable for several things

1. Rock Hudson with a bunch of adolescents..c'mon. My brother and I developed the tagline "Hold Me Rock" in response to the ending where Rock cradles a (mentally) traumatized adolsecent resistance fighter

2. Corny lines like "I'm gonna blow up this dam and kill 10,000 Nazis". Even though this was explicitly set AFTER the Italians surrendered and the Nazis were beating feet OUT of Italy.

3. Rock had a 70s hairdo and looked like he was playing a movie soldier from Vietnam not WWII era

4. At the end it goes from being one big movie-long bloodbath to this maudlin anti-war "surprise" ending .. Hold Me, Rock

5. Rock has an (offscreen) rape scene. Its not as bad as the Clint Eastwood one but still ..

The comments on IMDB are pretty hilarious too

"...they can't even begin to ponder the system/game of capitalism."

What we are up against is people who do not even recognize the existence of Capitalism (other than as a "belief" or as something in their imagination), let alone knowing what it is, let alone having any basis for defending it. Yet that does not stop them from rejecting the possibility of "eliminating Capitalism" and mercilessly attacking any and all who try to talk about class struggle or the history of Capitalism, or the social manifestations of it. Clearly people have been conditioned and indoctrinated to defend Capitalism, even to the point of not permitting any examination of it or even acknowledging its existence in any objective way or in any historical context. Since Capitalism is for them nothing more than a belief or an imaginary concept, they assume that critics of Capitalism are offering up alternative beliefs or imaginary concepts.

We have a lot of people who call themselves left wingers, yet who think that class struggle is not important to discuss or think about, and who do not think that discussing politics or being a left winger means talking about Capitalism - they demand a hands-off stance on that: Capitalism is inevitable, has always been around, is human nature, is synonymous with freedom, is a neutral tool that can be used for good or evil, etc. Of course, if a person thinks that the class structure and hierarchy is as it should be - imagine it to be based on merit and talent and as an expresion of "freedom," and think that those on top earned their right to be on top - and think that Capitalism is not to be challenged, they cannot in any serious way be called left-wingers.

people I'd never expect to badmouth capitalism have kinda picked up on it themselves, mainly (I guess) because I talk about it alot. A couple of us were watching Niall Ferguson's history of money series on PBS and it turn into a long talk excoriating capitalism. They actually thought it was a show about Communism because it started with a part about Diego Rivera and the Great Depression.

Also, I always have mailings and newspapers around that are prominently anti-capitalist. (That is one thing the Trots do pretty well IMO). Most of the headlines read something like "Down With Capitalist Rationing of Medicine!"

We so rarely see the Panthers. We see Ottawa, Toronto and Montreal here thanks to CBC but the rest of the East may as well not exist until the playoffs start.

I forgot to mention Jonathan Erickson, also out. I heard that the injured Wings, and this was before Zetterberg went down, scored a combined 270 goals last year. That will put a crimp in your offense losing that much production to say the least. Datsyuk and Lidstrom are trying to do too much and are making a lot of errors. When Tomas Holmstrom leads your team in goals that is not a good sign.

Among the replacement players, I think there may be one good little third or fourth line there - Eaves, Helm and Abdelkader. Helm is fast, Abdelkader is a hitter and hustles and plays defense, Eaves has a pretty good shot. They are making fewer and fewer errors the more they play, and are good on the PK. I predict that they will "stick." Leino is a big disappointment - so many give-aways and bad decisions and lackadaisical play - Miller and Newbury haven't shown me much yet.

Babcock for the fourth time in the last couple of weeks made an off hand critical remark about Osgood. Tonight he said "when you don't get good goaltending..." which he said the last time Ozzie played, and twice when Howard had good games he said "when you get good goal-tending..." I think it is yet to be certain that Howard is an NHL goaltender, so if Osgood is being compared unfavorably to him, that suggests that this may be Osgood's last hurrah. He let in a couple of soft ones tonight (yet again).

Apparently this particular strain of fundamentalist Christianity took a strange turn somewhere near its inception... but their "ideology" (to the extent that they seem to have an ideology besides "I'm chosen, so trying to hold me accountable to secular laws is a transgression against Jesus.") ... seems to be an equation of capitalism with Jesus.

I'll say that again, because it's so batshit insane, that it's hard to process the first time around.

They seem to literally believe that Free Market Capitalism was created and placed upon earth by Jesus himself.

Now, as this strange sect of neo-Jesusism has been running around the back rooms of the seats of power in the US since about 1935... spawned in reaction to the "unrest" of the labor movement and leftist struggles of the 30s... it is fair to assume that this "capitalism = Jesus" thought has caught on in a lot of churches around the country. Of course, not being a church going man... I can only assume. I do, however, further assume that this notion has spread, perhaps unconsciously at times, through many corners of the country... and I would suggest watching those who would take capitalism so much for granted that the notion of considering other systems seems too much to even consider. I'm not sure if this strain of wacky Jesusism is behind any particular case... but I'm growing curious to see if it's "fingerprint" can be seen on many minds.

