To the Folks Who Post that They Don't Post Here, Anymore..... - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

pan6467 · 03-11-2007, 05:56 PM

I post very little in here anymore because my politics are extreme but not a Left or Right extreme and thus I'm attacked from both sides and neither side even acknowledges good points.

Then again neither side admits or acknowledges when the other has a good point either.

Everyone wants to bitch about what is the best way to run the country and everyone wants it done their way, no compromise.

I believe in making compromises and doing not what's best for me or for "my side" but what is best for my country as a whole.

If more people truly believed that way and found compromise and ways to work together instead of trying to destroy each other we may get somewhere in this country. And as I keep saying, it starts at the ground floor.

Instead of every damned thread being a fight to see who can beat down the other, why don't we work on solutions and then go to other forums, write letters to the editor, find candidates that will listen and start a grass roots campaign and work to build up steam.

We are on one of the most popular forums on the net and we do nothing but fight here in politics.

No one listens to me, both sides refuse to see what I say and can do nothing but ridicule me for my beliefs so.... I stay out of it. Let you morons who only want to fight bloody each other and ruin the board.... I'll watch shake my head and keep imagining what could be.

dc_dux · 03-11-2007, 06:07 PM

Sorry Pan.....I'm confused....are we morons or elitists?

Why is your approach to political forums the only correct and/or reasonable approach for discourse?

pan6467 · 03-11-2007, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Sorry Pan.....I'm confused....are we morons or elitists?

Why is your approach to political forums the only correct and/or reasonable approach for discourse?

It's not but when your discourse includes only trying to destroy the right or left and you refuse to try to reach compromise and try to find the best way for improvement... then you are whichever you want.

You can be elitist because you refuse to listen to the other side and try to find middle ground for the betterment of all..... or a moron for it.

My way may not be perfect, and I maybe elitist myself.... but I want to listen to BOTH sides, find middle ground and do what is best for society as a whole...not just the side I am on because I want to prove myself right and feel all warm and cuddly while I didn't better any part of society at all.

Be pissy, get all defensive about what I'm saying.... hell attack me .... then look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if you honestly believe that by being so fucking partisan, that by not trying to reach a workable middle, that by doing nothing but fighting over who is all right and who is all wrong, you are truly bettering society as a whole.

I tried.... I couldn't do it any longer. I want to better society, leave a better world for my kid, niece, nephew and their kids and their kids and so on.... I don't want to take a stringent all one side or all the other stance and keep watching my country destroy itself. We are better than this and we deserve better.

But hey if you sleep better at night believing your side is all there is and you'll fight the other even if you know there can be middle ground and a better way that you both can agree on.... then sleep well.

Me? I sleep well because well, I try to keep an open mind and learn and do my best to make sure the part of the world I can control, is a little better than how I found it.

Get enough people wanting to put politics and religion aside and work to find ways to better society.... we will and the world will be a much better place.

Keep fighting over who's side is the only side or who's God is the only God..... you will eventually destroy each other... or if you do destroy all opponents and leave only you... best damned be sure you can better everything you say because if you can't...... you will find an opposition that will grow and destroy you.

Plus, if you are willing to find middle ground and the opponent still refuses to.... you win more people over to your side and middle ground will eventually win out... and you'll end up as the ultimate loser, because everyone will see you only stood for hate and 1 way. Let them see that in your opponent.... take the high road.

Disclaimer: the "you" used is meant as a collective "you" not just DC Dux. I'm sure you know deep down if this applies to you or not. If not God bless you.... if it does then why keep allowing hate to control you?

dc_dux · 03-11-2007, 07:25 PM

Pan...I would simply urge you to look at your previous post again objectively. It is the antithesis of consensus-building.

You rant about how you are "attacked from both sides" (I dont recall seeing such personal attacks), you rave about how others "do nothing but ridicule you for your beliefs" (I dont recall seeing such ridicule either) and you put yourself above the others here by characterizing them as "morons" (and earlier as "elitists") and implying that you care more about solving the problems of the country and the world.

Sorry but this is not whatI would describe as an effective way to create an environment for compromise and consensus building,

BTW..I dont believe that I allow hate to control me. I do believe it is important, or even critical, for the future of the country, for people to speak out and expose lying, secrecy, incompetence, and potential acts of malfeasance by a government that, in the opinion of many, is not working in the best interest of its citizens. From there, I am willing to build consensus to correct these failures and I am open to a wide range of solutions....not just mine.

Elphaba · 03-11-2007, 07:53 PM

Pan, did you see a recent editorial that four former senators, 2 R's & 2 D's, have formed their own "think tank" to find compromises for the big issues that need to be addressed? They recognize that congress is infected with partisan poison and it is their hope that they can craft legislation that is acceptable to both parties. It gives me great hope that a more collaborative government may be possible.

I believe this article was in my local paper and I will look for a link if you have not seen it.

Times are changing, my friend

Pen

dc_dux · 03-11-2007, 08:13 PM

Elph...I think you are referring to the Bipartisan Policy Center formed by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, George Mitchell, Bob Dole and Tom Daschle.

The BPC will work with national experts to undertake projects on a range of issues, beginning with energy policy, agriculture policy, and national security. Additional projects will be added in the coming year. Each project will be staffed by substantive experts and directed by a diverse group of national leaders. The BPC Advisory Board, comprised of the former Majority Leaders, will advise the organization on its overall direction and agenda. While each project will differ in scope and approach, all BPC projects will be politically balanced, evidence-based, and designed to have a meaningful impact on the national policy debate.
http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/inde..._Policy_Center

I look forward to following their work.

host · 03-11-2007, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Elph...I think you are referring to the Bipartisan Policy Center formed by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, George Mitchell, Bob Dole and Tom Daschle.

The BPC will work with national experts to undertake projects on a range of issues, beginning with energy policy, agriculture policy, and national security. Additional projects will be added in the coming year. Each project will be staffed by substantive experts and directed by a diverse group of national leaders. The BPC Advisory Board, comprised of the former Majority Leaders, will advise the organization on its overall direction and agenda. While each project will differ in scope and approach, all BPC projects will be politically balanced, evidence-based, and designed to have a meaningful impact on the national policy debate.
http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/inde..._Policy_Center

I look forward to following their work.

....evidence-based....bi-partisan...sounds identical to the ISG and the 9/11 Commission, and we saw how far their reco's went....however, we can hope, can't we? There was a time when it seemed that we were in for "one party" rule, for as far in the future as the eye can see, and now we've seen that some change is possible, especially when there is more than one "decider"...

pan6467 · 03-11-2007, 10:07 PM

The question was asked I answered it.

Find a thread where we see the Lefties here and the Righties find compromise and not try to bludgeon each other with their own "facts", with arguing over details and not offering compromise.

Am I better than anyone here? NO, absolutely not. I just speak as I see it and I see this board as being very partisan and hateful.

Again, I was asked, I answered honestly.

The_Jazz · 03-12-2007, 05:36 AM

When I was growing up, my parent taught me that polite people don't discuss politics or religion in public. Once I grew up, I realized that those are the two most divisive issues for humanity (note how I lumped everyone on the planet in there?). There's a good reason for my parents' warning - discussing either is one of the fastest ways to start a fight among strangers.

I've been thinking a lot about this topic recently, and I've come to the conclusion that I generally only post in Politics as a way to organize my own thoughts and to get a sense of the talking points of the ends of the spectrum. No one here is ever going to convince me to change my vote by themselves, and I'm never going to convince anyone else to do the same. In the best of all possible worlds, we'd all realize that and take some of the venom out of our statements. But I'm not Dr. Pangloss and I realize that won't happen. Instead, I'm going to restate the most basic rule of Politics - debate the topic, not the individual.

