How should I do it?

Good to see you.

might be all it takes... >(

"I wanna become an anarchist to piss off my parents. What should I do?"

;)

http://shelluno.com/ph7/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/NewMemories8X11.jpg

NOTES ON TIDY WHITE OPPRESSION AND SUNDRY PRETENDERS

There is much pretending throughout the progressive and liberal community.

Success and the good life, credentials and status, position and privilege must be protected, at least for people like "us." At the same time, this position and privilege is dependent upon playing a certain role. As Liberals 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 up the facade and since reality doesn't intrude into our "reality based" fantasy world, but once in a while something 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. Of course the only logical reason for this public oversight is because- “Republicans are able to take advantage of the people's stupidity and ignorance and turn them against us.”

As Liberals we understand that most of the problems in the world are the result of stupid people running things. If “We the 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 passé, and only something that we read about or see in movies. Romantic as those stories are, they are no substitute for hardheaded 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.

As fully-realized liberal-progressives we understand that our enlightened self-interest is the ultimate engine of social progress.

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 our righteous 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 quite naturally 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.

What an Asshole #10...

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/Dalai%20Lama.jpg

Dalai's reincarnation will not be found under Chinese control
Indian Express
July 6, 1999

HALA: The Dalai Lama, who turns 64 today, says if his successor is chosen in the traditional way, then his reincarnation would not appear in Tibet or areas under Chinese control. "Should people prefer the old system of choosing a reincarnation -- then Dalai Lama's reincarnation will appear in a free country, and not in Chinese hand as the purpose of a reincarnation is to carry the work started by the previous life and yet not fulfilled," reports PTI.



Pretty good reincarnation control, no? Perhaps the next Dalai Lama will pop up here:
http://www.namgyal.org/img/photos/dukhor/feature_image.jpg

"Namgyal Monastery is currently based in the Aurora Street House, a converted turn-of-the-century Victorian home in downtown Ithaca. We are now planning a new complex to accommodate our growing student base and the need for retreat facilities, student housing, and adequate dining facilities.

Donations to Dü Khor Choe Ling

Please help us build Dü Khor Choe Ling. As outlined in our Financial Needs and Assets card (available for download below), over one million dollars in capital must be raised to ensure the completion of this project. Every dollar donated will bring us closer to our goal. Donations can be made online by credit card (up to $10,000) and check through the following link:

We have chosen the eight auspicious Tibetan Buddhist symbols to mark the various donation levels because they are all equally auspicious and equally important. The symbols were illustrated by Namgyal translator Palden Oshoe. If you wish to donate equities, please phone the Namgyal office for information.



http://www.namgyal.org/campaign/donation/

http://www.namgyal.org/img/pdf/namgyal_ ... n_card.pdf

You can be a Golden Fishy for only $250,000.00.

Originally posted here:
http://populistindependent.virtual.vps-host.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=386&p=4054&hilit=dalai+lama#p4054

That whole Buddhist malarkey is the well-spring of most New Age bullshit. If there was ever a Libertarian religion, it is Buddhism...

http://populistindependent.virtual.vps-host.net/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=617&p=6714&hilit=anton+lavey#p6714

Of course it ain't as popular, like Rand it is the straight stuff, not for the squeamish.

http://s31.photobucket.com/albums/c395/chlamor/FUM2005010G0924-0335.jpg

Power to the people and all.

And I triple third that the Dalai Lama is an asshole. CIA asshole at that.


NEW DELHI, Oct. 1— The Dalai Lama's administration acknowledged today that it received $1.7 million a year in the 1960's from the Central Intelligence Agency, but denied reports that the Tibetan leader benefited personally from an annual subsidy of $180,000.


http://www.nytimes.com/1998/10/02/world/world-news-briefs-dalai-lama-group-says-it-got-money-from-cia.html?pagewanted=1

[link:www.greenleft.org.au/1996/248/13397|The Dalai Lama's hidden past]

Ugh

How are you Naja?

...

?

...

if you have Admin rights as Chlamor does... The "reply" and "edit" button are right next to each other.

