• New Registration

    To become a member of JackpineRadicals please see post https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/new-members/

Home Main Forums General Discussion What Are We Becoming?

  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

    What Are We Becoming?

    I thought being liberal meant that I could acknowledge others’ opinions. I may not agree with them, but I should be able to allow others to have their own outlooks on what is or is not moral, is or is not desirable and what is or is not ‘progressive’. Don’t we call the religious right idiots and fools and rigid hate mongers because they adhere to a strict set of ‘religious’ interpretations and attempt to force their ‘morality’ on everyone, denying any other viewpoint?

    Let’s get real honest with ourselves. Everyone has their own individual worldview, customized to their own outlook on just what the ‘perfect’ world would look like. We search out and associate with individuals sharing similar outlooks, forming larger and larger groups having some, but probably not all, of the individuals preferred worldviews. Some only loosely prefer a larger group because it is at least tolerable to their viewpoints, sort of this group sucks less than that group.

    Anyone attempting to breach those views is ostracized from the group because they ‘don’t fit’. Perhaps they think something the group cherishes is actually contrary to the common good of everyone, but because their viewpoint runs contrary to ours, we criticize and berate the other. Neither side listens to the other side and soon it’s a shit fest. Sounds just like politics in the good old USA right now.

    What, if anything, is ‘progressive’ if conformity is demanded? How can a ‘progressive’ worldview be brought to fruition in the United States if ‘progressives’ are unwilling to even acknowledge that others may have differing opinions on issues and their solutions? How is this a sign of intelligence we espouse? How is this considered to be thoughtful and considerate of others? How the hell do we grow and learn and adapt? I think that’s referred to as evolving, something we’re supposed to champion.

    How often do we post about the unwillingness of the conservative members of our society to consider our view or our interpretations or our desires? How often do we berate them for being stupid? Do we actually believe that? Do we actually consider that to be true? Yet when conservatives do the same thing, talk about our inflexibility or our ‘lofty snootiness’ or our ‘communist’ ideas, we take umbrage and vent our outrage against what we see as something totally false. We aren’t stupid. We aren’t sheeples. Or are we? Which is the more intolerant? Which demands the greater obedience to ‘principle’?

    There is essentially zero probability that there will be a ‘liberal’ or ‘progressive’ government in the United States as it stands today. Sure we can elect some ‘progressives’ to office, but that is a far cry from bringing progressive ideas and views to the vanguard of US foreign or domestic policy. Zero. Zip. Nada. Ain’t gonna happen. That’s because, as it stands today, about half the population leans left, and the other leans right. There are considerable variances within each political group, but none of those variances have the numbers to accomplish a takeover of the government by itself. However, as a conglomerate whole the right wing has gained enough ground to be very close to doing just that. But there are cracks in their walls and floors. No group is willing to consider what any other wants. None even consider the idea that both sides, right and left and sometime even those within their own party, want essentially the same thing. They just shut off any conversation or consideration of those with views contrary to their groupthink. The groups’ peerage will cast them out if they even attempt to discuss anything the peers don’t hold as true. It’s sad, destructive and I see a  threat of it here.

    How does this fit into the question I asked in the title of this OP? Step back and look at the limitations we impose on political or policy discussion. Step outside the boundaries we impose and one is effectively toast. Not much discussion, but in some cases a boatload of vitriol. Just make them go away and give us back our safe homogenous little band of brothers and sisters. They’re ‘different’ so we don’t want them. We certainly don’t trust them to tell us anything. It’s just ‘propaganda’ or ‘lies’ and we don’t want to hear it. But what if it’s just another viewpoint on the same information that we’re just not comfortable with? What if what they have to say has those pesky little grains of ‘truth’ in them, hard as it is to admit it? What if we actually allowed them to discuss issues without kicking them, and in the end get a win-win out of it? Perhaps things aren’t so cut and dried or black and white. Maybe having a strict conformist set of accepted values constipates discussion and prohibits advancement of solutions. That doesn’t seem to be a progressive stance to me, rather it smacks of totalitarian rule.

    Are we insulating ourselves? Are progressives everywhere insulating themselves? Are we, and other progressive sites, just a place for members to come and vent their dislike and distrust of all things ‘non-progressive’? Pick the news and rail on those stories that we deem worthy of our disdain? Or select those we like because they happen to reinforce our core values? Become a ‘progressive’ variant of The Rush Limbaugh Show? Yeah the politics here are progressive but some in the audience can be inflexible.

    Assume one actually wants to achieve a democratic socialist government. How is this insulation of ideas and issue solutions going to actually change anything toward achieving that goal? How is this going to influence those that are open for new and different solutions to our society’s flaws and errors? Those people exist. We just need to talk truth to them. Not biased observations or heated outbursts like they’re idiots or children, but actually sit down and discuss reasoned thoughtful solutions that are progressive for them to consider. Show them that there are many progressive policies that give them what they want, and be ready to back your claims up with evidence proving it. They should be allowed the same courtesy and their solutions should also be given real consideration. You never know, their solution and world view may suck overall, but parts of it may be something that actually produces an outcome we want, or show us that there may be things that need to be considered because we didn’t think about them in our solution.

    Aren’t we big enough, thoughtful enough and courteous enough to allow for competing points of view and alternative policies? Are we, through our own intolerance, going to become a closed echo chamber instead?

    Mac1949, no retreat no surrender, MrMickeysMom and 29 othersWood, bobthedrummer, VagrantPeters, Phlem, WillyT, xynthee, Ohio Barbarian, Babel 17, OCMI, chknltl, jwirr, ThinkingANew, Xyzse, Marym625, relgire, eridani, slipslidingaway, davidthegnome, beltanefauve, Gryneos, TRex, HassleCat, Haikugal, ThomPaine, Baba OhReally, peacecorps, Fire with Fire, Lord Thomas, quinn like this
     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
198 replies
  • 1 week ago #6
  • 1 week ago #42
  • 5 days ago #180
    • HassleCat (2307 posts)
      Profile photo of HassleCat

      1. Exactly. I will settle for some movement.

      If some of those DINOs will move a little bit, I’ll be nice to them. I don’t care if they’re progressive on every issue. I don’t even know what’s progressive on some issues.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        2. Me either.

        I asked that very question in an OP long time ago and got virtually zero answers.

        Maybe it’s hard to define. Nebulous. Has a distinct bounded interior but diaphanous outer part like a lot of galaxies have.

        It just seems to me that it is unrealistic to assume that the minority who are true progressives win everything on their own. Not at first anyway. The fact that the most progressive governments have the most citizens who are satisfied with both their lives and government is a fact that should be hammered home.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
      Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

      3. Wow somebody finally said it out loud. Thank you.

       Please post this on the DR. I rec it. @deadpool  @marym625

      The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

      • ThomPaine (5034 posts)
        Profile photo of ThomPaine Moderator

        20. Thank you.

      • Marym625 (28800 posts)
        Profile photo of Marym625 Admin

        40. Looks like

        @deadpool beat me. Good thing too since I’m WAY late!

        Thank you

        Take Action #StopFCC https://www.battleforthenet.com/breaktheinternet/ "Once the decision was made to go into Iraq as an invader and occupier,  it’s like our nation lost its conscience. And it has not yet gotten that conscience back." Madfloridian  
    • Deadpool (12823 posts)
      Profile photo of Deadpool Admin

      4. On the Daily Radical!

      • ThomPaine (5034 posts)
        Profile photo of ThomPaine Moderator

        18. Thank you.

      • Marym625 (28800 posts)
        Profile photo of Marym625 Admin

        41. Thank you

        :hi:

        Take Action #StopFCC https://www.battleforthenet.com/breaktheinternet/ "Once the decision was made to go into Iraq as an invader and occupier,  it’s like our nation lost its conscience. And it has not yet gotten that conscience back." Madfloridian  
    • FugitiveBirdie (1890 posts)
      Profile photo of FugitiveBirdie

      5. The root word of Progressive is PROGRESS

      And progress is a synonym for change.

      In 2008 the vote was for change.

      In 2016 the Republicans voted for change.

      I invite everyone to talk to their independent and Republican friends about change.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        11. But 'change' is directionless.

        Does that mean that ‘progressive’ is directionless, or does it imply a SPECIFIC direction in government?

        I would hope that progressive implies a direct connotation to progress in the direction leading toward greater social equality and prosperity.

        It’s hard for me to put exactly what I would hope its definition is. And that is a problem for me.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • FugitiveBirdie (1890 posts)
          Profile photo of FugitiveBirdie

          12. Well I think a properly functioning government is not afraid to make mistakes.

          Mistakes are often the best teacher.

          So even if we go in the wrong direction for a time it’s not a loss.

          “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself!”

          Franklin D. Roosevelt

          http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/5057

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            15. I totally agree.

            Perhaps one of the greatest losses we have had is the inability of our leaders to take real chances, some of which may end in disaster.

            I might even consider voting for a moron if he/she just up and fucking did something even if it were wrong. Take a stand. Make a difference. Lead.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • 99Forever (4237 posts)
      Profile photo of 99Forever Moderator

      6. Honestly?

      Sounds a whole lot like “incrementalism’ to me. I think I’ve about had my fill of what kind of results that brings. All I need to see that is open my eyes and look around. We’re more screwed every day.

      When “compromise” becomes capitulation, as it always seems to, for progressive ideas and issues, I prefer someone with spine enough to stand their ground. I see zero willingness to “compromise” from the right (you know, what they call the “center.”) and it’s pretty fucking obvious who is winning.

      • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
        Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

        7. That attitude is exactly what the OP is about.

        So do you want any input “ONLY” if it fits your own narrow minded views?  IMO what a sad way to go thru life.

        Are you always correct and any other opinion than yours is to be shunned.

        The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

        • 99Forever (4237 posts)
          Profile photo of 99Forever Moderator

          9. I care fuckall what you think of my "attitude."

          I was expressing my opinion, I didn’t ask you to like it. Go find another leg to hump, Lord.

          • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
            Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

            14. Thank you for your reply.

            The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

        • BillZBubb (2995 posts)
          Profile photo of BillZBubb Donor

          148. That charge is absolute bullshit.

          You claim “narrow minded views”. My views are solid, but they are based on logic and facts. The OP is wrong. We do not need to rehash issues that we have long ago considered and rejected on their lack of merit. We should never compromise on principle and basic rights.

          I’m not going to argue with some nitwit the claim the 2+2=5. That’s not being narrow, that’s sticking to what I know is true. I am willing to listen to any idea that is based on reason, but I’m not going to waste my time on neoliberal/neocon claptrap.

          DemExit! Don't give the Democrats a dime. Don't identify as a Democrat. Drop Democratic identification below 20%. Only then will they support true progressive policy. Until then, corporate money rules.
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        10. I have no idea what this is all about.

        I have not used the word ‘compromise’ in the OP. I have not used the phrase ‘incrementalism’ in it either. I give no timeline to achieve our goals. I question if our goals can EVER be achieved.

        Instead I ask you what is your alternative? How do progressives, having a clear minority of voters at this time, overthrow ‘the establishment’?