I've already seen a couple glaring violations of that rule in this thread, and to be honest, I actually thought about abusing my newly granted mod powers to warn people or shut down the thread entirely. Then I had a sip of coffee and realized that was counterproductive. However, I am going to insist that the rule be followed in both letter and spirit. There's a line between attacking someone's politics and their character, and I expect that you all know it. If you don't, you're going to find out. If you're the victim, please feel free to let me know since I obviously can't be everywhere at once.

roachboy · 03-12-2007, 08:14 AM

for me, these are the horse latitudes politically.
the bush administration is still in power.

the ideological climate has shifted out from under the administration, but it is still in power.

the fiasco of the iraq war is now self-evident--from its inception through to the present (the admin is requesting another 8000 troops---according to the guardian, yet another request is coming in may---there is no discrete endpoint for this "surge"--so it appears that the "surge" is best spelled ESCALATION in the grand vietnam stylee--this despite the story floating about this morning that the us is now planning to withdraw entirely if the "surge" doesnt work....)
but the administration is still in power.

i recently watched the spike lee documentary about katrina and nola---shocking stuff--unbelievable non-action from this administration, needlessly compounding already overwhelming suffering---but they are still in power.

the abuse of the judiciary--from guantanomo to the purging of district attorneys through the "expansive" interpretation informational gathering prerogatives accorded the fbi under the patriot act---all obvious. but the administration is still in power.

the list of incoherences could go on and on.
what is there to say?
i dont find this to be a climate that makes how i think about politics in the states to be more open than it had been....i dont find this a climate that provides much change in fundamental problems...i dont particularly enjoy the sense of writing the same thing over and over...so i have found myself fading out a bit.

pan6467 · 03-12-2007, 08:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

for me, these are the horse latitudes politically.
the bush administration is still in power.

the ideological climate has shifted out from under the administration, but it is still in power.

the fiasco of the iraq war is now self-evident--from its inception through to the present (the admin is requesting another 8000 troops---according to the guardian, yet another request is coming in may---there is no discrete endpoint for this "surge"--so it appears that the "surge" is best spelled ESCALATION in the grand vietnam stylee--this despite the story floating about this morning that the us is now planning to withdraw entirely if the "surge" doesnt work....)
but the administration is still in power.

i recently watched the spike lee documentary about katrina and nola---shocking stuff--unbelievable non-action from this administration, needlessly compounding already overwhelming suffering---but they are still in power.

the abuse of the judiciary--from guantanomo to the purging of district attorneys through the "expansive" interpretation informational gathering prerogatives accorded the fbi under the patriot act---all obvious. but the administration is still in power.

the list of incoherences could go on and on.
what is there to say?
i dont find this to be a climate that makes how i think about politics in the states to be more open than it had been....i dont find this a climate that provides much change in fundamental problems...i dont particularly enjoy the sense of writing the same thing over and over...so i have found myself fading out a bit.

You say Bush did this has done that..... (and I may agree), but how do we better the country? He only has less than 21 months in office before the next President Elect is sworn in. So we need a plan to better the country and repair it. So how will you do it?

Now you have something to work with, now you go in show what you got other than Bush is evil and the Right has to show what they have, other than their mantra, "the Left want to weaken America, tax and spend..." etc.

See both sides give fear, hate and rely on those. Neither side shows any answers. It's like for the past 20 some odd years our country has chosen to be REACTIONARY instead of trailblazing, stepping on some toes (which has to happen to move forward) and working to make this country great again.

I want new leaders that give new ideas. Leaders that listen to BOTH sides, takes the best from BOTH sides and looks at past mistakes not accusingly but to learn from.

Growing up with Liberal beliefs I was taught and believed back then to respect and listen to others. Then, I got into the politics of hate because that is where the road led and it was very easy. However, I looked at my son, the kids I go to college with, my sisters kids and realized that in hate politics I leave nothing better for them. So I worked to change and am changing more and more. It's work to not fall into the easy hate and blame politics, sometimes I still do, it's natural at times because there are still sensitive areas.

Hopefully, as shown above the think tank can work. It's a start. A start we need to make, hopefully it grows into something extremely productive. But there are those that will bear false messages of unity and working together and they will hurt the advancements. But if we hold politicians to a greater level of ethics than they have now, and they hold themselves to those ethics... those that would bear the false messages won't last long enough to do any serious damage.

We can blame, point fingers and hate or we can move forward, forgive and find lessons from our mistakes.

Plain and simple, which do you choose? Doesn't mean we give carte blanche.. we still hold politicians to a better and higher level than now.... but we don't blame a whole political party, we work together to get the garbage out and the rest will fall into place.

Show the masses a better, more positive message and way to advance and you will win. Elections then will not be "the better of 2 evils" but who has better ideas and a more comprehensive, inclusive plan to move us forward.

We can keep looking back, but doing so slows us down and gets us nowhere if all we do when we look back is point fingers and offer up nothing but hate and BS because we just want our side elected.

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 09:35 AM

I have to say that I agree with several of the other contributors on this thread. I consider myself to be a political person. I read and I take stances and I like to talk about them. But I have to admit that I am often turned off by the discussions in the politics forum. Like pan, I feel as though I am an outsider for my moderate stances on many issues. Even though I consider myself to be very liberal in my views, I don't feel like I am "liberal enough" to be accepted by the other lefties on the board. And the righties tend to simply ignore me, lol. But that's okay really, because I don't come to conclusions and develop opinions simply to post them here and gain acceptance. I post here in the spirit of weighing in with my opinion - for better or for worse.

And they are opinions, folks. I don't care how much you think you know, what sources you have or how compellingly factoids line up, there is no way for any of us to take in the entirety of the machinations at work in the world and claim that we know "the truth." The forming of political views can be a very narcotic and womblike experience. It makes us feel more secure to know that we have a viewpoint and that there are "facts" out there that align with our thinking...that impart some "truthiness" to the political ethos we feel akin to. But how is this possible when there are two sides who feel exactly the same way about their political affiliation? Now I don't say all this because I think I am better or smarter or more savvy than anyone else here, because I am well aware that I am not. It's just where I'm at and it leaves me often with not a lot to say in the politics forum.

Like uber and Hal, I am also turned off by the mode of discussion, but I understand it. It is typical of political discussion on the internet and is oftentimes a necessary manner of responding to some posts. I also agree that the liberal vs. conservative imbalance on the board makes some discussions degenerate very quickly when certain conservative posters get involved. I've no interest in getting involved in most conversations about "right and wrong" because I just don't believe in them most of the time...when it comes to politics, that is.

Finally, somewhat like roachboy, sometimes I feel like I have said all that I can say (not only here) about the current issues and haven't much desire to recant my own words over and over. Even just writing what I am writing now, I feel like I am repeating myself ad nauseum.

roachboy · 03-12-2007, 09:35 AM

pan:

all i wrote about is why i haven't been as active here as i have been.

i dont think i am particularly unusual in that my statements about what i may understand to be possible in principle (as things that might be done to alter the present, grim state of affairs) fluctuates with my general view of that state of affairs.

sometimes i think that lars von trier was right in "dogville": the united states is a gangster state and the only thing to be done about it for the benefit of all is to burn it down. it is not reformable, it is not changeable. it cannot accomodate the basic demands of its own citizens, much less be coherent as the center of a global socio-economic system. these are moments that push me more into my past of involvement with left revolutionary politics.

other times i think that much could and should be done. these are my more social-democratic moments.

in the horse latitudes, i find it difficult to focus on those things that could and should be changed within the existing order: the dysfunctions of the order itself become too obvious and with that the problems appear to be of a piece with the nature of the order itself---so solutions to fundamental problems begin to migrate into functioning as elements of a more radical position.

at other times, things seem amenable to being taken apart, separations made and on that basis more local arguments can be outlined and so forth.

insofar as the forum in concerned, when i am thinking about the present state of affairs as particularly grim, the arguments that i would be likely to advance would be more radical. these would (a) require a fair amount of explanation, which i am not sure folk would necessarily want to wade through and (b) would incline me to being quite uncompromising in discussions that may or may not follow.

besides, i work out the more radical stuff in other forms.

as is the case for anyone, what happens here is separate from my other work----what functions here is particular---in the end there are tactical questions particular to the forum that shape what i am and am not inclined to talk about here--because this is a particular kind of space involving a particular community--it is not that open, frankly--in part because of the format itself (a messageboard) and in part because of the particular combination of voices that comprise the community. the community is interesting and valuable, but not all kinds of argument function equally well within it. and this is neither good nor bad in itself: it simply is.

so.

pan6467 · 03-12-2007, 10:12 AM

But you have and give a picture of pessimism. All I am trying to do is push people to show that there is optimism and that change CAN and WILL happen if enough voices demand it and work for it.