It's possible Chlamor doesn't even realize he accidentally cleared it.

?

and accidentally replaced it with 3 dots?


It was not accidental, and it was completely fucked up.

it didn't occur to me that the poster may have written it (did you?) and didn't mean to offend. clearly the piece drives a wedge in the left and who does that serve? i apologize if that consideration offends, but i don't know anyone who fits the rigid profiles that are being drawn here, about those who oppose the Reich Wing.

That sounds like my writing, and others here have permission to re-post whatever I write.

You can address me with your questions about the content of the post I guess.

We have to talk it out.

It has been a while since we have had a controversy, and I am not sure where we make those decisions. I thought we had a (relatively) new forum for exactly this purpose, but I am not seeing it now since the forums got re-ordered.

I've never seen Chlamor do anything backdoor... ever. He is strictly front-door and above board. I've never seen him use ANY administrative power, ever. Wait for him to show up and ask...

This suit doesn't fit the fella. For starters, the jacket has six sleeves.

I bet is mistake, tovarisch.

believe your own demarcations?

the guy who is "me threeing" this is the guy who made the post in question.

Omega: why don't you just tell us what your post said?

It is very easy to make mistakes like clicking the Edit button instead of the Reply button

if he accidentally cleared it, what is he supposed to put? I suppose he could've written "I accidentally erased this post" but we both know thats not Mr Cs style.

You guys and your fucking "issues"..christ almighty

Couldn't omega simply tell us whether the post was innocuous (in which case, mistake is almost certain) or inflammatory (in which case fuck him, I hope Chlams did delete it. If not lets restore it so I can delete the damn thing)

Also, how do Edits appear? Sometimes Mod edits supercede regular edits so Omega could have gone back and changed the post to "..." but it still says "last edited by Chlamor"

I axed OM's baiting post. Yes it was my first foray into administrative meddling.

Basically OM was insinuating that what was posted was right-wing projections of liberalism and quite frankly in conjunction with OM's other posts I'm not in the mood to be playing around with this inflammatory BS.

Repressive tolerance and all that.

Don't worry I won't be making a habit of it and OM if you have anything to say, say it.

Drop the passive-aggressive bullshit or I'll ban your ass.

was it fucked up?

OM's just baiting people. Who's got time for that anymore?

I will add that I consider any further baiting on this matter from the likes of leftinSF (and don't even start with how we have to "talk this through" Mike) to be borderline trolling, and my patience for that shit is worn to the nub

you gotta define the left.

The liberals and progressives described in the post above are in no way 'on the left' by any standards. Hell come walk around my "most progressive city in USA" and get to know these folks, by their deeds, and you'll find the description is not only accurate but understated.

The degree to which these lib/progs see themselves as the chosen people and the degree to which they sell-out the working class folk was astonishing once but now has become as predictable and exact as a swiss watch.

I know literally thousands of people that fit the description to a tee, most of them within a ten minute walk from my front door.

http://www.donnymiller.com/beautifulpeople/beautifulpeoplecover.jpg

It's the first one in the 'Other Forums section.

I thought about leaving it up top but we haven't used it in so long I didn't bother.

The point of it was to have a public 'admin' forum so any decisions could be openly discussed rather than having it be a) a private forum or b) a threadjack.

eta: there is also the 'Time to Chill Out' forum which is sort of stupid but at least a post can be moved there rather than deleted/overwritten so anyone can see what it said originally. The idea behind that forum was to get stupid shit off the threads but still make it accessible so the offending poster's words are there for all to see. Admins can put posts in there by clicking the 'Playgrnd' button at the bottom left of each post.

and progressives are true enemies of the left (me and Kid had some back and forth on that once). Liberals and progressives are right-wing groupings - not left. They are viewed as "left" by some for reasons that have never made any sense to me. It is very easy, if you support the continuation of capitalism in any form, you are not on the "left", you are on the right.

As is said here a lot, "Who's side are you on?" - the working class or the owning class? It isn't a trick question; answer and you will know where you stand - and so will we...