And unlike trying to promote liberalism, critically commenting about Capitalism has "legs" and staying power. We have yet to scratch the surface of what we can be saying. I think the liberals sense that, and that is why they do not want to open up that can of worms and are so resistant to any discussion at all. They make little hit and run posts, many of which are practically unintelligible, or throw around a few insults. I think they know that the longer the discussion goes on, the weaker position they are in defending liberalism and the stronger position we are in criticizing Capitalism. We can deliver. They can't. We are just getting warmed up, they are throwing their last reserves in already. Liberalism is first and foremost about being right, (especially as opposed to actually getting any results) and the Religious Right and "Palin" and "Cheney" are easy sparring partners (although even with those opponents they struggle and fail). The idea that they could be wrong about anything is simply intolerable to them. Being right is all they have.

Maybe PI is not interested in that.

I don't know what DU is effective at - a place to vent maybe. It used to be different or I was different.

Yes it is probable that the current anger at the DP and/or Obama is only fleeting for some, not for everyone though.

The good was starting the conversation at DU, seems to me that PI would be a place to continue it. I don't know where the end is.

I don't give up on people that are slow to move, I can't because I'd count myself in with that group. And I don't accept that people don't change.

If I had it to do over, I'd probably make a different first post. I've read all the replies and it wasn't fair of me to be accusatory. I'll just leave it at that.

how to continue the conversation

Obviously, it happens in fits and starts and isn't without its difficulties, but that is our intention.

Fair enough on the rest .. of late, random posters show up to chide us at pretty regular intervals, so we're a little on guard against that

we are trying to find our way in this ugly, murderous system/culture/society. We are trying to teach ourselves how to coldly and rationally view the system we live in, that oppresses, steals, murders, rapes, destroys anyone and anything that it can. You, me, each of is oppressed our whole lives and we watch others being used and abused on a daily basis. We have to work ourselves out of this - no one is going to do it for us. We get jumped on a lot by people who think we are...I don't know, 'negative', maybe? Unrelenting, maybe? Uncompromising, probably? Maybe all that is true, but the working class is and has been tread underfoot for so long we don't know what it feels like not to have somebody standing on our necks.

If you are willing to listen, willing to learn, and can work with other working class folks without letting egos get in the way, then we welcome you. You don't have to agree with anyone, here, but someone will make you explain what you do think and why.

Just remember, no one here gets "personal". If someone trashes what you are saying, it is because of what you are saying, not who you are.

As TA loves to say: "Keep talking!"

ripped from their parents arms and turned into commie zombies, nuns raped before the altar, shoemakers and grocers sent to the camps, débutantes denied their 'coming out', lockstep parades every Sunday instead of Bible School, pets confiscated and fed to the poor. all manner of horror.

Propaganda works, at least for a while, until reality shatters it.

Goddamn straight, blindpig is coming for your golf courses....

http://www.earthstation1.com/Warposters/jckaelin/Stalin_leads_jk.jpg

Boo!

Ironically, most of the people here are not quick to "give up on people that are slow to move," maybe to a fault.

Participation is dramatically down everywhere. I would guess that people are in some state of despair and discouragement and are withdrawing. Most people on the boards a couple of years ago were not so much political junkies, but rather they hoped for change and thought talking could help, but Obama killed all of that.

Don't know how to go about encouraging new members. I suspect that people who have accused us of not properly encouraging new members really mean "don't say things that make me uncomfortable" because that is "chasing people away." Also, even were we to do that - not sure how, since what offends and upsets people keeps changing - it would not lead to more participation. People have left the boards in droves even where they have not been "chased away" by those "evil commies." People are confused and discouraged, and are making up excuses for dropping out of the discussion, I think. The political discussion has died, and people's hopes have been dashed. Rather than confronting the fact that their hopes were misplaced, it is easier to blame others for being "negative" or "rude" or something. Leftists are always a convenient target, have been for decades.

The people still posting are either leftists who did not have their hopes hitched to the wagon of liberalism, or Kucinich or Obama or whatever, and are therfore not in despair, and also the truth movement folks who were never really interested in politics.

but I was also on a mission to hunt the truth about politics, a truth that I came to understand is politics = economics and capitalism /= democracy.

And then I came to learn the truth about capitalism.

Most people think capitalism is the truth about economics and that capitalism = "freedom" and "democracy."

If they are going to cling to those notions as strongly as the faithful cling to notions of the supernatural, they will be challenged.

And they should be.

It's in their interest.

More importantly, it's in the collective planetary interest.

Do speak up more. Your perspective, as reflected by your two posts, is just the dialogue that needs to be had here.