Don't push the negativity and the hatred, expand your views into what can be positively done and work to BETTER the country.

There is no need to tear it down... we have the freedom to make the changes but we have to work for them. (Although I admit I am scared of what Bush may do if the GOP lose in '08.... but that's just my paranoidal side and I can't live on "what ifs" but they are fun to hypothesize at times.)

It's not time to tear down the nation it is time to stand up be counted and push people to come up with ideas to save and better ourselves. We need optimism and positive ideas now more than ever.

RB whether you believe me or not, I like ya. I like and respect most people on this board. I am trying to push people into getting out of the negativity and come up with positive ideas and compromises and debates that produce ideas that people when they read these threads can say, "That could work." or at least push them into thinking positively and demanding positive messages, ideas and plans from their politicians.

We are a country driven on negativety, fed negativity, and hate politics. It is time to push and demand for better.

Who cares what party the person with the better ideas comes from... we need leaders that are willing to take chances, piss people off in their party and the other and to stand up to corporate interests and say, "This is OUR country. A nation is not built on the power of the corporation and rich, it is built on how well educated, the chances EVERY single person has to advance, and the ability leave a better country for the future."

We can do it, we just have to start doing it. If enough voices speak out and demand what is right and demand politicians work for what is best for the country not their party or special interests we all win and we all get a better result.

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 10:29 AM

You are very optimistic, pan.

pan6467 · 03-12-2007, 10:32 AM

RB

The community, state and nation are a sum of all its parts.

If the parts are a majority negative.... the community, state, nation will be negative.

If the parts are a majority positive and work for positive growth......the community, state, nation will be positive.

It is imperative in these times of negativity coming at us from everywhere to stand up acknowledge it and turn it into positives and find ways to grow from it. Otherwise we keep falling into negativity until we die.

It's not hard to spend 15 minutes typing a positive thread or trying to read someone you disagree with's post and try to find compromise or a positive way to debate, instead of attacking, waiting for attack and attacking more.

That is what I am doing I guess... because I keep trying to push people to be positive and that in and of itself is wrong... I'm no better than anyone, I'm not holier than thou it's just I can see ways we can progress forward but I see too much hatred and resistance from partisan people and people who refuse to bend at all. It's frustrating, but then again... maybe someone reads what I say and it gets them to think and they start getting positive and coming up with ideas and they pass that on and so on and so on.... one can hope.

roachboy · 03-12-2007, 10:41 AM

well, i am not sure how you would position arguments along the line of:

the problems the states are experiencing follow in significant measure from the rationality of capitalism itself.

the problems the states are experiencing follows from the tendency to collapse politics into the arrangement of objects in the world, to assume that political arrangements are given in the way a naive epistemology take objects to be. you can see how this claim operates by watching the way in which political frame-assumptions and visual infotainment are combined in television "news" footage. watch them from a naive perspective. it should be obvious.

these two claims operate in tandem, with the first being a condition of possibility for the second.
it either is true, then it would follow that significant change at the political level should follow from a quite radical reassessment of how politics is understood. this reassessment may or may not end up being functional within this particular socio-economic system---following out its logic may end up with a quite radical transformation of the existing state of affairs as a whole.

i say this stuff because i suspect you, pan, would lump it all together under these rather problematic categories of "hate" and "negativity"--when it is neither. you act as though the existing state of affairs is a necessary horizon for all political thinking. i find that assumption to be useless. for me, at least, it is useless. it begs the questions that interest me. and that's all there is to it.

-------------

aside:

at bottom, pan, the problem that arises for me from your particular approach to debate is that i am not sure if you can or are willing to distinguish a radical critique--that is a critique that tries to point to fundamental underlying problems---from what you call "hate" and "negativity"--sometimes i dont think your recognize any distinction between them at all. whence the differends that arise. whence to some extent at least my sense of the community as placing artificial limitations on what can and cannot be said here. this is not a claim to censorship---rather it is a problem that at certain moments i find interesting to engage with and at other moments i dont.

almost inevitably, when period of interpersonal board snarkiness happen between you and i--for example--at its origin is what i take to be your refusal to recognize a difference between types of argument---"hate and negativity" as over against critiques oriented around fundamental or structural problems--the problem is: to deal with structural problems, you have to change the structure itself. it is not a matter of making adjustments within a structure that is itself fucked up. i dont find anything "negative" about saying as much--and i think that you do.

jorgelito · 03-12-2007, 10:43 AM

I can get on board with your message Pan, in fact, I like to think of myself as possessing similar attitudes as yourself. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being an optimist, it's a good thing. People would do well to learn that.

You just have to keep plugging away. Plus, we all could do to listen more as well.

Keep at it, don't lose hope.

pan6467 · 03-12-2007, 10:58 AM

RB I have to get to work, but see how things are going now? You and I have dialogue and that is a beginning, is it not?

THANKS MM AND JORGE FOR THE KIND WORDS..... I TRULY APPRECIATE THEM.

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 11:05 AM

I don't think there is anything wrong with being an optimist. I used to be very much of one myself...still am in some regards. But I must admit that the genetic pull towards cynicism that is inherent in my parents draws me deeper and deeper into its fold year by year.

Gather 'round ye peoples of TFP and bear witness to the development of an honest to god misanthrope. It's bound to get ugly.

Bill O'Rights · 03-12-2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

It's bound to get ugly.

Not a chance in Hell.

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 12:02 PM

oh, cut it out, I'm cultivating curmudgeonliness here....grrrrrr

The_Jazz · 03-12-2007, 12:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mixedmedia

oh, cut it out, I'm cultivating curmudgeonliness here....grrrrrr

If that's what you're aiming for, you need to figure out how to keep me from going from the stockings thread directly to this one. Crumudgeons, by definitions, aren't hot.

roachboy · 03-12-2007, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Crumudgeons, by definitions, aren't hot.

they can be.
i worked out a proof, but i cant seem to make myself post it.

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

If that's what you're aiming for, you need to figure out how to keep me from going from the stockings thread directly to this one. Crumudgeons, by definitions, aren't hot.

...okay, deal in base stereotypes if you must, my man

The_Jazz · 03-12-2007, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

they can be.
i worked out a proof, but i cant seem to make myself post it.

You, sir, are my proof that crumudgeons aren't hot. I've met you IRL and read your posts on a regular basis, remember?

Bill O'Rights · 03-12-2007, 01:00 PM

oh snap!

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 01:41 PM

I think roachboy is hot. But then, I've been known to be somewhat of a freak.

LOL, what's this thread about again?

Elphaba · 03-12-2007, 03:35 PM

I think it's about whether roachboy puts out or not.

The_Jazz · 03-12-2007, 03:47 PM

Pen, I'm sending you the bill for my new keyboard! I just shot beer out of my nose reading that!