And it is the primary reason that so much shit gets stirred where ever we go, it is a message more dismaying to libs/progs than anything ol' Newt might say. The difference being, it is the truth.

There isn't any baiting or trolling going on by leftinSF.

Chlamor answered, and I think people should be free to comment on what he said and did - "talk this through" in other words.

I suspected that omega had posted some inflammatory crap because A) it is very unlike chlamor to do any admin stuff, and B) omega didn't complain.

It is perfectly legit for leftinSF to ask what happened. It is also perfectly legit to talk about banning and deleting posts.

I couldn't remember the name and it wasn't in the location it once was in.

Omega probably posted some inflammatory crap, but what does that have to do with a new person asking what happened?

That's all.

who cares what happens to Omegas post? If there is actually an issue over it I'm pretty sure it has dick to do with leftinSF. If it does, its probably spill over OET shit, and the time for that is way over

Not playing nanny or anything but if you use the playground feature it would reduce this sort of wasted time/space. You having overwritten that post unilaterally is sorta controversial since it's gone now.

Click the link at the bottom left corner of the post that says Playgrnd (next to delete etc). Sends the post into the netherworld(aka time to Chill Out Room)

Then people can see what it said originally.

Just a thought, since we have that feature and all.

Frankly I'm withdrawing from any sort of strong opinions on the matter. I do think if we're gonna start having to deal with this shit we might as well do it as out-in-the-open as possible and let people's words stand.

That said I hope this OET mayhem chills out. We've been through it too many times.

And please understand the spirit of my post here - I just know this board's features and we may as well use them if we're gonna start moderating shit. I'm not trying to tell you or anyone what to do.

That's why I asked LeftinSF why he/she thinks it's fucked up.

Seems by logical parameters one would need to know the details of the deed before one ruled it to be an act of brilliance or an act of fuckedup-itude.

Anyone has the obligation/right to question any and everything and of course claim it to be fucked up but seems one should get a few details before doing so. Now that the silly details are known LeftinSF may still think it fucked up and that's fine.

So I ask again why is it fucked up?

Next time when such a post is entered I'll put this in: Omega Minimo post deleted due to snide, passive-aggressive one-liner.

I have a pretty light touch on the admin things, not really interested in the stuff, but the insipid one-liners baiting lefties gotta go.

http://files.myopera.com/gialioy/albums/882818/35-Fight%20Back.jpg

I am trying to understand and analyze my observations.

I once did have a belief about this. I believed that we were all on the same side. Reality intruded on that belief and finally bashed it out of me. I can't imagine how it could possibly be more clear than it is now, and that clarity is the one valuable thing we can gain from the OET experience.

The demarcation was not made by me. I didn't decide that liberals were to be excluded, they decided that we were to be excluded. If anything, I went to exhaustive lengths to include the people who are now excluding me. "We are excluding you because of your bad behavior" may or may not be supportable or defensible in the case of chlamor - I don't think so, but some may - but it is an absurd claim about the rest of us who were excluded.

I can't see how there can be many controversy or confusion about this any more.

My deep sorrow over the matter has caused me to demand a spanking from my girlfriend and she then felt that part of the responsibility for my rude behavior was in fact hers. Her logic was twisted but she insisted the only recourse was for me to return the favor, uh, uh I mean mete out equal punishment and spank her. It's amazing how this just went back and forth all night each of us understanding that the violation had to be dealt with in an unbridled, well okay we did use a few bridles, and very thorough manner.

I guess this is what could be called solidarity?

I think I'll post this on my forehead.

http://i234.photobucket.com/albums/ee60/J-rod86/smartass4life.jpg

We come to play, but that doesn't mean we play nice

I would have let it go without notice - whatever Tin posted and whatever omega posted. That would have been my call on both of those. Why? Because we have more important work to do and you have now dragged us back into the shit about all of this - the feelings issue and now the banning and deleting issue.

So I might be wrong, but I'm pleading ignorance on this. Did Tin delete something too?