"uncomfortable." I am open to ideas I haven't considered before and have some ideas of my own that I haven't worked through.

I will either prove your suspicions or not. Let's just see how it goes.

We keep getting hit with the charge that we are "alienating friends and allies," the implication being that if we were different somehow the board would "grow" and be more "successful," and that growing and being successful are what we are trying to do, and that growing and being successful is the way to measure the validity and worth of what we are saying. Yet when we called for participation to define who friends and allies are, what the purpose of the board should be, and proposed a democratic member owned and managed project, there was no interest in talking about that among the complainers.

I think the obvious conclusion to draw from all of that is that the problem people have is really with the things that some people are saying.

When the old members returned a few months ago, a unique situation developed - unplanned and unexpected. Leftists were suddenly in the majority rather than being a harassed minority as they have been everywhere else online (and off line as far as that goes), and the owner refused to ban or censor leftists when the conservatives ran to her tattling and whining. People were so accustomed to being able to gang up on leftists and then have the board owners back them up, that when they could no longer do that they just about lost their minds. It was the most amazing flame out I have ever seen.

There are some outspoken critics of liberalism among the returning members, and that is not something that people could tolerate. Strangely enough, those same critics of liberalism were saying the same things back 3 and 4 years ago, and no one lost their mind over that. The only change since then is the Democrats and Obama coming into power. Obama has not only betrayed the liberals - brazenly and shockingly - but the whole basis for liberalism and all of its premises and assumptions have now been thrown into doubt. This has people confused and alarmed, and in response they are "rounding up the usual suspects" - everyone's favorite target, the leftists. We watched as 30 or so people, previously appearing for all the world to be rational and sane, and many of them claiming to "be socialists" or what not, suddenly go into a frenzy of red-baiting.

That is my best guess as to what has been happening here.

It's been on cable recently. You should watch it or read the book it is based on.

How can anyone believe anything you say when you dare call JFK "despicable" and a "warmonger"? YOU HAVE NO BASIS FOR MAKING THOSE COMMENTS.

I won't call you a revisionist because you don't even know the facts. All you know is the crap that r/w web sites have thrown out to the greatest dumbed-down generation.

You have an obnoxious, sinister tone.

I have told you this before. You would probably not be alive today were it not for JFK. You would not be here to spew your garbage. Neither would I. Where were you in '62, buster? You were not even a gleam in daddy's eye. Well, I WAS there, but even I was not fully aware of what was going on behind the scenes. We came within a pubic hair of WWIII. Does that mean anything to you? And only THINKING LIBERALS JFK, RFK and Adlai Stevenson at the U.N. pulled us away from the brink that Curtis LeMay and the Joint Chiefs were willing to cross into.


The JCF and military wanted a war in the worst way in Oct. 1962. It was only becuase JFK would not be pushed into one and NEGOTIATED BEHIND THE SCENES with Kruschev that we escaped nuclear annihilation.

I have given you much material to read and videos as well on JFK. You have obviously not read the books nor watched the clips. Or if you have, you have not learned a thing.

I can no longer assume that your "despicable" comments were due to ignorance. They are due to something much worse.

WATCH THE MOVIE "THIRTEEN DAYS"!
IF AFTER SEEING THE FILM, YOU CONTINUE SPEWING YOUR CRAP ABOUT JFK, I WILL ONCE AGAIN CALL YOU OUT.

DON'T WAIT FOR THE TRANSLATION.
I WILL CALL YOU OUT ON THIS UNTIL "HELL FREEZES OVER, MR. ZORIN".

I was there in '62, and I read the book and saw the movie. I have no problem with what Kid said.

Much evidence has been presented to you as a "BASIS FOR MAKING THOSE COMMENTS" and you ignored it all.

Just because people disagree with you, that does not mean they are secret agents, trolls, ignorant, evil, right wingers, or any of the rest of the crap you keep smearing people with. Defend your assertions and stop attacking the messengers.

versed in the history and the "lore" of the period. The reason for the "Crisis" in the first place was the US reaction to the Cuban Revolution. And JFK was as big a "Cold Warrior" as any Republican. If the US - Kennedy - had tried to help the Cuban people and not the Cuban rich there would not have been the "Thirteen Days" and you can sputter and bluster all you want to, but them's the facts. You JFK idolaters all act like the world began in the spring of 1961. You need to look at history for some other nuggets besides tortured adoration and apologias for the Kennedy thugs. Just this 57 year old's opinion. And since all you are spewing is opinion and not historical realism, I figure it works both ways - right, Pops?

(hello all at PI - mdmc here.. basically I've always been a liberal.. guess I still am)

here is ACTS 4:34-35

There was no needy person among them, for those who owned property or houses would sell them, bring the proceeds of the sale, and put them at the feet of the apostles, and they were distributed to each according to need.

I thought is was a capitalist statement..

sort of puts a point on it