No need to do my abs tonight; laughing this hard will do the exercise for me!

roachboy · 03-12-2007, 04:39 PM

mr. jazz:
while it's true that we met in 3-d, i think you put me in a false bind on account of it. specifically:
what makes you think i am a curmudgeon?
i am much more a bouncy, trouncy, flouncy, pouncy bundle of fun fun fun.
so my spectacularly attractive 3-d self can cleave the air without contradiction.
and i am a boy of negociable virtue. it comes with the trouncy flouncy territory.

that about covers that, i think, except for the blushing part, which it is best not to speak of. here's my secret:

http://ubu.wfmu.org/sound/chopin_hen...diopoems02.mp3

and a low bow during the course of which i describe an arc with my right arm that results in my unnecessarily large hat sweeping across the floor in the general direction of ms. media.

Supple Cow · 03-12-2007, 05:01 PM

Pan, with a small alteration, I'd be right on board with you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

Don't push the negativity and the hatred, expand your views into what can be positively done and work to BETTER <strike>the country</strike> yourself.

I think the rest of it (community and country) just comes in time - with enough focused individuals.

pig · 03-12-2007, 05:15 PM

supple,

why must it be one or the other? i would agree with a position that you can not make the world a better place until you have worked on yourself, or at the very least that you will be more efficient with more self-improvement. but i don't see why that means that you can't be aware of and motivated by a desire to improve the collective simultaneously with self-improvement.

Supple Cow · 03-12-2007, 05:44 PM

Because the "collective" is nothing more than a mob. A mob doesn't think or care. An individual can. (Whether one does or not is another issue.) I am optimistic, too. I just happen to believe that efforts to control or educate collectives are wasted. I would rather use my energy and time to effect change among individuals. It is not that I have no desire to improve things beyond the scope of my selfish benefit.

Do you personally feel more motivated when an appeal to action comes to you as an individual or as some anonymous member of a collective?

Elphaba · 03-12-2007, 07:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Jazz

Pen, I'm sending you the bill for my new keyboard! I just shot beer out of my nose reading that!

No need to do my abs tonight; laughing this hard will do the exercise for me!

If you turn the keyboard upside down and use an air mover you are likely to still have a dead keyboard. I know this.

Pen advice bill is coming your way.

mixedmedia · 03-12-2007, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

and a low bow during the course of which i describe an arc with my right arm that results in my unnecessarily large hat sweeping across the floor in the general direction of ms. media.

hmmmm, large hat = large....

sorry, couldn't resist

pan6467 · 03-12-2007, 10:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

well, i am not sure how you would position arguments along the line of:

the problems the states are experiencing follow in significant measure from the rationality of capitalism itself.

the problems the states are experiencing follows from the tendency to collapse politics into the arrangement of objects in the world, to assume that political arrangements are given in the way a naive epistemology take objects to be. you can see how this claim operates by watching the way in which political frame-assumptions and visual infotainment are combined in television "news" footage. watch them from a naive perspective. it should be obvious.

these two claims operate in tandem, with the first being a condition of possibility for the second.
it either is true, then it would follow that significant change at the political level should follow from a quite radical reassessment of how politics is understood. this reassessment may or may not end up being functional within this particular socio-economic system---following out its logic may end up with a quite radical transformation of the existing state of affairs as a whole.

i say this stuff because i suspect you, pan, would lump it all together under these rather problematic categories of "hate" and "negativity"--when it is neither. you act as though the existing state of affairs is a necessary horizon for all political thinking. i find that assumption to be useless. for me, at least, it is useless. it begs the questions that interest me. and that's all there is to it.

-------------

aside:

at bottom, pan, the problem that arises for me from your particular approach to debate is that i am not sure if you can or are willing to distinguish a radical critique--that is a critique that tries to point to fundamental underlying problems---from what you call "hate" and "negativity"--sometimes i dont think your recognize any distinction between them at all. whence the differends that arise. whence to some extent at least my sense of the community as placing artificial limitations on what can and cannot be said here. this is not a claim to censorship---rather it is a problem that at certain moments i find interesting to engage with and at other moments i dont.

almost inevitably, when period of interpersonal board snarkiness happen between you and i--for example--at its origin is what i take to be your refusal to recognize a difference between types of argument---"hate and negativity" as over against critiques oriented around fundamental or structural problems--the problem is: to deal with structural problems, you have to change the structure itself. it is not a matter of making adjustments within a structure that is itself fucked up. i dont find anything "negative" about saying as much--and i think that you do.

It is ok to question the other side and to point out weaknesses and debate, I just feel that there is too much attack and no one offering up any solutions.

If both sides truly want what is best for the country then why doesn't either put forth a viable platform instead of running on "GOP is all Right winged Christian pro big corporate, evil old white men who hate the poor."

or

"The Dems are whacked out wanting to take away all your guns, let drug addicts roam free, tax and spend, they hate the rich and will do all they can to tax business and the rich into bankruptcy."

Or similar such hate.

But look deeply and neither side truly runs on ANYTHING of substance. It's time to push our politicians and ourselves to do better.

Why does one have to take a side? Why cannot one work to find middle ground that all can live with, without having people question his stances or motives?

Therein lies the biggest problem and why we don't see good people get elected. People are so used to the negativity and hate mongering they either don't care anymore or they vote for the person who convinces them that the other guy will do more harm. Is that what we truly want from government and in control of our future?

My belief is you show people positive outlooks and hope and it will spread. Clinton offered that hope. The Contract with America (even though it was discarded and forgotten about and was a PR move) offered a taste of that hope. People voted for that hope. It was crushed because it was for the wrong reasons and because hate mongering continued to saturate politics. Thus people who voted for that hope were disenfranchised and their voices silenced.

It is time for someone, some group, some entity to bring that hope back and prove it can exist and work.

How is this done? Keep plugging along spreading the messages you believe in. Offer debates, if your opponent makes a good point admit it. Keep your positive position and message no matter what happens or who you piss on and eventually people will gravitate toward the positive message and those who are negative will lose. When it is negative vs. negative... all that wins is negative and everyone loses.

To you it maybe useless, but that is you. For the majority it maybe what they want. Politicians that put forth the best most positive plans and not hate. Maybe I am wrong. Maybe people prefer to live in negativity and watch our country be destroyed by parasitic politicians who don't give a damn, by corporate entities that worry only about money, by people who only worry about themselves and not what is best for the future, and what their kids and grandkids will inherit.

I'm sorry, I don't want future Pans cursing me because I left them a bankrupt decrepit country that holds no hope. I want future Pans to know that whether I succeeded or not, whether I was accused of being a radical insane optimist with no grasp on reality, I tried and did what I felt and believed was best for them.

I honestly do not believe there are many politicians that can say that and there are few who post here in Politics that I believe can honestly say that and truly believe it.

It's time we find it in ourselves to do that and to expect our politicians more than any one to strive for, work hard and not back down from it.

In the end, what we do in this lifetime, how we vote, who we elect and the laws they write and get away with.... may not truly be felt by us, but our children, grandchildren and so on will feel it and pay for our mistakes.

Is it not time we do as our grandparents, great-grandparents and so on did for us and build a better country that moves forward and takes positive steps even if at the time they may require some sacrifice and compromise?

Yes Supple, I agree one does need to work on one's self but as you do so, you can find others of the same mindset to help and work with.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Supple Cow

Because the "collective" is nothing more than a mob. A mob doesn't think or care. An individual can. (Whether one does or not is another issue.) I am optimistic, too. I just happen to believe that efforts to control or educate collectives are wasted. I would rather use my energy and time to effect change among individuals. It is not that I have no desire to improve things beyond the scope of my selfish benefit.

Do you personally feel more motivated when an appeal to action comes to you as an individual or as some anonymous member of a collective?

I don't see the community as a mob. I see it as individuals each wanting what is best for society as a whole: but lost in the confusion, hatred, selfishness that is brought about by negativity.