Tin posted on another thread and you objected. If I am understanding you, in both cases you are objecting to OET crap and suggesting that we be ruthlessly intolerant of that. I said fucking let it go because you are dragging us right back into the shit you claim to be leading us away from. If Tin wants to post about feelings, and if omega wants to troll, let it go. At worst it is a distraction. Making a big deal out of it makes it more of a distraction.

"Bad behavior" is just the excuse.

I'm not sure it totally makes sense to me, but I do understand your point.

I'm not that worried about a relapse personally, since for the most part the OETers are at the Treehouse and we're over here. If you're talking about negativity in general I guess there's that, but you have to admit I'm very much a bit player in that department

You know I got it covered

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v327/meganmonkey/dominatrix-with-paddle-1.jpg

Looks like 'Lighten Up' has been misappropriated by new-age boomers though

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v327/meganmonkey/LightenUpcover.jpg

There are a whole bunch of people, like the member you attacked, who were drawn to OET by me. Some of them stood in solidarity with us, most are sympathetic. But don't let that stop you from shooting first and asking questions later, because after all there is nothing more important than petty feuds with PH and omega, and no better way to spend our time than rising to the bait of trolls and giving them the satisfaction of having someone here over-react.

because its all pretty bogus, but who did I attack? I wasn't even at OET recently.

You don't know anything about it, you haven't read it, it is probably all bogus, so you jump in and stir up shit about it. Makes sense to me.

To answer your question, you posted "I will add that I consider any further baiting on this matter from the likes of leftinSF (and don't even start with how we have to "talk this through" Mike) to be borderline trolling, and my patience for that shit is worn to the nub."

It is too mad and too sad to reply to individually. All I can say is, wow.

And this: I will not be drug into the middle of the drama that apparently you all are still invested in and won't stand in front of the whirling meatgrinder of frustration that's evident here. Enough of that, already.

I read the piece that chlamor posted and asked if there was a link. I don't remember the exact wording. Chlamor can repost it to back up his claims about "infalmmatory" and "baiting" if he wants, now that omega is being accused of "trolling." Deciding it's "true" because "omega didn't complain." Ya'll need to check your assumptions.

I reworded and restated the post, including my intent not to offend. Chlamor, "if you have something to say, say it." I said it.

I read the piece that chlamor posted and asked if there was a link. I used the word "presumably" wondering if there was a connection to a right wing source. Who does it serve for a piece that further Balkanizes what's left of the Left or progressives and/or Democrats? It's also odd for the sexist imagery chosen to illustrate it.

When it was deleted, I was appalled to think -- it hadn't occurred to me -- that chlamor wrote the piece and that's why it was considered an offensive question. Otherwise, the post and the question are as reasonable to discuss as anything else mentioned above.

Chlamor accused me of "passive/aggressive one liner.........." I occasionally write brief posts. AFAIK there is no inherent offense or any rule on any board against doing so.

So please. Point your dog-fight-looking-for-fresh-meat elsewhere.

2As, I know your observations are very astute. I would not have known the piece was yours, with no attribution. We've discussed elsewhere your certitude about your "observations." My impression of this well written piece is that it obviously has a sardonic tone (which made it seem even more like a send-up that might come from the right, rather than the left). It's mocking and divisive -- if that word is allowed on this board.

It's not a matter of choosing sides, which you demarcate so well, but the people who are left out who don't fit the rigid boundaries, who fall between the cracks, whose stories and lives you may not know or observe.

Another question:
If there are these rigid boundaries or a time comes to man the ideological barricades, if what's left of the left is divided or isolated, who does that serve, what gets accomplished and how?

and if you take a wider view of the matter, for months/years. As I understand it, according to you and others, that is now over. And, no, I don't have any patience left with it

LeftinSF comes in, makes an accusatory post that is total crap and you want me to what..kiss her ass? Wasn't that the very thing we just decided we were going to stop doing (Andrea, etc..)?

specifically is if there was link to the right-wing website where that came from.

Forgetting that part certainly calls into question your intent here in this latest post. Not that I give two shits but at least be honest about it.

If nothing else it proves you haven't even taken the first step towards understanding what it means when using terms such as liberal, progressive, leftist, right-winger and so on.