        It isn’t possible. That’s a hard fact for me to take as well, since I’ll be dead before my grandson can live in a modern democratic socialist country. What we can do is start using facts to argue our positions. Not ‘feel good’ rhetoric that gains nothing but solidification of the base. The base can’t get enough votes to achieve a progressive government. Period. So, that makes any real trend toward socialism contingent on those that we disdain.

        What do you see as an effective alternative to taking over a party that has the membership to effect change? Start a ‘Peoples Party’? That was tried and it failed in a whimper in 1908. Divide and rule is only going to let the conservative rule, not us.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
          Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

          34. Issues.

          Speaking for myself, because you ask a question I have long thought about.

          In government, progressives do not have the votes, this is true.  However… the public?  Different matter entirely.  If the government is representative of the people, votes on these massive issues of our time should represent the will of the people, right?

          A majority favors universal healthcare.  A majority favors higher (Not lower) taxes for the wealthy.  A majority favors ending our foreign military adventures.  I could go on and on.

          When these issues are presented in a non-partisan manner… progressives win.  All the time, on almost every issue.

          The problem is that the right and left divide… the rhetoric, the… extreme hyper-partisan kabuki effects all of these things.  Much of it, to begin with, is coming from billionaires who profit massively by keeping us ignorant and divided.

          So… how do we respond?  When government represents the donor class and not the public?  For many years, the prevailing opinion among democrats has been to work within the system to create change.  The problem is…. They have become a deeply entrenched part of that system that needs changing.

          Rather than the solution, elected democrats have, in general, become a big part of  the problem.  So how do we fix that?  Support progressive democrats?  Perhaps, but many who became corporate were once progressive, only seduced by wealth.

          Simply put…. we need to take profit out of politics.  Ban lobbying, enforce only votes funded by the public.  I do not believe the Democrat party will ever truly endorse such a thing.

          So… someone else has to.  There is no other viable solution to the corruption.  For that reason much of my support will go to third parties.  I am not opposed to voting for progressive democrats or republicans,  but….

          The system is broken beyond what you can repair from within.  It is an uphill, hellish struggle, to create a viable third party… but I am used to that kind of struggle.  At least now, it is for something I really believe in.

          “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
          • peacecorps (4589 posts)
            Profile photo of peacecorps Donor

            37. Damn good post. Americans do poll as in favor of progressive policies as Bernie

            personifies – probably why he is the most popular politician.

            Just two things (matters of opinion, not fact) I would add. While it is extremely difficult to change the Democratic Party into a progressive organization, FDR did it. Alfred Smith, the nominee in 1928 and competitor for the nomination in 1932, was a pro-business Democrat who later opposed FDR’s New Deal.

            Of course, it took someone like FDR – with the ‘help’ of the onset of the Great Depression – to transform the party. And while Bernie is as unique in his own way as FDR was, history may not repeat itself 85 years later. The pro-business Democratic Party may be more entrenched than that of the 1920’s.

            The other thought is with future progress towards our progressive goals. For now we are so far from achieving any of them that we need to strive to educate people on the link between the failure to achieve progressive goals (which the large majority do support) and the current government by the donor class with the ‘hyper-partisan kabuki’ theater. Bernie is a good vehicle for doing this.

            If (when, I hope) we get within reach of achieving some/all of our progressive goals (not now but I hope not too distant future), how much, if any, do we compromise with conservative forces. Social Security started out ‘small’ – just retirement benefits for the worker, nothing for spouses, children, the disable, widow(ers) – and grew from there as its popularity was established.

            One day, we will have to decide if ‘half a (progressive) loaf’ is better than nothing. Do we insist on 99% of the ‘progressive loaf’ now (and hope that, like Social Security it proves itself and its popularity grows) or we will wait for more years? How many? As I said these are concerns for the (distant?) future. For now we need to educate people and support progressive candidates when and where they exist and work against conservative politicians and policies no matter what party they come from.

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            54. So, I again ask the real question.

            I have presented my thoughts on how to achieve a more socialist government that I happen to think will work. And I base it on considerable amounts of research.

            Anything and everything not directly addressing that goal is bullshit. I don’t give a rats ass on what has transpired before except how it failed and using that information so it doesn’t happen again. I repeat, I don’t give a shit what happened. It happened so I can’t change that result. I CAN (hopefully) change the next result, and that is what I need to focus on.

            So, what alternatives are there that you can show will actually work?

            To this point, the answer is NONE. Instead the reply appears to me to be exactly what I address in the OP, the unwillingness to hold open reasoned argument to determine ways to get the result I want, a democratic socialist government. As such I can only talk to myself. Fine.

            I’ll find those willing to change the game with me. I have no intention of losing my focus on my goal, and everything that has been brought up doesn’t get me there. I happen to think that we can’t play the game and win. I have two hundred years of data to prove that we can’t play the game and win.

            Let’s fucking change the game so that we CAN win.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
              Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

              78. To change the game, we have to have political power. And political power grows

              out of the barrel of a gun. In short, we need to have at least the acquiescence of the military, so long as it exists. Most people in the service would be better off under a truly progressive government than they are now, and we probably wouldn’t need as many of them because they would find better ways of making a living.

              If you are to be consistent with applying your principle of asking others what they want, you cannot ignore the active duty military and at least most of the veterans. I’m not saying you are ignoring them, but many on the left ignore them at best and despise them at worst.

              I find that foolish.

              Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                80. Gandhi would respectfully disagree.

                I don’t suggest we ignore anyone. That would be stupid.

                Socialism is supposed to be about everyone, right, left, male, female, rich, poor, doctors, lawyers, plumbers and mayors and yes, even congressmen.

                So, where do we start this mess? How do we think we stand a chance if we don’t even know what the majority of people ACTUALLY want and then encompass those wants into a socialist state?

                One issue about this is the FACT that these buzzwords, those used by all sides, have different meanings even among their own membership. As an example, take the bugaboo word freedom.

                Just what the hell does that mean anyway? If I can’t show that socialism brings freedom, I’m fucked at the starting gate. I gotta learn what they want. I gotta actually set my opinions aside, my dislikes aside, my intolerance of all things conservative aside to determine the answer to this. I have to actually hold a meaningful discussion with them, where I learn what they mean. Until I do I get absolutely nowhere because that one bugaboo word is killing us at the polls all by its’ lonesome. And it happens to be quite easy to neutralize if you think about it.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                  Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                  82. Freedom from starvation, homelessness, and ignorance is a good start.

                  Socialism has accomplished all of those things every once in awhile, you know. Even Social Democracy has done that. Capitalism, by itself? Never.

                  Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    87. Capitalism has nothing to do with government.

                    So it has nothing to do with solving those problems other than being the economic engine that provide the means to do so.

                    I agree with those three being good starting points. I even hold that the vast majority of conservatives hold them as well. So, all we have to do is convince them that our government beats theirs. That socialism can actually fix those issues and show them how theirs never has and never will.

                    Easily said but a bitch to do. Especially if I’m unwilling to talk to them and show that my socialism is not only a viable alternative, it’s the only one proven to work. Not piss them off by calling them names and ignoring everything they say.

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                      Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                      108. Bullshit. Capitalism controls our government. Our government officials

                      believe capitalism is best because capitalists reward them for cooperating with them and giving them more power and control over the rest of us.

                      Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        117. Nope. You're looking at a symptom of the seven deadly sins.

                        Capitalism is an economic system only. How that system distributes the wealth gained from economic activity is the government.

                        That, my friend, is the problem. The government, not the economic system. No economic system has ever been used that has either survived or been adopted and retained other than variants of capitalism. That is a fact.

                        The problem you are attributing to capitalism is not capitalism, it’s shitty governance that allows greed to overtake the distribution of the tremendous wealth we have created, and hoard it to the few versus lift the many.

                        It is not theoretically possible for everyone to become rich. No working theory has ever produced an economy that is self regulating that doesn’t have the major flaw where wealth growth can be restricted to a few versus spread over the many.

                        That regulation is government, not the economy or economic system.

                        Why do you think the greedy little shits always rail against ‘regulations’? Those are the things that modify wealth flow and are used to restrict damages to the environment. Note the word ‘restrict’.

                        Every last working socialist country has an economy based on capitalism. PERIOD. Get over your hatred of the WRONG THING. EMBRACE capitalism and USE IT to make everyone better off like they do.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                        Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                        133. Semantics. I think it is impossible to have a government independent of

                        capitalism in a society where government, because it is purchased by the capitalists, sees the only goal of capitalism-more profit soonest-as the same goal society and individuals should have. Such a government is morally bankrupt. We don’t have to look far to see that in this country today.

                        The goal of capitalism will always take over government when it is seen as a mostly positive thing.

                        Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        135. You may consider it to be semantics, but not I.

                        I refuse to mix the two because it is crucial that we adopt an economic system that actually works.

                        Are you implying that the government of Finland has been purchased by capitalists?

                        Or Norway? Or even that economic giant, Germany?

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                        Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                        137. No for Norway, Yes for Germany, I don't know enough about Finland to say.

                        I do know that in Norway, Denmark, and Sweden the predominant social goals are not the same ones that we see here, or now dominant in Germany. And Germany’s getting militaristic again. I have concerns about that development. So do the Belgians and Poles, I’m sure.

                        Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        138. But they are highly socialist.

                        In fact, they may have the solution that we need.

                        And no, nobody has to worry about Germany. Unless they’re stupid enough to attack them, then they’re toast.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                  • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                    Profile photo of Aldroud

                    109. I would disagree

                    It has been capitalism that has created the wealth that has lifted most from poverty. Socialism in an impoverished country is just a code word for kleptocracy by the powerful. Socialism in the Nordic countries is code for an oil based capitalist economy with generous welfare programs.

                    Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                    • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                      Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                      110. Of course you disagree. And you're wrong about the Nordic countries. Norway, for

                      example, gets about 7% of its revenue from North Sea oil. Most of the rest is from taxes on earnings. And if socialism is kleptocracy for the powerful, then the United States is socialist right now, for we are clearly governed by a kleptocracy for the powerful right now.

                      Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                      • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                        Profile photo of Aldroud
                        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                      • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                        Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                        112. I got my figure from something on TV a few days ago, but I don't remember

                        what it was. Even if you’re right, both Third Way Democrat and Republican propaganda in this country make it sound like a lot more than it actually is.

                        Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                      • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                        Profile photo of Aldroud

                        114. Can't trust the tv

                        Remember, you’re not allowed to lie on the internet.

                        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                      • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                        Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                        134. Lol! I forgot: if it's on the internet, it must be true!

                        Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
                    • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                      Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                      118. This is way over simplified.

                      But what the hell, you brought it up so I’ll ask a question.

                      You use the typical conservative phrase ‘generous welfare programs’.

                      Where do you think all that money goes, that welfare money?

                      What makes a welfare program something a conservative would dislike, considering the answer to my question makes them rich.

                       "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                        Profile photo of Aldroud

                        120. Well, the safety net in the US is pathetic

                        I adhere to the velocity of money model, so welfare funds are a churn in the overall economy.

                        My objection to the welfare system in America is the inefficiency, waste, and misguided attempts to use it for social engineering.

                        Looking at the numbers, seems to me the optimal solution would be Nixon’s negative income tax/ universal basic income.

                        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        124. No shit.

                        I see two things in your response. Correct me if I’m getting this wrong…..

