Quote:
|
If this thread can be a "process" with a goal of finding out how "each other tick", with no argumentative intent, I'm asking how you do it. I'm bestowed with a requirement for political justice, as an indispensable component of decisions I take, and of those my government takes. I want to identify rationalizations, and avoid them, as an "easy way" out.
|
well, i am interested in the narrower version of the thread for its own sake, really.
i was--and if anything am more so now that i've read the responses above--curious both about what folk have to say and how they say it.
it's mostly a way to try to understand the community differently, and maybe humanize it a little by pushing aside the persona names and asking the (anonymous) 3-d comrades a question, just because i'm curious about it.
given that, it makes little sense to me to launch any fusillades, y'know? it's a fragile thing, a thread like this, in that it's asking what to me are quite intimate questions. so narrowing the focus is mostly about trying to create a space so folk may be inclined to actually respond, in their way, based on how they see these relations.
and it's interesting that already there is such a range of responses, interesting to see the overlap and distinctions between say jj's and seaver's experiences in the military and their relations to larger political commitments.
or that ustwo and i have diametrically opposed relations to collective work. it's interesting for its own sake, i think.
anyway, that's the idea.
feel free to open other threads to pursue discussions about underlying issues--but remember the second rule--i dont want us to screw up the possiblity of once in a while addressing each other as human beings rather than as collections of sentences in a box by having what those folk say turned back onto them. if that happens, this thread will die a quick death and you wont see others that try this going anywhere. so it's kinda important that we respect that rule...