Noone here is looking for fresh meat but certainly if you are interested take the time to read some of the essays that are on the board right now and think about it.

Omega what is telling here, to me, is the simple fact that since you think that such a post as the one above came from "a right-wing site", that you buy hook, line and sinker into the political narrative of the status quo as propagated by various organs of the state. And I'm not talking merely about TEEVEE News.

Maybe you could start by defining what you think of as "the left."

"have a pretty light touch on the admin things" with such heavy-handed, false assumptions?



"Omega Minimo post deleted due to snide, passive-aggressive one-liner."

"...but the insipid one-liners baiting lefties gotta go."


"Snide"?

"Insipid"?

"Passive-aggressive"?

"One-liners"?


These are words on a screen.

Thank you.

I don't really understand what you are saying here.

said was nearly verbatim so harp on it all you want, you just conveniently omitted the truth of the matter. You know damn well what I just posted was almost exactly what you wrote. If I missed a comma too bad, can't get it back even if I cared to which I don't.

You were just caught snarkin' at the lefties, big deal it's to be expected from folks who align with the propertied class.

You posted, in response to something that I originally wrote, "how about a link to the right wing source that came from."

You knew damned well it didn't come from a right wing source, and you were not really interested in a link, so let's cut the crap. What you posted IS inflammatory and baiting, and you know that. I mean come on, enough with the games.

This recent post in response to me is full of snarky little comments and dishonesty, too.

I call bullshit on your explanation here.

"Nearly verbatim" and "almost exactly what you wrote" is not what I wrote.




"You were just caught snarkin' at the lefties, big deal it's to be expected from folks who align with the propertied class."


Like I said, wow. Just wow.

Please point your meatgrinder somewhere else.

First of all, you have no reason or right to question my sincerity. LOL

You have no way to claim "you knew damned well it didn't come from a right wing source, and you were not really interested in a link." wtf

You are fabricating this claim:
"You posted, in response to something that I originally wrote, "how about a link to the right wing source that came from."

No I didn't. You are paraphrasing yet putting it in quotation marks.

I posted in response to something Chlamor posted with no link or attribution. How is anyone supposed to know that you wrote it?

Yes. 2As, "so let's cut the crap. I mean come on, enough with the games."



I call bullshit on your fabrications and indignation here. You boys need a breather.



"This recent post in response to me is full of snarky little comments and dishonesty, too."

That's very odd. Are you perhaps misreading compliments? shrug

You asked if there was a link to the the right-wing website where the piece came from.

:shrug:

What is the point? If you are not lying, that could be easily explained to everyone's satisfaction. If you are lying, what is the point, other than to bait and troll?

I don't give a shit. Talk to us if you want, post whatever you want. Start a thread in the forum we have for discussing these things and convince everyone here.

I cannot believe that you thought that little essay I wrote came from a right wing source. You did not think that. I cannot believe that you posted a request for a link in all innocence. You did not do that. Your subsequent posts contradict that! You are trying to make a point that anyone who criticizes liberalism may as well be a right winger. You tried to make that point in an insulting and dishonest way. Duh. I mean come on, we have all been around this block a few times. You can't actually think you are fooling anyone with your lame and convoluted explanations.

Argue your point about wedges and stuff if you like, but your posts on this thread are trolling and baiting. Of course they are. You know they are. You are working hard at making them as provocative and inflammatory as you possibly can.

Geez, this gets old.

You have posted similar things before, and chlamor's representation of what you said in that post is consistent with everything else you are posting on this thread.

Do you seriously expect us to believe that you thought my essay was from a right wing site?

Do you seriously expect us to believe that you thought what I wrote was from a right wing source? Come on, that just cannot be true.

I didn't see your post, but chlamor's explanation holds water and yours does not. You fired the first shot, or we would not even be talking about this.

You have subsequently argued that things I, and others, have written may as well be from right wingers because they are hurting the left, or your idea as to hat the Left is - dividing etc. Given that, and your snark and insults in the rest of your posts, of course it is logical to think that you would post "could I have a link to the right wing source that came from" and did that for the sole purpose of getting a shpt in and stirring up shit. Geez we didn't just fall of the turnip truck.