                        You actually think that a basic minimal income is necessary. Fantastic. I love that idea.

                        You don’t disagree that welfare is necessary, you just dislike how it has been done American style. I totally agree.

                        But we are gonna disagree on the issue of ‘waste’. I don’t consider any spending wasteful if the money goes into the economy directly by being spent. To me waste is generated when individuals take the money and hoard it like taking it offshore, or putting it into the market. The market thing is because the money that we would call waste doesn’t generate anything to help anyone except the owner of the money. I don’t buy into the market generating a universal good in the least. That is an outrageous lie. That is how a government program can generate ‘waste’ to me.

                        So, how you gonna present this to your club? I’m concerned for your welfare.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                        Profile photo of Aldroud

                        125. I'm a goddamn war hero. I'm untouchable

                        My response when challenged is what FOB were you at?  Generally shuts down anyone questioning my bonifieds.

                        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        127. Except me.

                        Those don’t cut the mustard for intellect per se as far as I’m concerned. Don’t get me wrong, they have to be earned and are well deserved for what they are.

                        For others that may be true. I require more than that by far.

                        Good thing I’m not your grad adviser or on your grad committee.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                        Profile photo of Aldroud

                        128. My old school conservative buddy in state gov't

                        says that if I wasn’t on my seventh tour, he’d think I was some sort of nambly pambly liberal hippy. Its funny how environment affects perspective. In Portland, Or, my hippy friends thought I was a goose stepping fascist, in Alabama my conservative friends think I’m one step away from being a flower child.

                        Won’t ask you to be on my committee.  Looking to get Phd in applied mathematics. In race with wife, but she got head start so imma gonna have to hustle when I get home.

                        The time is now 1 am. Its been fun, turning in for the night.

                        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        130. Sleep well.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                        Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                        136. There's an old tradition that regarded both idle people and idle money as

                        “waste.” Idle being defined as what the proponents of that belief system thought was unproductive. People like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson both thought that way. They would have regarded the stock market as a wasteful casino.

                        Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
            • Wood (1364 posts)
              Profile photo of Wood Donor

              129. Teamwork is needed and it's not just a catchword..

              One of the essentials of teamwork is listening to, hearing, and thereby validating every member of the team. This ought to be taught in elementary school.

              Progressive to me means open-minded, seriously open-minded. Focused on simple solutions that benefit the most lives. Progressive is not arrogant. Progressive is not negative. Progressive walks the talk of what it means to be a human being.

               

              "All things wrong will move on if you let them."  - Prem Rawat
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                131. Just so I understand your thoughts….

                What do you mean by ‘open minded’? If I just up and read that I would make the assumption that that means everyone has to actually assess the pros and cons of all political stances, which is actually a really good thing. I mean, it has to be true that there are a large number of conservatives who have really good ideas of ways to solve problems that even progressives could agree with.

                If we would just shut the fuck up and listen for a change.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • Wood (1364 posts)
                  Profile photo of Wood Donor

                  144. Here's an easy question:

                  If a wise man meets a fool, and they have a conversation,who will learn more?

                  There’s a post here on JPR about the 3-D vision of a preying mantis. Similar to human vision, there are two eyeballs and each has a different point of view. The brain makes sense out of it, giving us a 3-dimensional understanding of the world around us. I think of the left and the right as two eyeballs. It is a good metaphor.

                  If one eyeball is constantly negating the validity of what the other eyeball sees, what’s the poor brain supposed to do?

                   

                  "All things wrong will move on if you let them."  - Prem Rawat
                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    152. The wise man.

                    But that’s because the fool knows everything.

                    There are millions of people who are not considering themselves to be what we call ‘progressive’. And few of them are real fools. So, we stand a chance if we really are the wise man, don’t we?

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • Wood (1364 posts)
                      Profile photo of Wood Donor

                      154. I do believe it's wise to consider all points of view

                      It’s such a delusion to imagine that our tiny pin-prick perspectives are the Truth, but that’s what all the fighting is about, anywhere and everywhere. Yup

                      "All things wrong will move on if you let them."  - Prem Rawat
        • 99Forever (4237 posts)
          Profile photo of 99Forever Moderator

          43. Why am I required to "have an alternative" to know that…

          … to understand that kissing neocon and neoconservative ass hasn’t, isn’t, won’t get any us “closer to our goals.”

          They are my enemies and NEVER bargain in good faith. EVER. I KNOW they can’t be trusted in any way, shape, or form. They lie, cheat, bully, steal, bribe, threaten, intimidate, and murder to reach their goals.

          When the rest of you finally figure out that “where else are you gonna go?” is just another fucking way to keep you under their thumb and grow a spine and instead of taking the bullshit and say FUCK YOU and walk away, maybe, just maybe, that “impossible People’s Party” you’re so fucking quick to dismiss would have a solid chance.

          BTW, get a fucking calendar, it’s not 1908 anymore.

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            57. Please.

            I still have no idea what you’re talking about. In fact, I’m not convinced you are talking. I see nothing but a vent against my post. Talking implies having the ability to have a response that is considered. That doesn’t seem to be in the offering.

            I don’t propose kissing any person or groups ass. I state that the only way we are going to win is if we address their wants and desires.

            I don’t say we ‘capitulate’ anything. I say we give them what they want ON MY TERMS. I think anything other than that type of cooperation is doomed to fail, and I have some pretty convincing experimental data to prove that this is indeed the case.

            Things were far worse at the turn of the twentieth century. Way way way worse than they are now.

            Your ‘fuck you’ attitude is absolutely doomed to fail. It does nothing but prove your enemies point. You can’t show how your style of governing does anything except give YOU what YOU want, and they can claim it fails utterly to give them what THEY want. And they’ll vote you out each and every time. Just like they have for over two hundred years. “They” happen to have at least a two to one advantage and if you continuously play my way or the highway they will gladly show you the way to the nearest highway.

            My suggestion changes that dynamic where nothing you (if you actually do) propose does. I win if I get one sixth of them to come to my side by showing them that my socialist government gives them what they want as well. They get to capitulate that their way isn’t as good.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            58. Please.

            I still have no idea what you’re talking about. In fact, I’m not convinced you are talking. I see nothing but a vent against my post. Talking implies having the ability to have a response that is considered. That doesn’t seem to be in the offering.

            I don’t propose kissing any person or groups ass. I state that the only way we are going to win is if we address their wants and desires.

            I don’t say we ‘capitulate’ anything. I say we give them what they want ON MY TERMS. I think anything other than that type of cooperation is doomed to fail, and I have some pretty convincing experimental data to prove that this is indeed the case.

            Things were far worse at the turn of the twentieth century. Way way way worse than they are now.

            Your ‘fuck you’ attitude is absolutely doomed to fail. It does nothing but prove your enemies point. You can’t show how your style of governing does anything except give YOU what YOU want, and they can claim it fails utterly to give them what THEY want. And they’ll vote you out each and every time. Just like they have for over two hundred years. “They” happen to have at least a two to one advantage and if you continuously play my way or the highway they will gladly show you the way to the nearest highway.

            My suggestion changes that dynamic where nothing you (if you actually do) propose does. I win if I get one sixth of them to come to my side by showing them that my socialist government gives them what they want as well. They get to capitulate that their way isn’t as good.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
          • ravensong (2016 posts)
            Profile photo of ravensong Donor

            60. +1000. Third Way Democrats did so well when they "reached across the aisle" back

            in 2009, didn’t they?

            Third Way policies are fail.  Adopting the ideas and policies of the right wing is the kiss of death for the progressive left.

            Got a stupid, irrational, dangerous, destructive idea you want me to consider, so that it can be made into a policy that will only benefit the 1%?

            No. And no means fucking no.

            No to kissing neocon/neoliberal ass.

            Together, together, my friends, we have begun a political revolution to transform America, and that revolution, our revolution, continues. ~ Bernie
            • Enthusiast (11527 posts)
              Profile photo of Enthusiast Donor

              145. I'm with you guys.

              I don’t agree with Nazis. Period.

              "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." Thomas Jefferson
      • HassleCat (2307 posts)
        Profile photo of HassleCat

        16. The right picked key issues & stood firm.

        Of course, much of what they were selling were vague stands on poorly defined issues: freedom, less government regulation, patriotism, security, etc. And we can see why they avoid filling in the details, because they like to have their “core values” understood emotionally, not rationally. Democrats do the same, but Republicans are better at it. Neither party is much good at making government work in the public interest, which is how I see progressivism.

      • Wink21 (37 posts)
        Profile photo of Wink21

        17. Agree. Fuck the Repubs,

        fuck the RW. We are in a war for or against America, and I know what side they’re on. I have zero tolerance for their horse$h!t, and not much more for those that want to build a campfire with these aasshats.

        lives in NY-21. Find on twitter @wink1radio Avatar is a pic of my S.L. avie.
        • ThomPaine (5034 posts)
          Profile photo of ThomPaine Moderator

          19. Problem is that is not at all what the OP is about.

          • Content removed for violations of the community standards & guidelines
            • ThomPaine (5034 posts)
              Profile photo of ThomPaine Moderator

              22. Boy did you miss the point. But you did get your "kill 'em all" in.

            • Aldroud (1179 posts)
              Profile photo of Aldroud

              25. Game on

              Enter player one

              Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
            • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
              Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

              32. I have read…

              That kind of talk before.  Years ago, during the Bush Presidency, it was common among a certain group of republicans.  Mostly tea party members.

              If you are really serious about it, then I humbly recommend that you think twice.  Most republicans are just regular people, working and living, paying taxes and dying like everyone else.

              The goal of progressivism, such as it is, is to help everyone.  Not just ourselves, but all the people of this Nation.  With prosperity for the masses comes education, greater equality, reform.  Peace.

              These kinds of comments don’t help.  In fact, they inspire greater division and even hate between the two sides.

              Passionate for our goals is one thing, but anyone who would kill the innocent to bring them about is not someone I want on my side.

              “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                62. I have met the enemy and he is me.

                That is exactly what this post is about.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
              • Content removed for violations of the community standards & guidelines
              • Content removed for violations of the community standards & guidelines
                • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                  Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                  142. Hanging? Really?

                  I may despise most of them and their ideology, but you are taking it to greater extremes than even most if them would.  Your method… if ever seriously attempted, or accomplished, would leave millions dead in a Nation devastated by civil war.

                  It is not just them, it is their voters, who number in the millions.  Is that what you want?  Ideological war?  It would not end well.  It never does.

                  Our rights determine that we are innocent until proven guilty.  You are talking about hanging more than half the government for treason, without judge or jury, with neither indictment nor conviction.

                  Think about what you are saying.  That is neither progressive nor admirable.  That is no better than those tea party fanatics who say “If ballots don’t work, we’ll use bullets”

                  No.  We are better than that.  I will not permit myself to reach that level of hatred.  Ever.

                  “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
        • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
          Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

          98. Interesting.

          ” We are in a war for or against America”

          For some strange reason I think I’ve heard this rhetoric before.

          Yeah, I have. Guy by the name of Bush. No, maybe Rumsfeld. No, and it wasn’t Cheney either so it must be Donald Trump.