If you keep hearing bad news every day, whether true or not you will believe it, prepare for it and adjust your life and attitude so that you can handle it. When filled with negativity, health suffers, mentally you are drained, you can't focus and you fill up with negative energy and emotions.

That is what is happening in this country today.

It's time to change that. We can do it. Like I said I can affect my little world only to a degree. But if someone hears me and is influenced then they affect their own little world and make it better and perhaps we join together and affect others who affect others and so on.

I've said this before and if nothing else I say makes any sense to you think long and hard about this and try it in your own life to see how true it is. (Hopefully you try it on something small.)

Negative energy flows downhill... so it covers everything in it's path exerting a minimal amount of energy. So it is very weak. Everyone can see how weak it is.... but it is easy. The majority of politicians, corporations and media use this to their advantage.

Positive energy flows uphill and starts weakly and has to fight to survive. But as it fights to survive it gains strength and presses forward and upward. Each step it gains more and more strength and more and more powerful, so that when it meets negativity there are only 2 possible outcomes. It's strength, might and the belief in it overcomes the negativity and becomes stronger gaining more strength and belief each battle it has as it moves upward.

You don't truly defeat negativity, as you win a battle it just pulls back, condenses and waits for the next battle.

OR

The belief in it is bogged down and the easy way is chosen and negativity didn't have to do anything but wait for the positive influences to get tired and decide to give up.

The option lies within each of us. Recognizing we own that option and we can make the choice and not have the choice made for us can make a difference.... but again it lies solely in how much energy and belief each person wants to put into it.

(I also use that with my clients describing recovery.)

pig · 03-13-2007, 06:18 AM

supple, your preference for point of attack is entirely up to you, of course. i didn't mean to imply anything concerning selfishness in the popular negative connotative way, although i suspect you may use that word with a different sense. however, i suppose i reject the premise the we are primarily either individualistic or societies; i believe the fact is that we are both simultaneously. i'm thinking about a friend of mine who works for the usda in organic certification and farmland allocation/preservation. although he certainly enjoys what he's doing, its not his primary interest in his job. he does it because he is concerned about the future of open spaces in america and the availability of healthy food stocks. in fact, i know many people who work in fields with a primary motivation to make a better world; and i would tend to think that these career choices are at least heavily influenced by an awareness of the larger social group.

are you talking primarily about the imposition / education of morality / ethics?

mixedmedia · 03-13-2007, 06:24 AM

I think there are collectives, as in groups organized around an interest or a concern. Then there is THE collective. And I tend to agree with supplecow. THE collective is very hard to influence in subtle yet meaningful ways. It is hard to get THE collective to change or sacrifice because, individually, they can fall back on laziness or indifference without being singled out.

roachboy · 03-13-2007, 07:49 AM

i dont think anyone engages with the political unless they are motivated by a degree of concern for themselves, for their surroundings and the direction these are moving both in real time and in the future. real time situations are indices of future possibilities: that's why folk spend time trying to work out meanings for real-time phenomena. and in this there is a commonality that runs well beyond the narrow limits you seem to want to draw around political debate: it goes as much for folk who trawl through the field of debris that is the left as for those in the shadowy reaches of the far right who play paintball in camo every weekend as a way of preparing themselves for helter skelter.

maybe folk have other things that they would focus on if they were able to assume that the political space within which they lived was coherent: stuff like finding a rubik's cube on ebay because this time goddamn it i am going to solve it or trying to figure out if it really makes any sense to use pipe from a pipe organ in your car's exhaust system because it should sound cool....

but the fact is that the political space within which we operate is not coherent, and the longer-term trajectories you can derive from this political space are even less coherent. the major political parties really are factions within an oligarchy that engage in periodic rotation--the democrats offer very little that differs from the republicans--periods of deviation apart--and the bush administration has turned out to be quite a period of deviation----such that the democrats suddenly look like an actual alternative, even as their actions in congress demonstrate that the constraints within which they function nearly outweigh any sense that this alternative has a content.

here's a little example:

over the weekend, i watched spike lee's documentary about new orleans during and after katrina. you really should see it, even though the last 2 parts operate like a long, slow drift into ambiguity. it raises a host or problems, from the way in whcih the television coverage of the storm and its aftermath was simultaneously about sensationalizing certain elements AND was a device to enable avoidance of the scale of what happened, to the systematic racism that cuts through all aspects of the situation and responses to it, to the way in which the disaster was "handled": shipping people all over the united states on busses, one-way tickets provided by fema. one way bus tickets. go to utah and rot. buh-bye.

nola revealed many systemic problems--and it showed how folk had managed to cope and flourish even within these systemic problems--a coping and flourishing that did not in any way justify the systemic problems themselves...

one of these problems: racism and its implication with the american class structure and the ways in which these factors coverge in the debacle that was the nola public school system. this cluster is a set of indices of the way in which social reproduction in the united states is entirely geared around an outmoded class structure---one of the consequences of this is that the system itself amounts to an argument, and that argument is that if you are young, poor and african-american, you are expendable.

it was like this before the storm.
it is like this, after the storm.
this is a fundamental element of what makes america as it is.
and this is a STRUCTURAL problem.

it is intertwined with the entire history of the united states since the civil war. it is an expression of that history. it is among the logical outcomes of that history.

and nola was but an extreme example of a situation that obtains across the board insofar as the american class system, racism, poverty and social reproduction are concerned.

both political parties are geared around avoidance of such problems: they are not amenable to short-term solutions, so it is difficult for politicians to offer simplistic packages the primary function of which is the enabling of appropriate photo-ops for the heroic politician. this is what i did. i am magnificent. vote for me.

addressing stuff like this would require a fundamental rethinking of how the united states operates: what class system it actually has (as opposed to the class system the conservatives prefer to imagine that we have, one within which everyone is somehow middle class--an image that is the simple inversion of lake woebegone, where everybody is above average...), what factors it leans on, what functions it serves and does not serve, whether it is ethical to allow it to continue....and what is more, questions of what should be done to change it and to what end do not resolve themselves as a result of thinking about the history of these issues.

the questions that arise even from this are difficult. and neither political party has any interest in attending to them. not really.

so if you position yourself in the center, and define the center as the result of a triangulation of party positions as you understand them, ruling questions in and out of debate in this way, then the simple fact of the matter is that you have no way of thinking about this kind of question either.

now judging from the way in which you present yourself, pan, it would appear to follow that for someone to dwell on this kind of problem, and to do it here, would be tantamount to introducing some vibe of "hate and negativity"---in this case, these empty terms that you like to throw around function simply to exclude issues from debate. and if the claim underpinning this exclusion centers on concern for the future, then i think you create a problem for yourself: i dont see how the future is served by avoiding difficult problems.
and i dont see anything in your preferred exlcusionary categories of "hate and negativity" but a desire to avoid complex problems in the name of maintaining some facile optimism.

"no no, let's not talk about that, man, it's bumming me out."

i dont accept it.
i dont buy the argument, i dont buy its implications and i certainly dont buy its effects.
sorry.