No big deal. I think that you ought to be able to make posts like that. Others here disagree and have a legitimate case for deleting that sort of baiting and taunting post. In any case, there is no authority figure here to play to, so if you don't like what is happening and want to get it resolved, you will have to start a thread on that topic and get consensus from everyone here just as I would. I usually lose, by the way, and we are a long way from having consensus on how to handle things like your posts on this thread. That is just the way things are.

I don't recall whether it was website or source, but I KNOW I used the word "presumably" right, when asking for a link.

Who does it serve to mock and characterize people like that? I might have thought it came from the right, rather than the left. It didn't occur to me it came from someone on PI.

The questions in my other post remain, regarding balkanization. Perhaps it's already official and as chlamor says, one only has to read some essays to know which hard-edged faction one fits into.

I question the usefulness of using characterizations that shove individuals into one size fits all "type" cliches, except to shove "Them" away from "Us."

You have me re-thinking this again.

However, I see no evidence that leftinSF, a newcomer who has been solidly in our corner all along, was baiting or trolling. I am certain that she was not.

"Presumably?"

Then you launch right into statements that contradict your innocence. You think I am mocking people, and that this is dividing the left, and that this helps the right wing, so therefore I may as well be a right wing source. So of course you said, sarcastically and as a taunt - "could I get a link to that presumably right wing source?" Of course you did. Of course that is baiting and trolling. You knew it was not from a right wing source, you did not presume that it was, and you instead were trying to make a point in an insulting and dishonest way. LOL. Of course you were. You worked at it, are still working at it.

Anyway, read the page below. If you agree with what is written on that page, then welcome aboard and join in. If you don't agree, then start a thread and make your case and get consensus from the members on your point of view about what the purpose of the project here should be. If you don't want to do either of those, you are just in the wrong place for what you want to do.

But the "about us" page tells you exactly what we are up to in no uncertain terms. Unlike other sites that claim to welcome all left wing points of view, we do not. Unlike other sits that claim they exclude people supposedly because of their manners or behavior, we do not. We ban people because they try to stop, try to break up, try to disrupt the very discussions that we are here to have, which is the only reason we are here. If you want to have those discussions, join in. If you don't, then don't. But coming here to tell us we should not be doing the exact thing we are here to do, and that we make no secret about, is - OBVIOUSLY - trolling.

You don't go to a board, the express purpose of which is for people to share their fishing and hunting adventures, and then expect to be able to argue that they shouldn't be hunting and fishing. You don't go to an alternative spirituality board and argue that Jesus is the one and only true way, and that everyone there who dos not agree is going to hell.

Unless you are trolling.

We are not obliged to consider or entertain liberal points of view here and don't want to. We don't claim to be tolerant of liberal points of view. "You are dividing the left by criticizing liberals" is a liberal posts of view. Attacking people here for being no different from the right wing is trolling.

Here is what we are up to:

About PI[h2]

Progressive - Promoting or favoring progress toward better conditions or new policies

1. America needs a strong Left

2. We are here to figure out how to do that

3. The fake Left is the biggest obstacle

If you still have questions, take a long hard look at the following diagram.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/shalom/pia/piaimages/spectrum.png

If this is not clear, read further...

[h2]'The Fake Left'

Confusion often stems from misunderstanding the real meaning of 'leftist' in terms of political and economic thought. In popular discourse the 'left' commonly refers to certain positions on culturally-divisive social issues (like abortion, gay rights, etc). This is dangerously misleading and serves to distract from understanding our economic reality.

People talk about 'democracy' and 'freedom' as if they can exist without economic democracy. The very concept of economic democracy rarely enters the discourse. Yet it is the key to all of these 'issues' we struggle with piecemeal in our legislative system - poverty, environmental damage, income disparity, weak education system, health care, and so forth.

Many people identify themselves as liberal AND leftist. These are contradictory positions. Liberalism, first and foremost, is an ECONOMIC theory, not a social platform. Not only that, LIBERALISM IS A RIGHT WING ECONOMIC THEORY. It is no accident that people have been taught to think otherwise.