           "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
      • Entrepreneur (2405 posts)
        Profile photo of Entrepreneur Donor

        28. Yep. Some points of view are objectively more valid than others. Those

        to the right, who employ false data, cherry picked data, lies by omission, or outright lies do not deserve to have their views respected.  Those who argue for one set of rules for themselves and another set of rules for others do not deserve to have their views respected.

         

        “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness" - J.K. Galbraith
    • Fire with Fire (1124 posts)
      Profile photo of Fire with Fire Donor

      8. Excellent OP

      I disagree with this sentence, however:

      That’s because, as it stands today, about half the population leans left, and the other leans right.

      Almost half the population never votes and has no interest whatsoever in what left or right means.  Of the people who do vote, most have no clue about left and right beyond the simple and often misleading dichotomies like Big Government vs. Freedom, or the Little Guy vs. Big Business.

      The opportunity before us as progressives is not an ideological awakening in favor of Social Democracy.  It is that a growing majority are waking up to the fact that the government is a fraud and that the bright future that our cultural heritage tells us is our birthright has been stolen from us.  We have a chance to persuade a 60% majority to give Social Democracy a chance — just as the frightening inflation, interest rates and rising crime rates of the 1970s induced a majority to give Reactionary politics a chance.

      I think the biggest forgotten fact in our political culture is that Ronald Reagan was a joke until about three weeks before the election of 1980.  His fat cat backers tricked up their message as the Reagan Revolution.

       

       

      Beyond that point about the irrelevance (for the most part) of ideology, I really appreciate the OP’s call for reasoned discussion with our opponents.  We are winning the battle for public opinion — but the MSM does its best to make us doubt our own success.

       

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        13. I was just paraphrasing the latest data.

        It is taken from polls for about the last 50 years or so, and shows some interesting trends, none of which I put in the OP.

        Those ‘simple and often misleading dichotomies‘ are exactly what I am alluding to for us progressives as well. When progressives pull up their stakes and fold their tents in frustration toward the ‘establishment’ dems, I wonder if they aren’t doing exactly that, deciding something based entirely on perception, not fact.

        When someone makes a decision without taking any evidence into consideration, they fall into that category. It happens to be a really cool subject in psychology called risk affect.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • ThomPaine (5034 posts)
      Profile photo of ThomPaine Moderator

      23. Great post. It needed saying.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        24. Thanks Thom, I appreciate this.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • TRex (3760 posts)
      Profile photo of TRex Donor

      26. I notice most of us believe the federal system is in shambles.

      I try to find common points and work my way out. When I see a political party that checks a lot of my boxes I usually pay attention. At one time I gave blind allegiance to one party. Won’t ever happen again.

       

      Oh sweety, no just no, when I or those of us here talk about the ultra rich - it is NOT you! Not you by a longshot, oh my God did you think...no way you actually thought we meant you? Lord, this country is full of rich stupid people and you seem to be one of the worst. No sweety, you are just a low paid pawn to those ultra rich we talk about. They are wrecking the world, you are an enabler and I understand not being able to sleep at night. I wouldn't either, selling out our future. You have kids right?  
    • Aldroud (1179 posts)
      Profile photo of Aldroud

      27. Based on imperical evidence, the answer to your last para is no

      Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
      • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
        Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

        31. Not really.

        People are pissed off, they have good reason to be.  I can understand both the OP’s point and those who, uh, well, very passionately disagreed.  At the end of the day though, they’re not going to go shooting anyone.  They might yell at their Congress critters, or throw things at the TV, but when they say “kill am all!” I don’t believe that is meant literally… at least I hope it isn’t.

        We don’t kill people for being wrong and/or stupid, or stupidly wrong.  That’s not what progressives do…

        Anyhow… from what I can see the opinions here are rather diverse.  Some extreme in one direction or another.

        Take those republicans though… now, they might be about as bright as a barrel of headless monkeys, but I like some of them anyway.

        Diversity of opinion is what always gets us progressives into trouble.  On the one hand, some of us (like the OP and myself) want to include everyone, even some of you damn republicans.

        On the other… People are angry.  They are angry because they are suffering, because their friends and families are.  Because we keep hearing stories of people freezing to death, children going hungry, tax cuts for the wealthy and massive military spending… but somehow… we can’t feed or shelter our own.

        Some times I get that angry too.  Then I have to remind myself that even (most of) you republicans don’t want that to happen.

        Not always easy… compassion.  Hell, it’s the hardest fucking thing in the world some times.

        All that said, I, a wicked progressive, shameless liberal… welcome you, a Republican, to any of my own conversations – and if you ever find yourself in northern Maine, even my broke ass will buy you a beer.

        “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
        • Aldroud (1179 posts)
          Profile photo of Aldroud

          33. I'm not talking about the larger picture, I'm talking about right here on this

          board

          Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
          • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
            Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

            35. So am I.

            I guess we see something very different.  Do you think one of us would ever be welcomed at, say, the freerepublic forum?  No?  Then how is it, if this forum is as closed minded as you suggest… how is it that you have not been banned for often disagreeing with pretty much everyone here?

            I am not suggesting that you should be.  Quite the opposite, I believe we need more like you, decent people who disagree with majority consensus.  I do not wish to be part of an echo chamber….

            Don’t take a few angry replies to mean we are all uniformly opposed to dissent.  We aren’t.  Dissent is what brought us here.

            “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
            • Aldroud (1179 posts)
              Profile photo of Aldroud

              39. Again, I disagree. Not because people don't necessarily agree with me

              I was suspended for two weeks and yet no mod has responded to my question about what rule I violated.  It just comes down to some people didn’t like what I said.  So no, this board is not as open minded as you may think.

              As for how welcome you’d be at free republic, I have no idea.  That site is a sewer and I’m shocked by the content.  Discussionist is better, at least there’s a free for all mentality that one expects to engage in intellectual combat.  I’d welcome your input there.

              Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
              • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                44. I had wondered

                Why you were gone for a while.  Figured it was a military thing.

                Without knowing the details of why you were suspended, I can’t make any sort of judgment, but neither can you, it seems.

                This makes me uneasy.  I like our admin and moderators and get along with them quite well, so it bugs me even more…

                Not sure if you any are reading this – but if you are, could you please respond to Aldroud’s question?  Yes, he is a Republican, but I didn’t think that was immediate grounds for suspension…

                Don’t we have some kind of warning system that lets people know when they are crossing a line and asks them to stop?  Not accusing.  Just asking.

                In any event, Aldroud, I don’t mind the occasional intellectual combat, just would probably be a bit much for me right now.  Maybe I will join you on discussionist later though, when I am having fewer panic attacks and am less inclined to freak out.

                That being said, JPR is my internet home – and I don’t believe I have ever seen you befoul it with hate speech of the sort common at the free republic.

                So I don’t like that you were suspended and never given a reason why….

                “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
                • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                  Profile photo of Aldroud

                  45. Speaking of panic attacks

                  My wife is medical anthropology and an L&D Nurse.  So I get to see a lot of her material she studies (she’s a great researcher, lousy grammarian).  Recently read an article out of Scientific America about research on panic attacks and brain chemistry.  There is some evidence that elevated levels of CO2 in the bloodstream spark panic attacks in those that are prone to having them.  A possible treatment that immediately lends itself is a hit of pure O2.  I don’t know what your situation is, but if you can arrange to get a can from a medical supply company, that might help ease your experiences.

                  Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                  • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                    Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                    48. Haven't heard that.

                    Interesting… worth looking into.  Thanks.

                    “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
                  • glinda (2396 posts)
                    Profile photo of glinda Donor

                    64. Is that why they suggest breathing into a paper bag?

                    Animals know more than we do. - Native American proverb
                    • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                      Profile photo of Aldroud

                      86. No, the paper bag thing is for hyperventilation

                      Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                • 99Forever (4237 posts)
                  Profile photo of 99Forever Moderator

                  46. self-delete

                  • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                    Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                    47. Self delete

                    Nt

                    “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        49. O-K I have thought about your reply for a while and

        now I’m open to understanding EXACTLY what you are saying. There are two questions given in the para, so I need to understand which is being given the no. To start this, I will assume the no is directed at the first question, though it may indeed be directed at both but I’m not seeing how that can be true.

        You seem to understand the gist of both of my subjects, the local and the global. I am going to assume, again, that your negative on the question is directed at BOTH suppositions, that we are closed to open courteous discussion both here and across the US.

        I agree. Sadly and reluctantly, I agree. Proof of this has already been presented in this thread. And the closed mind is shown globally every day.

        So, having come to the conclusions we have, there is something that needs to be examined. How do we, you and I, deal with it? I get the impression that you have some, or perhaps many, opinions or even better, actual knowledge of things that go contrary to the accepted boundaries and have had some rather heated replies to some of the things you have tried to discuss.

        If I were an intelligent and courteous gentleman, which is highly unlikely considering how much I like to be a truant child, I would want to know some of the things you feel we either misunderstand or ignore because it runs contrary to our worldviews. If I were interested in reaching my goal of implementing a socialist form of government, then I would have to understand your concerns and, again if I’m the courteous and intelligent person, address them with how that form of governing can take your concerns into account. Having failed to do either, then I would assume that people having your concerns would vote against my implementation of said socialist government and passage of it would be highly tenuous at best. So, it would seem that my best course of action is to address your concerns, intending to sway you to allow my approach to dealing with it will actually work so I can get you to vote for it.

        Please note that nowhere in the reply have I capitulated to anything you demand. All I have done is to realize that unless I take your concerns into account, and properly address them within my desired socialist worldview, I will fail to get anything I want. Even BETTER is the fact that I have learned what those concerns are, and then taken the time and effort to understand them. So I happen to have placed myself in a win-win position. My assumption would also be that you, being a courteous and intelligent person, realize exactly the same is true for you.

        So, after taking way too long to reply as it is, I again ask:

        What do we do, you and I, to deal with the fact that your conclusion is true?

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • Aldroud (1179 posts)
          Profile photo of Aldroud

          88. In the end, we must realize out goals are the same

          We disagree on the means.  A socialist form of government isn’t your end goal, rather you believe it is a vehicle to achive it.

          A system that maximises the potential of each human being, provides them the means to sustain a healthy and happy lifestyle, respects the environment we all share, and preserves the basic rights we have come to understand as universal to all mankind.

          I believe that end state is achievable through a capitalist society.

          It is not the ends we argue, but the means.

          Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            92. Labels do make things sticky don't they?

            So, I see we are in complete agreement if I have read your reply correctly.

            Every current demonstrably effective democratic socialist country has economic systems based entirely on capitalism. Every single one. In fact some of them are actually using economic systems that are far more ‘capitalistic’ than ours, since they have adopted more open free market strategies that our conservatives love to bring up. And lo and behold, they enjoy their success and consider themselves overwhelmingly satisfied with their lives as a whole.

            Please correct me if I’m wrong, but that is the description of Germany’s socialist government and it’s tremendous economic engine which is capitalist. I’m not too sure I agree with everything they do, but it sure seems like a good place to start.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Aldroud (1179 posts)
              Profile photo of Aldroud

              106. Germany is a much more powerful country than they pretend to be

              Their major cirporations bear much in common with syndicalism.  The strong unions ensure worker rights, but they don’t have an adversarial relationship with management.  That there makrs them much better than our system. Unions in the US are parasitical, whereas in Germany they are symbiotic.