03-11-2007, 05:56 PM	#41 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	I post very little in here anymore because my politics are extreme but not a Left or Right extreme and thus I'm attacked from both sides and neither side even acknowledges good points. Then again neither side admits or acknowledges when the other has a good point either. Everyone wants to bitch about what is the best way to run the country and everyone wants it done their way, no compromise. I believe in making compromises and doing not what's best for me or for "my side" but what is best for my country as a whole. If more people truly believed that way and found compromise and ways to work together instead of trying to destroy each other we may get somewhere in this country. And as I keep saying, it starts at the ground floor. Instead of every damned thread being a fight to see who can beat down the other, why don't we work on solutions and then go to other forums, write letters to the editor, find candidates that will listen and start a grass roots campaign and work to build up steam. We are on one of the most popular forums on the net and we do nothing but fight here in politics. No one listens to me, both sides refuse to see what I say and can do nothing but ridicule me for my beliefs so.... I stay out of it. Let you morons who only want to fight bloody each other and ruin the board.... I'll watch shake my head and keep imagining what could be. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

03-11-2007, 06:07 PM	#42 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Sorry Pan.....I'm confused....are we morons or elitists? Why is your approach to political forums the only correct and/or reasonable approach for discourse? __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire

03-11-2007, 07:25 PM	#44 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Pan...I would simply urge you to look at your previous post again objectively. It is the antithesis of consensus-building. You rant about how you are "attacked from both sides" (I dont recall seeing such personal attacks), you rave about how others "do nothing but ridicule you for your beliefs" (I dont recall seeing such ridicule either) and you put yourself above the others here by characterizing them as "morons" (and earlier as "elitists") and implying that you care more about solving the problems of the country and the world. Sorry but this is not whatI would describe as an effective way to create an environment for compromise and consensus building, BTW..I dont believe that I allow hate to control me. I do believe it is important, or even critical, for the future of the country, for people to speak out and expose lying, secrecy, incompetence, and potential acts of malfeasance by a government that, in the opinion of many, is not working in the best interest of its citizens. From there, I am willing to build consensus to correct these failures and I am open to a wide range of solutions....not just mine. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 03-11-2007 at 07:45 PM..

03-11-2007, 07:53 PM	#45 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	Pan, did you see a recent editorial that four former senators, 2 R's & 2 D's, have formed their own "think tank" to find compromises for the big issues that need to be addressed? They recognize that congress is infected with partisan poison and it is their hope that they can craft legislation that is acceptable to both parties. It gives me great hope that a more collaborative government may be possible. I believe this article was in my local paper and I will look for a link if you have not seen it. Times are changing, my friend Pen __________________ "You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007

03-11-2007, 08:13 PM	#46 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Elph...I think you are referring to the Bipartisan Policy Center formed by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, George Mitchell, Bob Dole and Tom Daschle. The BPC will work with national experts to undertake projects on a range of issues, beginning with energy policy, agriculture policy, and national security. Additional projects will be added in the coming year. Each project will be staffed by substantive experts and directed by a diverse group of national leaders. The BPC Advisory Board, comprised of the former Majority Leaders, will advise the organization on its overall direction and agenda. While each project will differ in scope and approach, all BPC projects will be politically balanced, evidence-based, and designed to have a meaningful impact on the national policy debate. http://www.bipartisanpolicy.org/inde..._Policy_Center I look forward to following their work. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 03-11-2007 at 08:21 PM..

03-11-2007, 10:07 PM	#48 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	The question was asked I answered it. Find a thread where we see the Lefties here and the Righties find compromise and not try to bludgeon each other with their own "facts", with arguing over details and not offering compromise. Am I better than anyone here? NO, absolutely not. I just speak as I see it and I see this board as being very partisan and hateful. Again, I was asked, I answered honestly. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

03-12-2007, 05:36 AM	#49 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	When I was growing up, my parent taught me that polite people don't discuss politics or religion in public. Once I grew up, I realized that those are the two most divisive issues for humanity (note how I lumped everyone on the planet in there?). There's a good reason for my parents' warning - discussing either is one of the fastest ways to start a fight among strangers. I've been thinking a lot about this topic recently, and I've come to the conclusion that I generally only post in Politics as a way to organize my own thoughts and to get a sense of the talking points of the ends of the spectrum. No one here is ever going to convince me to change my vote by themselves, and I'm never going to convince anyone else to do the same. In the best of all possible worlds, we'd all realize that and take some of the venom out of our statements. But I'm not Dr. Pangloss and I realize that won't happen. Instead, I'm going to restate the most basic rule of Politics - debate the topic, not the individual. I've already seen a couple glaring violations of that rule in this thread, and to be honest, I actually thought about abusing my newly granted mod powers to warn people or shut down the thread entirely. Then I had a sip of coffee and realized that was counterproductive. However, I am going to insist that the rule be followed in both letter and spirit. There's a line between attacking someone's politics and their character, and I expect that you all know it. If you don't, you're going to find out. If you're the victim, please feel free to let me know since I obviously can't be everywhere at once. __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

03-12-2007, 08:14 AM	#50 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	for me, these are the horse latitudes politically. the bush administration is still in power. the ideological climate has shifted out from under the administration, but it is still in power. the fiasco of the iraq war is now self-evident--from its inception through to the present (the admin is requesting another 8000 troops---according to the guardian, yet another request is coming in may---there is no discrete endpoint for this "surge"--so it appears that the "surge" is best spelled ESCALATION in the grand vietnam stylee--this despite the story floating about this morning that the us is now planning to withdraw entirely if the "surge" doesnt work....) but the administration is still in power. i recently watched the spike lee documentary about katrina and nola---shocking stuff--unbelievable non-action from this administration, needlessly compounding already overwhelming suffering---but they are still in power. the abuse of the judiciary--from guantanomo to the purging of district attorneys through the "expansive" interpretation informational gathering prerogatives accorded the fbi under the patriot act---all obvious. but the administration is still in power. the list of incoherences could go on and on. what is there to say? i dont find this to be a climate that makes how i think about politics in the states to be more open than it had been....i dont find this a climate that provides much change in fundamental problems...i dont particularly enjoy the sense of writing the same thing over and over...so i have found myself fading out a bit. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

03-12-2007, 09:35 AM	#52 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	I have to say that I agree with several of the other contributors on this thread. I consider myself to be a political person. I read and I take stances and I like to talk about them. But I have to admit that I am often turned off by the discussions in the politics forum. Like pan, I feel as though I am an outsider for my moderate stances on many issues. Even though I consider myself to be very liberal in my views, I don't feel like I am "liberal enough" to be accepted by the other lefties on the board. And the righties tend to simply ignore me, lol. But that's okay really, because I don't come to conclusions and develop opinions simply to post them here and gain acceptance. I post here in the spirit of weighing in with my opinion - for better or for worse. And they are opinions, folks. I don't care how much you think you know, what sources you have or how compellingly factoids line up, there is no way for any of us to take in the entirety of the machinations at work in the world and claim that we know "the truth." The forming of political views can be a very narcotic and womblike experience. It makes us feel more secure to know that we have a viewpoint and that there are "facts" out there that align with our thinking...that impart some "truthiness" to the political ethos we feel akin to. But how is this possible when there are two sides who feel exactly the same way about their political affiliation? Now I don't say all this because I think I am better or smarter or more savvy than anyone else here, because I am well aware that I am not. It's just where I'm at and it leaves me often with not a lot to say in the politics forum. Like uber and Hal, I am also turned off by the mode of discussion, but I understand it. It is typical of political discussion on the internet and is oftentimes a necessary manner of responding to some posts. I also agree that the liberal vs. conservative imbalance on the board makes some discussions degenerate very quickly when certain conservative posters get involved. I've no interest in getting involved in most conversations about "right and wrong" because I just don't believe in them most of the time...when it comes to politics, that is. Finally, somewhat like roachboy, sometimes I feel like I have said all that I can say (not only here) about the current issues and haven't much desire to recant my own words over and over. Even just writing what I am writing now, I feel like I am repeating myself ad nauseum. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