Many people look to the liberal 'social democracies' of western Europe as some sort of people-oriented balance between capitalism and socialism, where the living standards are high, education, health care, labor rights etc are great. However, this perspective falls apart when we look deeper and see the relationship of these capitalist countries to the rest of the world. They still rely on the exploitation of other people's labor to keep their high standards. Those standards are applied only to those within their borders while the rest of the world continues to suffer. Make no mistake about it - these romanticized countries are generally nationalistic and protective. And the bottom line is that they are capitalist.

The ideals of the true left are universal, global. They do not stop at one country's borders at the expense of poor people elsewhere. They require the end of capitalism.

Yes, we are talking about the class war. Yes, we are talking about socialism. Yes, we are pointing to capitalism as the root of our problems.

Now for the 'rules', insofar as we have any.

NO RED-BAITING. Believe me, we've seen it enough to recognize it in its many disguises. There are plenty of other places to go if that's your game.

BE HONEST. Don't be afraid of looking uninformed. It's even ok if you're confused - billions of dollars have been spent to confuse you your whole life. No passive-aggressive games either.

NO WHINING. Is someone being mean? Tough it out. These are words on a screen, not kids on a playground. Don't take things personally. Substance trumps civility here. This is not a free pass for being an asshole, but everyone has a different style.

This is one place where we don't constantly have to defend the most basic leftist views. Challenges are fine but the impetus is on the status-quo protector.

"The radicals have the easier case to make. They have only to point to the discrepancies between the operation of the modern economy and the ideas by which it is supposed to be judged, while the conservatives have the well nigh impossible task of demonstrating that this is the best of all possible worlds. For the same reason, however, the conservatives are compensated by occupying positions of power, which they can use to keep criticism in check... The conservatives do not feel obliged to answer radical criticisms on their merits and the argument is never fairly joined."

http://pubs.socialistreviewindex.org.uk/isj71/harman.htm

To existing members who are upset/confused about this - recent events have demonstrated that we can't waste our time distracted by defending against attacks from the status quo. Sorry if it ruffles your feathers, but the reality is that if there will ever be real change, there needs to be a fight. The battle lines are being drawn here, and you need to pick a side. It's that simple.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/shalom/pia/about.htm

calm down

I'm not seeing how that helps here though.

In any case, I understand the point you're making and I think you'd find sites like DU accommodate that "inclusive" point of view.

This site doesn't.

Noone was or is doing this.



one size fits all "type" cliches, except to shove "Them" away from "Us."

Open your eyes a bit. You couldn't have possibly described exactly what is happening from the liberals/progs any better and you don't even see it.

As far as just reading essays that too is just another dumb remark. You can head right over here and I'll house you and we'll take lots of walks and attend lots of events with our recorders. I'll hold your hand through it all and provide the barf bags as we witness first hand the very folks Mike so perfectly described in that bit.

It's real life and the ideas these people buttress are the figurative dead wood that needs clearing. Once you do that you will wake up a bit. Then again you might just be pretending to be asleep.

If it's a wedge issue, it's worth asking who that wedge serves, ultimately.

http://www.progressiveindependent.com/dc/dcboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=105666&mesg_id=105838
Reply #49: The "overreaction" has already occurred, above.

It's not a matter of choosing sides, which you demarcate so well, but the people who are left out who don't fit the rigid boundaries, who fall between the cracks, whose stories and lives you may not know or observe. 

Another question:
If there are these rigid boundaries or a time comes to man the ideological barricades, if what's left of the left is divided or isolated, who does that serve, what gets accomplished and how?


1. America needs a strong Left


2. We are here to figure out how to do that
3. The fake Left is the biggest obstacle

As the question above suggests, how and where does #2 occur? I now have a better grasp of what this alleged "fake left" is regarded as on PI now... my questions were about those who don't fit the cliches, who fall between the gaps, how -- or are -- they included?