              Just one example of the strength of the German system. I find much to admire. Full disclosure, I grew up in Germany, so I’m biased.

              They’re guilt over WW2 continues to keep them off the world stage and I think that is a pity. Germany today is not the Germany of 1940s.

              Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                116. I am of almost full German descent.

                My dad bombed the shit outta his relatives in WWII. He was a B-17 wing commander.

                My closest friend in grad school was my dissertation chair, chair of the department and mentor all rolled into one. A German raised initially in the Middle East because his father was a medical doctor.

                Germany has paid enough for their mistakes. We would do well to form a government similar to the one they finally adopted after almost total destruction. Would have to be modified for the differences in the two countries, but we should be smart enough to figure this shit out.

                I’m a little concerned how they went straight for austerity in 2008. I think that was actually a big mistake.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
              • Robert From NC (350 posts)
                Profile photo of Robert From NC

                132. Yes,

                Germany’s system is very good, where unions and management have a symbiotic relationship. However, unions are not parasitical in the US, it is corporate CEO’s, the ownership class, monopolies, and the “rent seekers” that are parasitical.

                https://www.payscale.com/data-packages/ceo-pay

                http://evonomics.com/joseph-stiglitz-inequality-unearned-income/

                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rent-seeking

                 

                 

                 

                 

                 

                "Socially Liberal, Fiscally Progressive" "Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." George Carlin "Formerly known here as Robert Thomas 85"
          • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
            Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

            105. Well stated Aldroud.

            The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

    • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
      Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

      29. Your last paragraph

      Sums it all up nicely.  Are we big enough?  It took a long time for the split on the left to happen.  When it did it was because progressives were mocked, shut out, ignored, not given even a place at the table.

      As things stand, our voice in government is very small.  Consider how many of us (myself included) love Sanders because there is no one else quite like him.  Our passion, even ideology among the masses is far stronger.

      Universal healthcare.  A strong safety net.  Infrastructure upgrade/rebuilding.  Genuine tax reform.  Many, many things can be done much better and even have broad support among the masses.

      Who we are really fighting, I think, is not so much each other as it is the system itself.  If these bigger issues were put to a public vote, they would pretty much always favor progressive solutions.

      Of course, there is ideology and fact, as well.  We can debate the why and the how… but take something as simple as, say, food stamps.  A program that permits the poor, disabled and working poor to buy food.  This is the only sustenance for many, it is how they survive.

      It is a fact that it offers (on average) considerably less than 2 dollars, per meal, per person.  Democrats (some) want to enforce a “health food only” policy within the program… not understanding, for the most part, that this simply cannot be done with the funds given.

      Go further right and you will hear calls for drug testing recipients, work requirements, and some times far worse ideas.

      So… can we allow for dissenting views?  Absolutely.  Can we allow for a lack of education, ignorance, resentment and even cruelty to dictate policy?  No… and that is exactly what is increasingly happening.

      This is how we got here.  Playing one side against another without the focus being on compassion.  The plight of those in poverty and those in deep poverty is terrible – and becoming far worse by the year.

      I do not believe we can permit the status quo to continue as is.  Some times we are going to have to get loud and even angry to change it.

      Most people… I believe/hope want to do good, to be good.  To share the wealth, to find common purpose.  To care for our impoverished and workers as well as for the rich.

      The wealthy in and out of government, however, exist in that very echo chamber you speak of.  They have no need to listen or care.  This doesn’t even genuinely have a damn thing to do with party.  It is simply a matter of magnitude and donor preference.

      To be perfectly clear… I think we can and should have a huge damn tent, even including wealthy people who’s greed has not made them insane sociopaths.

      I do not think we will find genuine common cause among the apparatus of either main party as it exists today.  Therefor I must respectfully disagree at least in that regard.

      As such… I will not support democrats or republicans.  I will support unique individuals who see through the lies and both speak and fight for truth and justice.  I don’t give a damn what their party is.  I do though, feel very strongly that we desperately need a party that represents the poor and working class.

      Right now, such a party does not exist.  I hope to take part in creating it.

      The D or R next to ones name means less than nothing.  What it comes down to – always – is the issues.  Frankly, the majority of politicians are so sick and twisted they are wrong, embarrassingly, painfully, stupidly wrong on almost all of them.

      Big tent?  Sure.  Dissent?  Absolutely.  Party for the wealthy  – poorly disguised as being something else?  Nope.  I say this for the vast majority of elected politicians – it is not directed at our people or parties, but, as for those “leaders”?  Fuck em.  Hope they choke on their silver spoons.

      Just my ten cents – and yes, the last bit really was neccesary.

      “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        51. I think I understand what you're saying.

        And the issues you present are exactly what I have brought up in the OP.

        However, I don’t agree with this one statement, which is critical to bot arguments, yours and mine:

        “I do not think we will find genuine common cause among the apparatus of either main party as it exists today. “

        I don’t quite get what you mean by apparatus. In fact, I don’t even care about either party. What I am suggesting in the OP is that in order for us to be able to achieve a socialist form of government, we have to PROVE to those in opposition to it because of ideology that our government can give them what they want as well.

        If we fail to do that, then we fail to achieve our goal. There will never be enough progressives to overcome the huge numbers of “other” affiliations in total, so any and all achievements will be local only.

        I’ll give you an example of how I think this can work. I am going to post an OP directly addressing the vaunted ‘freedom’ issue that conservatives use in opposition to anything socialist. All I’m going to do is show how freedom is actually a central issue for a democratic socialist government, and that it is in fact MANDATED to any member of it’s society.

        Think about it. What does freedom actually mean? How do you make sure every individual has it? Conservatives have a ‘perception’ of what they call freedom. But it’s just that, a perception and it isn’t actually true. Show them a real tangible freedom brought about by a democratic socialist form of government and watch their heads explode.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
          Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

          53. I'll put it this way

          Do you think mainstream democrats who, thanks to this system have become wealthy… are really going to get behind any plan that threatens that wealth?  They won’t.  Neither will republicans.  Indeed, any third party created, if it is to be successful in creating change…. will have to adhere to some damn strict financial guidelines.

          That’s the problem, in a nutshell.  Add that media empowers and promotes their narrative, further add that the money from donors is often given in expectation of tax relief, favors and so on….

          There you have it…. American “democracy” such as it is.

          We’ve got to change it.  We have to take the money out of it to change it.  Nothing else is going to work.

          “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            61. Of course not.

            Is that what you think socialism does, take away someones wealth?

            I was under the impression that capitalism under a democratic socialist government was about the best thing we’ve ever seen in the history of humanity.

            I have no intention of taking away their money. I WANT them to make as much money as they can. I WANT them to get absolutely filthy rich. Because along the way the taxes they pay on their gains is used to enhance every person in the society through services provided by the government and subsidized incomes for those in need. EVERYONE prospers if they get rich. THAT is socialism as I define it.

            Redistribution of wealth IS NOT taking wealth away. It is giving everyone wealth. The real truth is that if everyone had money to spend, they’d get even richer faster than they do now.

            So why not listen to them and give them what they want?

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
              Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

              63. You serious?

              They ARE rich, my friend.  Very rich.  That money is not trickling down, it is not going to, either.  Yes, progressive tax reform could change that, but you saw the kind of tax reform we just got.

              I am not opposed to people getting rich.  I am opposed to them getting rich and deliberately screwing everyone else in the process.  This is our reality.

              You think these assholes are ever going to support progressive tax legislation?  Why?  It means they would have to pay a lot more.

              Economically, logically, ethically, hey, it makes perfect sense… but it will not happen with this government.  You could not convince these assholes even if you brought Jesus and Buddha with you.

              What they are doing… and have been doing for years is criminal.  Damn right I think they should lose that wealth.  It should go to the 45 million Americans their policies have impoverished.

              “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                67. Who said anything about trickle down?

                I didn’t say anything about trickle down. Socialism as I know it ignores anything concerning trickle down.

                If you think for a moment that you will EVER be able to take their wealth away, you have a problem. That is theft. That is communism. That would be immoral as much as their unwillingness to share it is immoral.

                Look at it this way. Starting the day we enact a socialist government:

                I want you to get absolutely filthy stinking rich.

                Each time you put money in the bank, I get half. And I don’t care where that bank is, so you don’t get to hide it offshore. Fuck with me and I take all of it. You can spend as much of it as you like to lessen what you put in the bank, but I get a minimum of 25 percent of it in sales or other taxes regardless of country of sale, which makes me richer as well, and I’m guaranteed that whoever got your money has to give me half of the profit if it is spent in country. Then, when you finally decide to sell whatever the hell it was that you bought, I get half. I can’t fucking lose at this game. The more you make the more I make. The more you spend the more I make.

                Oh, one other little tidbit. All that money you amassed before now? You have two choices. Give me what I want now, or give it to me later when it moves somewhere, because you will give me half of it SOMETIME. You can’t take it with you when you die.

                So go right on ahead and make your money. Make as much as you possibly can. The richer you get the richer I get. Spend it all over the place, I don’t care. Invest it. Sooner or later I get (at least) half. In the meantime I get a quarter.

                I don’t see trickle down anywhere in that discussion. I see someone getting rich and the society which produced that wealth getting rich as well. There is no limit to what you can make. Take as much as you want.

                Win-win for both parties. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Almost giggly.

                And no-one talks the truth about it so the greedy shits get away with making it but not giving it back as you point out above.

                I don’t care about the rich. Seriously. They comprise less than a percent of the population. They don’t have the combined wealth that I need even if I could take it. I need for them to continuously increase their wealth instead. I want the lie about how socialism restricts getting rich exposed and convince enough of the remaining 99 percent to vote socialist so they are guaranteed a better life if they do.

                THAT is listening to their wants and giving it to them. Let them get rich. Let them dream the American dream of becoming filthy rich. Who cares? In fact, ENCOURAGE it. I get a whole lot of money to do a whole shitload of good with when they do. End poverty once and for all. End the inability to get medical help once and for all. End homelessness (if the homeless actually want to live somewhere) once and for all. That is what I want and I get it if I let them get what they want. In fact, I don’t see any way I get what I want if they DON’T get what they want.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                  Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                  69. So…

                  You want voters to elect a democratic socialist government?  Or you expect our politicians to actually conform?

                  Again, the problem is that they are not going to ever willingly do so.  Even if it makes them richer in the long term… they will not.  So, unless we get that progressive majority you keep saying we can’t, that’s just not going to happen.

                  Is it economically sound?  Yes.  Ethically so, as well.  It is not going to happen, however, until we somehow create a new government.  And letting them, even encouraging them to get filthy rich is how we ended up in this mess.

                  No.  I believe there needs to be limits on how much wealth one can gain through supposed public service.  I am not opposed to reasonable comfort for those who perform well, but what you are suggesting…

                  Is reckless.  We already have rich politicians.  We used to have a much more progressive tax system and much poorer politicians.  For a time, things were more equitable.  That has not been the case for several decades.

                  I don’t disagree that progressive tax works – I disagree with the idea that we should have millionaire politicians.  That’s what we have now… see how it works?

                  Until the system is reformed financially  – by taking money OUT of politics, we are unlikely to see any sort of genuine progressive reform, let alone a socialist type tax system.