03-12-2007, 09:35 AM	#53 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	pan: all i wrote about is why i haven't been as active here as i have been. i dont think i am particularly unusual in that my statements about what i may understand to be possible in principle (as things that might be done to alter the present, grim state of affairs) fluctuates with my general view of that state of affairs. sometimes i think that lars von trier was right in "dogville": the united states is a gangster state and the only thing to be done about it for the benefit of all is to burn it down. it is not reformable, it is not changeable. it cannot accomodate the basic demands of its own citizens, much less be coherent as the center of a global socio-economic system. these are moments that push me more into my past of involvement with left revolutionary politics. other times i think that much could and should be done. these are my more social-democratic moments. in the horse latitudes, i find it difficult to focus on those things that could and should be changed within the existing order: the dysfunctions of the order itself become too obvious and with that the problems appear to be of a piece with the nature of the order itself---so solutions to fundamental problems begin to migrate into functioning as elements of a more radical position. at other times, things seem amenable to being taken apart, separations made and on that basis more local arguments can be outlined and so forth. insofar as the forum in concerned, when i am thinking about the present state of affairs as particularly grim, the arguments that i would be likely to advance would be more radical. these would (a) require a fair amount of explanation, which i am not sure folk would necessarily want to wade through and (b) would incline me to being quite uncompromising in discussions that may or may not follow. besides, i work out the more radical stuff in other forms. as is the case for anyone, what happens here is separate from my other work----what functions here is particular---in the end there are tactical questions particular to the forum that shape what i am and am not inclined to talk about here--because this is a particular kind of space involving a particular community--it is not that open, frankly--in part because of the format itself (a messageboard) and in part because of the particular combination of voices that comprise the community. the community is interesting and valuable, but not all kinds of argument function equally well within it. and this is neither good nor bad in itself: it simply is. so. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

03-12-2007, 10:12 AM	#54 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	But you have and give a picture of pessimism. All I am trying to do is push people to show that there is optimism and that change CAN and WILL happen if enough voices demand it and work for it. Don't push the negativity and the hatred, expand your views into what can be positively done and work to BETTER the country. There is no need to tear it down... we have the freedom to make the changes but we have to work for them. (Although I admit I am scared of what Bush may do if the GOP lose in '08.... but that's just my paranoidal side and I can't live on "what ifs" but they are fun to hypothesize at times.) It's not time to tear down the nation it is time to stand up be counted and push people to come up with ideas to save and better ourselves. We need optimism and positive ideas now more than ever. RB whether you believe me or not, I like ya. I like and respect most people on this board. I am trying to push people into getting out of the negativity and come up with positive ideas and compromises and debates that produce ideas that people when they read these threads can say, "That could work." or at least push them into thinking positively and demanding positive messages, ideas and plans from their politicians. We are a country driven on negativety, fed negativity, and hate politics. It is time to push and demand for better. Who cares what party the person with the better ideas comes from... we need leaders that are willing to take chances, piss people off in their party and the other and to stand up to corporate interests and say, "This is OUR country. A nation is not built on the power of the corporation and rich, it is built on how well educated, the chances EVERY single person has to advance, and the ability leave a better country for the future." We can do it, we just have to start doing it. If enough voices speak out and demand what is right and demand politicians work for what is best for the country not their party or special interests we all win and we all get a better result. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?" Last edited by pan6467; 03-12-2007 at 10:15 AM..

03-12-2007, 10:29 AM	#55 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	You are very optimistic, pan. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

03-12-2007, 10:32 AM	#56 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	RB The community, state and nation are a sum of all its parts. If the parts are a majority negative.... the community, state, nation will be negative. If the parts are a majority positive and work for positive growth......the community, state, nation will be positive. It is imperative in these times of negativity coming at us from everywhere to stand up acknowledge it and turn it into positives and find ways to grow from it. Otherwise we keep falling into negativity until we die. It's not hard to spend 15 minutes typing a positive thread or trying to read someone you disagree with's post and try to find compromise or a positive way to debate, instead of attacking, waiting for attack and attacking more. That is what I am doing I guess... because I keep trying to push people to be positive and that in and of itself is wrong... I'm no better than anyone, I'm not holier than thou it's just I can see ways we can progress forward but I see too much hatred and resistance from partisan people and people who refuse to bend at all. It's frustrating, but then again... maybe someone reads what I say and it gets them to think and they start getting positive and coming up with ideas and they pass that on and so on and so on.... one can hope. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

03-12-2007, 10:41 AM	#57 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	well, i am not sure how you would position arguments along the line of: the problems the states are experiencing follow in significant measure from the rationality of capitalism itself. the problems the states are experiencing follows from the tendency to collapse politics into the arrangement of objects in the world, to assume that political arrangements are given in the way a naive epistemology take objects to be. you can see how this claim operates by watching the way in which political frame-assumptions and visual infotainment are combined in television "news" footage. watch them from a naive perspective. it should be obvious. these two claims operate in tandem, with the first being a condition of possibility for the second. it either is true, then it would follow that significant change at the political level should follow from a quite radical reassessment of how politics is understood. this reassessment may or may not end up being functional within this particular socio-economic system---following out its logic may end up with a quite radical transformation of the existing state of affairs as a whole. i say this stuff because i suspect you, pan, would lump it all together under these rather problematic categories of "hate" and "negativity"--when it is neither. you act as though the existing state of affairs is a necessary horizon for all political thinking. i find that assumption to be useless. for me, at least, it is useless. it begs the questions that interest me. and that's all there is to it. ------------- aside: at bottom, pan, the problem that arises for me from your particular approach to debate is that i am not sure if you can or are willing to distinguish a radical critique--that is a critique that tries to point to fundamental underlying problems---from what you call "hate" and "negativity"--sometimes i dont think your recognize any distinction between them at all. whence the differends that arise. whence to some extent at least my sense of the community as placing artificial limitations on what can and cannot be said here. this is not a claim to censorship---rather it is a problem that at certain moments i find interesting to engage with and at other moments i dont. almost inevitably, when period of interpersonal board snarkiness happen between you and i--for example--at its origin is what i take to be your refusal to recognize a difference between types of argument---"hate and negativity" as over against critiques oriented around fundamental or structural problems--the problem is: to deal with structural problems, you have to change the structure itself. it is not a matter of making adjustments within a structure that is itself fucked up. i dont find anything "negative" about saying as much--and i think that you do. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 03-12-2007 at 10:44 AM..

03-12-2007, 10:43 AM	#58 (permalink)
jorgelito All important elusive independent swing voter... Location: People's Republic of KKKalifornia	I can get on board with your message Pan, in fact, I like to think of myself as possessing similar attitudes as yourself. There's absolutely nothing wrong with being an optimist, it's a good thing. People would do well to learn that. You just have to keep plugging away. Plus, we all could do to listen more as well. Keep at it, don't lose hope.

03-12-2007, 10:58 AM	#59 (permalink)
pan6467 Lennonite Priest Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA	RB I have to get to work, but see how things are going now? You and I have dialogue and that is a beginning, is it not? THANKS MM AND JORGE FOR THE KIND WORDS..... I TRULY APPRECIATE THEM. __________________ I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

03-12-2007, 11:05 AM	#60 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	I don't think there is anything wrong with being an optimist. I used to be very much of one myself...still am in some regards. But I must admit that the genetic pull towards cynicism that is inherent in my parents draws me deeper and deeper into its fold year by year. Gather 'round ye peoples of TFP and bear witness to the development of an honest to god misanthrope. It's bound to get ugly. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

03-12-2007, 12:02 PM	#62 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	oh, cut it out, I'm cultivating curmudgeonliness here....grrrrrr __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

03-12-2007, 01:00 PM	#67 (permalink)
Bill O'Rights will always be an Alyson Hanniganite Location: In the dust of the archives	oh snap! __________________ "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony "Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

03-12-2007, 01:41 PM	#68 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	I think roachboy is hot. But then, I've been known to be somewhat of a freak. LOL, what's this thread about again? __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

03-12-2007, 03:35 PM	#69 (permalink)
Elphaba Deja Moo Location: Olympic Peninsula, WA	I think it's about whether roachboy puts out or not. __________________ "You can't ignore politics, no matter how much you'd like to." Molly Ivins - 1944-2007

03-12-2007, 03:47 PM	#70 (permalink)
The_Jazz Asshole Administrator Location: Chicago	Pen, I'm sending you the bill for my new keyboard! I just shot beer out of my nose reading that! No need to do my abs tonight; laughing this hard will do the exercise for me! __________________ "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety." - B. Franklin "There ought to be limits to freedom." - George W. Bush "We have met the enemy and he is us." - Pogo

03-12-2007, 04:39 PM	#71 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	mr. jazz: while it's true that we met in 3-d, i think you put me in a false bind on account of it. specifically: what makes you think i am a curmudgeon? i am much more a bouncy, trouncy, flouncy, pouncy bundle of fun fun fun. so my spectacularly attractive 3-d self can cleave the air without contradiction. and i am a boy of negociable virtue. it comes with the trouncy flouncy territory. that about covers that, i think, except for the blushing part, which it is best not to speak of. here's my secret: http://ubu.wfmu.org/sound/chopin_hen...diopoems02.mp3 and a low bow during the course of which i describe an arc with my right arm that results in my unnecessarily large hat sweeping across the floor in the general direction of ms. media. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 03-12-2007 at 05:04 PM..