The unattributed piece that chlamor posted was intended as sardonic and divisive, based on attitudes expressed in another thread as "gentrified fucks" or "yuppie assholes." What about those who are left of those perceived "fake leftists"?

built around a dingleberry.

to believe what you want and then claim it as truth and try to impose it on others.

Before I had replied in this thread after the deletion, you wrote:

Reply #30: WTF?
I suspected that omega had posted some inflammatory crap because A) it is very unlike chlamor to do any admin stuff, and B) omega didn't complain.

Reply #32: what fucking "issues"
Omega probably posted some inflammatory crap, but what does that have to do with a new person asking what happened?

"Omega didn't complain" so that legitimizes false accusations?

"Omega probably posted some inflammatory crap" based on what BS supposition?

What I did was restate the question in a way indicating my LACK of intent to offend.

You've been so busy building some monument to your agenda -- whatever it is -- and starting new threads to promote it, you haven't actually addressed the questions about the unattributed essay, which it turns out was written by you. No discussion there. Just an excuse for false bravado and manipulative invective.

With respect to your observations, commitment and excellent writing skills, your assumptions and presumptions do not equal truth.

Your projections and misrepresentations of my actual words and thoughts are not reality; nor is your attempt to build some new campaign on your imaginary foundation.

Two Americas Reply #62: of course I do

"No big deal. I think that you ought to be able to make posts like that. Others here disagree and have a legitimate case for deleting that sort of baiting and taunting post. In any case, there is no authority figure here to play to, so if you don't like what is happening and want to get it resolved, you will have to start a thread on that topic and get consensus from everyone here just as I would. I usually lose, by the way, and we are a long way from having consensus on how to handle things like your posts on this thread. That is just the way things are."

:wow:

Paging Dr Guillotine...

this one isn't even fun to bat around.

and ain't useful, helpful, or valuable except as an example of distractions to be avoided...

...depending on the subject matter.

There is an opinion poll (NYT) going around at the moment which defines the teabaggers as being of above average education, income, and social status. The interesting thing is not that they are not primarily working class as is often claimed. Anyone could have told you that. The interesting thing is that they are demographically indistinguishable from "liberals"... and both nearly match the statistical make-up of the 'burbs, defined narrowly.

Dese guys are mirror images of each other and each thinks that their shit don't stink but the other guy's does.

Omega-man, it isn't an insult (except on DU) to say that looney tea-baggers have the Libs pegged. In large part they do...

Or don't you think that the Libs are putrid with their own versions of creationism and birthers?

What does the Dalai Lama think about it?

used by the OET mods when bashing leftists. "Calm down." Fuck, if I was an admin I'd ban your ass right now...

clear as a bell...

your hair trigger assumptions about the use of the English language? Your hostile projections. FTS!!!! Get a fucking grip, is that better?

Don't try to drag me into your personal bullshit.

You come in here and instead of trying to learn from several folks here who could give you some much needed schooling, you start spouting the same old tried liberal jabs and comebacks and may be too thick to even realize it. "Get a grip"? "Calm down"? I would not drag you anywhere fella. Fuck this - you are lucky I am not an admin...

I don't know if you think you know anything about me but one thing you should know is I don't give a fucking shit what you think you've heard before -- I stand by my words and will not be a generic punching bag for any belligerent fuck.

Thank you.

Why the fuck are you on this board? What do you hope to accomplish or learn or do? So far you have simply screamed that you are a liberal and proud of it. Well that's great for you, but why the fuck are you here?

Do you read posts before you reply to them?

"I don't know if you think you know anything about me but one thing you should know is I don't give a fucking shit what you think you've heard before -- I stand by my words and will not be a generic punching bag for any belligerent fuck. Thank you."


"I stand by my words" means I don't let anyone lie about what I've said, like you tried to here:

"So far you have simply screamed that you are a liberal and proud of it."

You are so fucking clueless it is really funny. You are just the same old, tired liberal bullshit we have all seen before. No one gives two shits for your "I stand by my words" self aggrandizing bullshit. Fuck you and your "words". We have asked before, who's side are you on, and you have answered the question. You will try to claim that you haven't, but you have BoBo...you have.

Now we are done. Speak into the microphone...