                  The economic ideas are sound.  The way you are suggesting we accomplish bringing them about are not.

                  “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    73. When did I ever say we can't get a majority?

                    I don’t even need a majority of true socialists to win. But I do need to convince enough others to give socialism a try. If we can’t do that then we’re totally screwed and blowing in the wind. Just like we are right now. Totally screwed, no workable plan, no real concentrated effort to reach out and no future.

                    We don’t give a shit about anyone but ourselves. Anyone not a socialist is a barbarian and deserves to live out their miserable lives being stupid and abjectly poor. (I was considering making sure that this was listed as sarcasm, but I’m not convinced that a lot of people don’t actually believe that.)

                    Yup. Sounds just like 2018.

                    And we’re fucked. Just like we have always been.

                    Nothing new here. This struggle has been going on for over two hundred years in the US, and we’ve gotten exactly nowhere using everything I see being tossed out not only here, but everywhere.

                    Time to change the game. This one no worky. I can’t win this game. In fact, only the rich win in this game.

                    Fuck the rich. Give me the chance to actually address the concerns of some run of the mill conservatives and even some of those bastard third way asshats who are total idiots and fools, and I may be able to convince them that they are better off giving a new game a try. And then we all win.

                    Every working socialist country has filthy rich politicians and those bought off by them. So what. They also have what we would call huge turnouts at the polls, so their pitiful few supporters get beaten back almost all the time.

                    You want to win the game and have a socialist country? Therein lies one of the keys. But I don’t see any way to get bigger turnouts if we can’t give them something to vote for. But just what is it that they want to vote for? If I don’t know that, then I can’t show them how they can get it by voting.

                    Shit, that was proven just last year.

                     

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                      Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                      76. Now we are getting somewhere.

                      The best question either of us can ask in this conversation is, “What do the people want?”  The answer isn’t that hard.

                      Freedom, as much as they can have.  Comfort and security.  Potential for upward mobility.  These things… We can give all of them, as a Nation, as a whole.  Not perfection, but more good than bad.

                      So…  You want to win over run of the mill conservatives and third way dems in addition to everyone else?  Then, focus on the issues.

                      To begin with, I believe it is the sacred obligation of any society that calls itself righteous to help the poor.  Free college tuition, universal healthcare, increasing wages.. these things are a good start.

                      Support a strong infrastructure upgrade.  This increases access to pretty much everything, hopefully for everyone – and will grow the economy.

                      A new new deal is required for this.  A basic, universal income.  It doesn’t have to make anyone rich, just enable them to live.  That could end much of the debate about the “welfare state”.  It will become necessary as well as automation and robotics improve.

                      Finally, embark upon a quest to reconnect people with the planet they live on.  Massively boost funding for climate change initiatives and education.

                      There is more, but is be willing to bet my arm that a majority will support most, if not all of this.

                      Do it… outrageously, proudly, unflinchingly, bravely.  We CAN still lead the way, but only if we turn back from the abyss.  It’s about freedom, justice… and finally, compassion.

                      We can have it all, if we just focus on the issues.  Even that progressive tax reform you speak of.  I do not think though, that most people will support enriching politicians.  Not unless they get something damn great in return… which is how it SHOULD have worked all along.

                      Just my thoughts… not feeling so well and I think I need to lie down, but I’d be glad to continue this later.

                      Be well, take care… and focus on the issues, that is where we win – and we agree about much more than we disagree about.

                      “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
                • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                  Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                  72. One other thing….

                  You say it would be theft to seize their wealth.  If that wealth had been honestly earned I would agree.  It was not.  Now, I am not saying it even can be taken away and I would not care to try.

                  You know where the money for those tax cuts comes from?  How about spending over 50% of the budget on military?  I’ll tell you:

                  It comes out of working people.  It comes in cuts to everything from meals on wheels, to heating assistance, medicaid, Medicare.  That infrastructure we need?  Yep, came out of that too.  Also education.  The list is nearly endless.  It includes social security (as politicians have taken trillions from the fund).

                  In the last twenty years, there has been trillions of dollars lost that government forces simply… could not account for.

                  You say let them be as wealthy as possible to benefit a socialist government.  That only works if we have that kind of government, and even then…

                  They have spent decades crushing regulation, kicking the poor further and further down.  Failing on education, healthcare and almost everything else… quite deliberately, in order to enrich themselves and serve their donors.

                  As such, this cannot be maintained.  No, I do not think this kind of money has any place in government.  It corrupts.  It is power – and absolute power…

                  Financial reform needs to include bans on lobbying, on corporate contributions to politicians.  On the massive financial meddling that takes place at every level of government.

                  Any plan that does not support that, will never get my support.

                  “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    74. You claim they stole it, and they claim they earned it.

                    One of you is correct.

                    They did earn it. They earned it from the society they live in.

                    The question remains. Who cares?

                    What matters is how they should give back directly to the society from which it came.

                    There aren’t enough of them to matter either way. This is a red herring.

                    What does the guy that owns the little business down the street want? What does his wife want? What do all those average Joe Blow ‘conservatives’ want? Why do they think that their conservative worldview can work?

                    Give me the answer, and I’ll show them how it has never worked to their favor, nor will it ever work to their favor, and that MY solution MIGHT. Their way doesn’t so what do they have to lose? The conservative lie has got to be shown to be a failure because it is a failure. That is one thing that needs to be done. The other is giving them a proven workable socialist alternative that may work. If I don’t do BOTH, they vote against me every time.

                    Those are the only people I’m interested in. I don’t give a fart in the wind about this stupid rich versus poor versus whatever. I can’t change it unless I can win.

                    Winning isn’t something, it’s EVERYTHING.

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • slipslidingaway (197 posts)
      Profile photo of slipslidingaway Donor

      30. If we close our minds to others with a different view we become like others …

      we disdain, frustrating as it might be, we can only hope to chip away at their views and seek common ground in certain areas, without opening our minds we put ourselves in a box, on the other side, and there is no improvement for the majority of  people. We cannot rely on elected officials to bridge this gap, we must do this on our own, and it takes work, but you only need a small sliver of opening to the other side, and we must remain open to their views as well and can only wish that they hear something we are saying.

      Great post, we should become what we wish the other side should be.

       

       

       

      • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
        Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

        38. Very well put SSA.

        The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

        • slipslidingaway (197 posts)
          Profile photo of slipslidingaway Donor

          101. Thank you. n/t

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        52. We should become what we claim we are.

        That will allow the ‘other side’ to see just what that presents as a society.

        Done right and I believe the majority of both will come to the conclusion that we must evolve to a more socialist nation.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • slipslidingaway (197 posts)
          Profile photo of slipslidingaway Donor

          103. I have watched relatives switch sides including our own daughter

          there is not one single discussion that I could point to, and I would not presume it was a discussion with just us, we are all a part of larger group and you do what you can depending on the circumstances. Not going to stop trying to have a conversation when it could make a difference, then again I also recognize when the discussion is fruitless.

    • mmonk (2471 posts)
      Profile photo of mmonk Donor

      36. Injustices in our society warrant those suffering injustice

      to have a seat at the table.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        55. A truly socialist government demands that EVERYONE has a seat.

        By what I define a socialist government to be. The very term ‘socialist’ implies that.

        So, how do we take over the table’s conversation?

        That is what I address in the OP. How can we get anywhere if we either leave the table or be so obnoxious that no others at the table listen to us?

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • Eleanors38 (883 posts)
          Profile photo of Eleanors38 Donor

          66. Your outlook is reasonable, and it does no violence to reform…

          of the electoral and party system.  I am OK with supporting some crappy compromises on policy, while keeping tabs on those party operatives and candidates who need to retire or be retired.  In fact, if the compromises are all that bad, then let the promulgators own them and take the future consequences.

          Currently, I am putting in the sign-making grunt work for a candidate for Texas legislature, and supporting (just barely) others.  But when the opportunity comes, a few of these cats are OUT.

          The danger in all this is that the Far Right has a record of virtually No Compromise, and the centrist Demos (about all there is) are known to break first and often.  The Right knows this to such a degree that it must maintain the bully stance because most of its constituency expects (even relishes) the dynamic.  Whatever the changes down the line, that image and well-practiced role of Democrats (or whatever purports to oppose the Right) must drastically change.

          Your views are reasonable, but with a short shelf life.  In fact, without the future development of a powerful progressive party to counter the dangerously authoritarian Right, they would be fatuous.

          Good discussion!

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            71. I'm not suggesting compromise.

            I detest compromise. That produces two losers, not two winners.

            I’m saying that if we were smart like we claim we are, then we’d listen to what they claim they want.

            And then give it to them in a socialist government. They mistakenly think that they can’t have what they want in a socialist society, which is totally false. I’m not talking bullshit stuff like abortion or right to religion or that crap, I’m talking about the societal structure of government, and how that government provides for it’s citizens. Religious zealotry is immutable so I don’t want to waste my time on them. I don’t need them. If they can’t get past their outragious religious crap, then so be it.

            There is nothing that I can think of off the top of my head that they claim to want that isn’t provided with a democratic socialist government.

            I just gotta listen to them demand something, because that’s what everyone is doing these days, demanding, and give them a solution to their demands via democratic socialism. They aren’t getting what they want now, so they will actually contemplate getting it another way, but only  if they know that there is a better chance of actually getting it. Once they are convinced there is a better way to get what they want, they’ll support the movement.

            First I have to listen.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Eleanors38 (883 posts)
              Profile photo of Eleanors38 Donor

              170. Okay, got your drift.

        • Aldroud (1179 posts)
          Profile photo of Aldroud

          90. Change the language

          Socialist is a word with negative connotations. Half the electorate is turned off immediately just by the word.

          Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            93. O-K, I'll buy that.

            So what do we call it? Maybe we should start an OP and do a poll on names that don’t automatically turn people off. Come up with some good alternatives.

            I actually haven’t thought about that as a problem, but you’re probably correct.

            Seriously, any ideas?

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Aldroud (1179 posts)
              Profile photo of Aldroud

              100. I have often used this as aan argument

              A well run empire doesn’t allow an exploitable work force to starve or be handicapped by simple medical issues as arguments in favor of gov’t assistance.

              Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                102. Yeah, fine. But what name do you suggest?

                Conservative is a connotation disliked by about the same number of people as socialist.

                Most people consider Empire as evil by one of three ways, one is they’re most often dictatorships throughout history or the result is catastrophe of the first magnitude in the end, or failing either of those two, they’re financed via some form of servitude. Even if that servitude includes medical care, it isn’t a very good thing.

                So I would assume empire isn’t any better than socialism as far as bad names go.

                How about compassionateist? How about brotherhoodist?

                Gotta be something that means socialist but doesn’t sound like it. Like naming my company Datsun because Nissan seems too Japanese or conservative because it doesn’t sound like greed.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                  Profile photo of Aldroud

                  104. I would suggest "optimal" as in, what is the optimal solution to this problem?

                  An optimal political movement, one that looks to use efficiency and logic to arrive at a solution rather than rhetoric and ideology.

                  I’m not a Conservative or Liberal, I’m an Optimist!

                  I’m not a Republican or Democrat, I vote Optimist!

                  Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    113. I am going to take this very seriously.