03-12-2007, 05:15 PM	#73 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	supple, why must it be one or the other? i would agree with a position that you can not make the world a better place until you have worked on yourself, or at the very least that you will be more efficient with more self-improvement. but i don't see why that means that you can't be aware of and motivated by a desire to improve the collective simultaneously with self-improvement. __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

03-12-2007, 05:44 PM	#74 (permalink)
Supple Cow Americow, the Beautiful Location: Washington, D.C.	Because the "collective" is nothing more than a mob. A mob doesn't think or care. An individual can. (Whether one does or not is another issue.) I am optimistic, too. I just happen to believe that efforts to control or educate collectives are wasted. I would rather use my energy and time to effect change among individuals. It is not that I have no desire to improve things beyond the scope of my selfish benefit. Do you personally feel more motivated when an appeal to action comes to you as an individual or as some anonymous member of a collective?

03-13-2007, 06:18 AM	#78 (permalink)
pig pigglet pigglet Location: Locash	supple, your preference for point of attack is entirely up to you, of course. i didn't mean to imply anything concerning selfishness in the popular negative connotative way, although i suspect you may use that word with a different sense. however, i suppose i reject the premise the we are primarily either individualistic or societies; i believe the fact is that we are both simultaneously. i'm thinking about a friend of mine who works for the usda in organic certification and farmland allocation/preservation. although he certainly enjoys what he's doing, its not his primary interest in his job. he does it because he is concerned about the future of open spaces in america and the availability of healthy food stocks. in fact, i know many people who work in fields with a primary motivation to make a better world; and i would tend to think that these career choices are at least heavily influenced by an awareness of the larger social group. are you talking primarily about the imposition / education of morality / ethics? __________________ You don't love me, you just love my piggy style

03-13-2007, 06:24 AM	#79 (permalink)
mixedmedia has all her shots. Location: Florida	I think there are collectives, as in groups organized around an interest or a concern. Then there is THE collective. And I tend to agree with supplecow. THE collective is very hard to influence in subtle yet meaningful ways. It is hard to get THE collective to change or sacrifice because, individually, they can fall back on laziness or indifference without being singled out. __________________ Most people go through life dreading they'll have a traumatic experience. Freaks were born with their trauma. They've already passed their test in life. They're aristocrats. - Diane Arbus PESSIMISM, n. A philosophy forced upon the convictions of the observer by the disheartening prevalence of the optimist with his scarecrow hope and his unsightly smile. - Ambrose Bierce

03-13-2007, 07:49 AM	#80 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	i dont think anyone engages with the political unless they are motivated by a degree of concern for themselves, for their surroundings and the direction these are moving both in real time and in the future. real time situations are indices of future possibilities: that's why folk spend time trying to work out meanings for real-time phenomena. and in this there is a commonality that runs well beyond the narrow limits you seem to want to draw around political debate: it goes as much for folk who trawl through the field of debris that is the left as for those in the shadowy reaches of the far right who play paintball in camo every weekend as a way of preparing themselves for helter skelter. maybe folk have other things that they would focus on if they were able to assume that the political space within which they lived was coherent: stuff like finding a rubik's cube on ebay because this time goddamn it i am going to solve it or trying to figure out if it really makes any sense to use pipe from a pipe organ in your car's exhaust system because it should sound cool.... but the fact is that the political space within which we operate is not coherent, and the longer-term trajectories you can derive from this political space are even less coherent. the major political parties really are factions within an oligarchy that engage in periodic rotation--the democrats offer very little that differs from the republicans--periods of deviation apart--and the bush administration has turned out to be quite a period of deviation----such that the democrats suddenly look like an actual alternative, even as their actions in congress demonstrate that the constraints within which they function nearly outweigh any sense that this alternative has a content. here's a little example: over the weekend, i watched spike lee's documentary about new orleans during and after katrina. you really should see it, even though the last 2 parts operate like a long, slow drift into ambiguity. it raises a host or problems, from the way in whcih the television coverage of the storm and its aftermath was simultaneously about sensationalizing certain elements AND was a device to enable avoidance of the scale of what happened, to the systematic racism that cuts through all aspects of the situation and responses to it, to the way in which the disaster was "handled": shipping people all over the united states on busses, one-way tickets provided by fema. one way bus tickets. go to utah and rot. buh-bye. nola revealed many systemic problems--and it showed how folk had managed to cope and flourish even within these systemic problems--a coping and flourishing that did not in any way justify the systemic problems themselves... one of these problems: racism and its implication with the american class structure and the ways in which these factors coverge in the debacle that was the nola public school system. this cluster is a set of indices of the way in which social reproduction in the united states is entirely geared around an outmoded class structure---one of the consequences of this is that the system itself amounts to an argument, and that argument is that if you are young, poor and african-american, you are expendable. it was like this before the storm. it is like this, after the storm. this is a fundamental element of what makes america as it is. and this is a STRUCTURAL problem. it is intertwined with the entire history of the united states since the civil war. it is an expression of that history. it is among the logical outcomes of that history. and nola was but an extreme example of a situation that obtains across the board insofar as the american class system, racism, poverty and social reproduction are concerned. both political parties are geared around avoidance of such problems: they are not amenable to short-term solutions, so it is difficult for politicians to offer simplistic packages the primary function of which is the enabling of appropriate photo-ops for the heroic politician. this is what i did. i am magnificent. vote for me. addressing stuff like this would require a fundamental rethinking of how the united states operates: what class system it actually has (as opposed to the class system the conservatives prefer to imagine that we have, one within which everyone is somehow middle class--an image that is the simple inversion of lake woebegone, where everybody is above average...), what factors it leans on, what functions it serves and does not serve, whether it is ethical to allow it to continue....and what is more, questions of what should be done to change it and to what end do not resolve themselves as a result of thinking about the history of these issues. the questions that arise even from this are difficult. and neither political party has any interest in attending to them. not really. so if you position yourself in the center, and define the center as the result of a triangulation of party positions as you understand them, ruling questions in and out of debate in this way, then the simple fact of the matter is that you have no way of thinking about this kind of question either. now judging from the way in which you present yourself, pan, it would appear to follow that for someone to dwell on this kind of problem, and to do it here, would be tantamount to introducing some vibe of "hate and negativity"---in this case, these empty terms that you like to throw around function simply to exclude issues from debate. and if the claim underpinning this exclusion centers on concern for the future, then i think you create a problem for yourself: i dont see how the future is served by avoiding difficult problems. and i dont see anything in your preferred exlcusionary categories of "hate and negativity" but a desire to avoid complex problems in the name of maintaining some facile optimism. "no no, let's not talk about that, man, it's bumming me out." i dont accept it. i dont buy the argument, i dont buy its implications and i certainly dont buy its effects. sorry. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 03-13-2007 at 07:55 AM..