                    Not kidding. Maybe not ‘optimist’, but surely some variation of ‘optimal’. Everyone likes things that are optimized, no? Us scientists sure the hell do.

                    Fucking great idea.

                    Thanks. I’ll make sure you get all the credit when I start a movement to adopt something like it.

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                      Profile photo of Aldroud

                      115. Before I came to Afghanistan I was slowly introducing

                      the concept into my local Republican club. Plan to continue when I return.

                      Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        121. Enlighten me.

                        Just what concepts were you attempting to introduce? That representation of something I’d probably call realistic social foundation is worth going for?

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Aldroud (1179 posts)
                        Profile photo of Aldroud

                        123. That universal healthcare is better for buisness

                        and that it saves money in the end. Rather than wait till something requires ER treatment or the loss of a skilled worker, treat ailments as they arise. Fewer days lost in productivity, reduced costs borne by employeers, and the ancillary improvement in morale when workers think the employers care for them.

                        Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who don't.
                • Eleanors38 (883 posts)
                  Profile photo of Eleanors38 Donor

                  171. Heh. If JPR isn't suitable for us, how do we re-name a whole philosophy?

    • Marym625 (28800 posts)
      Profile photo of Marym625 Admin

      42. Great post

      Thank you.

      While in the bigger picture I agree, I do believe there are serious limitations to what we should allow, if you will, in our fight for life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

      I’ll expound on that by Saturday. :)

      Take Action #StopFCC https://www.battleforthenet.com/breaktheinternet/ "Once the decision was made to go into Iraq as an invader and occupier,  it’s like our nation lost its conscience. And it has not yet gotten that conscience back." Madfloridian  
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        56. Perhaps you misunderstand what I am trying to say.

        Under no circumstances do I propose that progressives go beyond our ‘limits’.

        I suggest we address others concerns via our solution. In order to do so, I have to be able to not only listen to what they say and believe, I have to be able to understand what they really want, and then hand it to them on a socialist platter. And let them eat socialist crow.

        They will love the taste if I do it right.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • Marym625 (28800 posts)
          Profile photo of Marym625 Admin

          157. That, I can agree with

          :)

          Take Action #StopFCC https://www.battleforthenet.com/breaktheinternet/ "Once the decision was made to go into Iraq as an invader and occupier,  it’s like our nation lost its conscience. And it has not yet gotten that conscience back." Madfloridian  
    • ravensong (2016 posts)
      Profile photo of ravensong Donor

      50. I will never tolerate fascism. Please let me know when conservatives come

      up with a policy, even an idea, that is beneficial to the planet, and beneficial for human beings who aren’t wealthy.

      In my many decades on the planet, I’ve yet to experience this, and I love to experience new things.

      If I wanted to read repetitive conservative nonsense, I would visit the websites that promote it.

      Together, together, my friends, we have begun a political revolution to transform America, and that revolution, our revolution, continues. ~ Bernie
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        59. Perhaps this one may suffice.

        Freedom.

        Or perhaps this one:

        Individuality.

        That is two examples of things conservatives cherish in thought, that we also cherish. Yet we have allowed the conservatives to play a game that makes it appear that we don’t like nor want freedom. They have been able to get away with convincing their minions that they desire individuality, but turn around and despise our desire to have true equal rights, which I happen to think is the ultimate requirement for everyone to be an individual.

        So, listen to what they want.

        They want to make money. Shit, I want to make money. Who doesn’t want money?

        They want to get rich. Shit I wish I was rich. Who doesn’t want to be rich? The only difference between me and the ‘greedy’ right wing thug is the fact that I’d probably give the vast majority of it away to those in need. But what a blast that would be! I can’t do that if I can’t get rich in the first place, so socialism had better have a way to get rich in it. Besides, the richer I get the more taxes I pay (under a socialist government) and the more money everyone else can get.

        How come THAT message isn’t being hammered home? WE WANT YOU TO GET RICH (continuing to say asshole under your breath)!!!!! In fact, we NEED you to be able to get rich (continuing to say greedy bastard under your breath)!!!!

        Convince them they can make as much money as they want EASIER in some ways via socialism. The more they make, the more gets spread around and everyone makes money with them.

        All you have to do is listen, consider and above all adapt. I am firmly convinced that socialist ideals to give them what they want as well as what we want. It’s that adapt thing that never shows up. People just close down and shut out all conversation. Give me the chance to show them the advantages socialism has and many conservatives may change their minds. But they aren’t going to give me the time of day if I become closed and spew hate and flip them off.

        That is what the OP was supposed to explain.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • ravensong (2016 posts)
          Profile photo of ravensong Donor

          65. You don't seem to understand. I listened 50 yrs ago. They are saying

          and doing the same things today that they were then.  The same thing they’ve been saying and doing over and over and over for decades. I really don’t need to hear it again. I totally understood how fucked up it was the first time. No one I have ever known has been successful at changing a conservative’s heart by listening to their irrational drivel. No one I have ever known has ever changed a conservative’s heart by adopting conservative ideas or ways.

          What do freedom and individuality mean to conservatives? The freedom to use their religion to quash the human rights of LGBT? The freedom to attack, conquer, kill, exploit other peoples, in other lands, in the name of Jesus and murica?? The individual right to pollute and rape the earth indiscriminately, with impunity?  The freedom and individuality to deny justice, equality and healthcare, because they got theirs, and they want ours too?  Because it’s pretty clear that their ideas of freedom and individuality are universes apart from my concepts of freedom and individuality.

          I don’t want to be rich. I never cared about being rich. The rich people I know were ruined by being rich, whether they were born with money, or got rich later in life. I felt it would ruin me as well. I’ve had a happy, fun, rewarding life because of not wanting or trying to get rich.  I’ve been lucky to always have a bit more than enough to be comfortable.  Greedy people, who take too much, have been fucking everything up since the dawn of human kind. And not everyone, or every culture, shares American capitalist values.

          When I asked a friend of mine, an executive among tribes in the Northwest Territories of Canada, “If you could have one wish granted, what would it be?”

          He said he wished that everyone in the world could always have enough to eat.

          Right. Beautiful answer.

          Conservatives are entitled to their opinions. I’m not going to lie to them, or be duplicitous. I am going to continue to espouse rational, practical, constructive progressive ideas and ideals, and will continue to tell conservatives to their face exactly how, and why, they, and their ideas, are destructive, dangerous, and ineffective.  They can choose to hear me or not, if they have that innate capacity.

          The irrefutable proof is in the pudding.  The world is a mess, and it is a mess because of what conservatives do, and have done.

          Together, together, my friends, we have begun a political revolution to transform America, and that revolution, our revolution, continues. ~ Bernie
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            70. I don't intend to do business as usual. I don't even suggest it.

            I only pose the following observation.

            What we have done in the past doesn’t work. Everything we’re doing right now doesn’t work. Nothing in the near future looks like it has a chance of working either.

            So what do you propose we do? Take our marbles and go home? Flip them off and withdraw any meaningful vote by giving it away in some delusional feel good protest vote doomed to fail as it always has?

            Politics in America are almost perfectly mirrored in the issue of global warming. How do you propose to deal with that issue? You think we don’t give enough to feed people now, wait a while and you’ll see REAL starvation if we don’t come up with a way to convince some, not all that many, conservatives to re-examine different solutions to the problems. If we don’t, the result is going to be really bad news. It’s up to us, the progressives, to re-examine what we present to those we need to sway to support us. If we continue to close doors then all light will be extinguished.

            Research has shown you stand zero chance of moving anything anywhere politically if you don’t sit at the table and offer realistic proven solutions that they can examine. The balance of power is in play at any time. What the research has shown is that if you give the opposition proof that your way works for them to achieve what they want as well, then you stand a chance of gaining that power.

            Nothing else has ever worked. How do you think they did it in Europe? What makes you so sure we’ve ever actually addressed EVERYONES needs and concerns at ANY TIME? This stalemate will only get worse the more we draw those stupid lines in the sand. Pit one closed mind against another. Especially when it is known that there is a solution suitable to both sides.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • ravensong (2016 posts)
              Profile photo of ravensong Donor

              75. For starters, I propose Bernie's agenda, and then nominating him for POTUS

              if he runs.

              Trump and Republicans are destroying the Republican party so we should seize upon their lack of popularity by continuing to support and elect as many progressives as we can, to as many offices as we can.

              Keep it simple: Medicare for all, expanding Social Security, public 4 year undergrad education, tax the rich. Economic and social justice.

              Look at where the Democrats are right now. Third Way New Democrats and their centrist policies have left them with 9+ years of minority status in Congress, 7 of those years with a lame duck center right president, minorities in the majority of state governments and governorships, and a fascist SCOTUS.

              And then these geniuses nominated, (while cheating), the center right Hillary Clinton for POTUS. And we all know how that turned out for them.  And now here we are, with a national political, social, judicial,  environmental, and economic disaster on our hands.

              Obviously, the Third Way New Democrat right center approach of mixing liberal and conservative ideology has not attracted 2 republicans for every one blue collar worker lost, like Schumer predicted it would.

              Bernie would have won. And he will win, if we can get him nominated.

              I don’t know what research you are referring to, but everyone can plainly see that Republicans certainly didn’t sit down with anyone else, and they won the WH and federal and state congressional majorities, and they are bullying fascist legislation through Congress at alarming rates, while Democrats are powerless to stop them.

              So forgive me if I don’t buy into getting in bed with conservatives, but that tack has simply never been effective for enacting serious progressive legislation. Ever.

              If we elect Bernie and a reasonably progressive congressional majority, we will pass legislation that will ensure a progressive dynasty that lasts even longer than the decades long Democratic party dynasty that followed FDR’s New Deal.

              Together, together, my friends, we have begun a political revolution to transform America, and that revolution, our revolution, continues. ~ Bernie
              • Enthusiast (11527 posts)
                Profile photo of Enthusiast Donor

                146. With you 100%.

                I really like this—Obviously, the Third Way New Democrat right center approach of mixing liberal and conservative ideology has not attracted 2 republicans for every one blue collar worker lost, like Schumer predicted it would.

                And this and everything else—Trump and Republicans are destroying the Republican party so we should seize upon their lack of popularity by continuing to support and elect as many progressives as we can, to as many offices as we can.

                Give people a reason to turn out!

                "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." Thomas Jefferson
        • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
          Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

          77. I don't want to be rich. I wouldn't like myself very much if I were. And NO ONE

          should be allowed to become too rich. What’s too rich? That’s debatable with me, but I absolutely will fight anyone who believes there should be no limits.

          So will the Universe, in the long run.

          Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            79. As you say, the limits of greed must be set,

            but how and how much?

            However, if I want the run of the mill conservative to even give socialism the smallest chance of coming to fruition, I have to let him/her still have the dream of making it big time. That’s one of their foundation ideologies, and we ignore or disdain it at our peril. And not allowing it may actually be counter productive to the progressive ideology of providing a minimum standard of living and all those other programs we champion. They cost money. It has to come from someone, and most of it should come from those getting rich.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
              Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

              81. A millionaire here, a millionaire there; well that's probably inevitable.

              Just so long as no one person or faction gets too much power. And I most definitely include myself.

              Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
              • Aerows (4548 posts)
                Profile photo of Aerows Donor

                84. I'd like to think I'm fairly neutral

                and fair in examining all pieces of evidence.

                That doesn’t mean that I will stand by and let crimes be committed without pointing it out.

                It also doesn’t mean I accept everything and always include my bias when evaluating sources.

                All said, I have things I MUST live for, but like anyone committed, things I’d die for, too.

                © by Aerows 2018 Root: If we're just information, just noise in the system, we might as well be a symphony.
              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                85. If we get anything at all like we think we want,

                I don’t see any way that we can allow money to buy elections.

                But I also think that if we actually sat down with the average conservative they don’t want that either. So I actually think that the thing we refer to as getting the money out of politics will be relatively easy to get.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • Aerows (4548 posts)
                  Profile photo of Aerows Donor

                  94. Rank and file conservatives

                  are just as pissed off as rank and file leftists, I believe.

                  We all, as Americans, see waste, we all see a posture towards war that benefits no one but the MIC, yet destroys the lives of people “over there”.  Some of them, namely the women, actually had lives before we interfered, now they are chattel.

                  I will not and can not be a party to that, and Hillary was trying to ramp it up.  Donald is awful, but I also think they see him as just a business man that won’t pull the trigger as long as we all go along to get along.

                  I do not like his policies or his politics.  But our houses haven’t been bombed yet and now we know the situation with the uranium that went through Clinton, via CGI and Bill’s $500,000 speech.  That pisses me off more than anything.

                   

                  © by Aerows 2018 Root: If we're just information, just noise in the system, we might as well be a symphony.
                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    96. So how do we get those pissed off rank and file conservatives

                    to buy into a new government that is socialist in type? That is what someone has to figure out.

                    How do we form a government that cures all the problems as best it can that you point out and still get the right to go along with adopting a complete shift to a more socialist style?

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • Aerows (4548 posts)
                      Profile photo of Aerows Donor

                      99. The answer to your question is within your question.

                      “how do we get those pissed off rank and file conservatives to buy into a new government that is socialist in type? ”

                      You won’t.

                      If I had a solution other than “keep them from dying on the streets and comfortable” I’d offer it, but there is no other solution.

                      You need these kind of people:

                      engineers

                      scientists

                      medical professionals

                      educational professionals and

                      Sanitation

                      Electrical workers that climb up polls, occasionally when there is still storming conditions so that you and me can have power.

                      Sewage and Water Board, that God Bless them, allow us to cook with running water and flush our toilets.  You don’t know how much you miss that until it is gone.

                      People that make society function.

                      We have to evolve beyond survival of the fittest, and start taking care of our own.

                      © by Aerows 2018 Root: If we're just information, just noise in the system, we might as well be a symphony.
                • Ohio Barbarian (7197 posts)
                  Profile photo of Ohio Barbarian Donor

                  107. That has been my experience as well. Most Republicans, conservative

                  independents, Libertarians, and Democrats I know are in favor of getting money out of politics, at least to some degree. That absolutely has to be done. As Keith Olbermann once said, “Citizens United is our Dred Scott.” I’m no fan of Olbermann and haven’t much cared for him for years, but give credit where credit is due.

                  It took the Civil War to overturn the Dred Scott decision. All who want to avoid seeing history rhyme should work for the overturning of Citizens United.

                  Ignorance is the foundation of tyranny.   
          • closeupready (2166 posts)
            Profile photo of closeupready Donor

            126. Hollywood is nothing but rich – and drugged up. The real question?

            If being rich and famous is so terrific, why do so many of America’s rich and famous end up dying young (or much earlier than the typical American)?  Dying from overdosing or thrill-seeking gone wrong?  Broken families, kids on drugs or otherwise behaving like undesirables (raping, sexual assault, drunk driving)?  I thought, “to grow rich is glorious”, so where’s the glory???  The mind boggles.

            There was a film many years ago – we watched it in high school as a social studies exercise.  Can’t remember the name, and the message didn’t compute to my 17 year old brain, but it was about a family or group of people from Southern California who fled from the social decay and problems … but brought those same problems WITH THEM where they resurfaced.  NOW, I can say, I get it.  Message received.

            I wouldn’t turn down an accidental windfall, but I’m not going to wallow in doggie doo for $$$.

            The opinions and views expressed herein are solely those of the author.
    • Aerows (4548 posts)
      Profile photo of Aerows Donor

      83. What we've always been.

      To be liberal, you must evaluate all angles, the tangents, but you must also come to conclusions.

      Being liberal doesn’t mean that you must disregard evidence, or that your brain turns to mush on the basis of any political party.

      It means to be true to yourself, in my opinion, and follow the truth where it leads.

      Sometimes that is an uncomfortable place.

      © by Aerows 2018 Root: If we're just information, just noise in the system, we might as well be a symphony.
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        89. What if it leads to ugly.

        Take Hitler for example. He certainly was true to himself and followed it all the way.

        There has to be somewhat clearly defined goals. And just as importantly there has to be clearly defined limits.

        What do you see as limits to socialism? How far does it go? What can it take and how much? What can it give and how much?

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • Aerows (4548 posts)
          Profile photo of Aerows Donor

          91. I'm never that sure of myself.

          Peer-reviews from many different sources are what I rely upon.  People I trust that run the gamut of opinion.

          No, I’d never live in an echo chamber of any sort.  That frightens me more than living under a corrupt government that can be cleaned up than one where you are forced to agree.

          I’d be one of the dead people first, since I disagree with absolutely everyone about something at one time or another.  Does that make you feel any better :) ?

          © by Aerows 2018 Root: If we're just information, just noise in the system, we might as well be a symphony.
          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            95. I don't feel bad. I just want to understand, that's all.

            Most people like structure. That doesn’t mean that it’s closed, and it doesn’t mean it can’t be open, but it has to actually DO something and that means it has to have a structured platform to work from.

            How would you want your government to be structured? How would you want it to provide services to its citizens? If the structure isn’t agreed upon then who does what? What can’t someone do?  How does your government get funded?

            These issues have to be reached by a consensus or it is doomed to failure before it even gets started.

            What would be your ideal government, and how would it work?

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Aerows (4548 posts)
              Profile photo of Aerows Donor

              97. We need scientists. We need engineers.

              We need traders.

              Here is a link.  I think many people should read it.  It rather coincides with your questions.  I adore thought experimentation, so here you go.

              http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

              Good writing style, a bit tedious, but gets the point across.

              © by Aerows 2018 Root: If we're just information, just noise in the system, we might as well be a symphony.
    • Fire with Fire (1124 posts)
      Profile photo of Fire with Fire Donor

      119. This is a significant thread

      I agree with the OP wholeheartedly.  If we want to take power, we need to grow our ranks.  We will not grow our ranks by either insulting or ignoring the hundreds of millions of Americans who do not already agree with us.

      So Far From Heaven has done an admirable job of fending off several members who I think are misconstruing the argument.  The idea is not to compromise with anybody, or to reach across the aisle to find common ground with right wing politicians.  The idea is to quit making dismissive and stereotypical assumptions about our family, neighbors, friends and business associates who have up to now voted for what we consider the wrong candidates and who express ideas that we consider factually or morally wrong.

      Of course we must stand absolutely firm on our principles.  But one of those principles is freedom of speech and freedom of conscience.  It is an imperfect presumption, but any form of democracy must presume that rational debate is the correction for error.  It certainly beats preemptive dismissal of every opinion but one’s own.

       

      I am lucky enough to have a job and I am lucky enough to have a job as a labor organizer, which has given me a perspective on changing minds — it is hard but not impossible.

      It is just as hard to change an ally’s mind as an opponent’s, as this thread shows.  This is important to remember at both stages of organizing — first you build your organization from people who already agree; second, you collectively reach out for converts.  Here at JPR, we are a tiny sliver of a global process of social democratic self organizing.  We have to identify each other, and we have to agree upon a common strategy for taking power.  Within the USA this entails whether to form a Third Party, and if so what will it look like?

      I look at this thread a being a key element within the first stage of self organization about how to conduct the second stage of building a movement broad enough and strong enough to take power.

       

      My personal take about our effort to put together a coherent political message with enough force to make real change is that many of us do not realize how much consumer culture has infected us all — including ourselves.  Instead of activists trying to take power, we see ourselves as consumers making a “choice” between options that are put before us.

      When I was on the other side of the Third Party debate in 2004, one of the arguments from Naderites that struck me then as idiotic went like this.  “So long as we keep voting for DINOs, they have no reason to offer us a real progressive.”  The absurdity of this argument should be clear by now — the Democratic Party ain’t Pepsi and the GOP ain’t Coke.  Looking at the wall to wall defeats by the Corporate Democratic Party from 2010 through 2016, if they gave a shit about “our” votes, they’d be beating the drum for Sanders in 2020 right now.

      My beef with that logic is not just that it misunderstands the nature of the Democratic Party, it turns us from actors to passive non-entities, hoping that somebody else will give us a “choice” that we like.

      No, nobody ever gives you anything. You have to take it.  And that means you have to recruit allies, all of whom, by definition, do not now agree with you.

       

      Another dimension of the subversive consumer mindset is the progressives who will only tell you what they are NOT going to do, and never say what they will do.  

      “I will never vote for a DINO.”  Neither will I.  What do you want for that, a medal?

      “I will never make nice with corporate whores.”  Neither will I.

      “Look how well kissing corporate ass has worked for the Dems.  I will never support that.”  Uh, you get the picture.

       

      To summarize — we need to communicate with our fellow citizens if we want to take power.  If we isolate ourselves we get exactly what we deserve, another century of war and global corporate fascism.

       

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        122. Fantastic.

        I never intend to allow myself to be ‘bought’. But I want to find a way to win.

        If you just let your emotions sway your efforts and your votes, you lose unless you happen to be comfortable with the local majority, and if that majority has enough other local majorities to win national office.

        I intend to keep playing the game. I’m not going to let defeat after defeat change the fact that I HAVE to keep playing or I’ll never get what I want.

        So, how come I always lose? Because I’m stupid enough to play the game as it is. There is a HUGE difference in changing the game versus retreating out of it. I happen to think that a third party is the stupidest, most illogical construct for winning we can come up with. The numbers and statistics do not lie. They ALL point out the futility of a third party gaining power in any relatively short period of time.

        That leaves me only one choice, to change the game. Just fucking listen to what people have to say, learn what they really want, and then convince them that socialism can let them achieve their wants, and that whatever the hell you want to call the system we have now has never been able to and will never be able to. Don’t call them names. Don’t scoff at their (mistaken) beliefs about who or what can give them what they want. Be what a true progressive should be, thoughtful, considerate, well educated and above all respectful and show them the alternatives, but we better be ready to prove what we claim. Some, not nearly all of course, will begin to wonder if what they think is true is actually false (it is) and they may be willing to chuck off their shackles and join with us.

        I really wouldn’t be at all surprised to find that we may actually get more to join us from the right than from our own ‘party’.

        We only need a sliver, about one sixth of the electorate to join us (if we quit beating the shit out of each other and remain firmly focused on winning) to begin to drastically change the face of politics in America. And you know what they say, nothing sells like success.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
      • ravensong (2016 posts)
        Profile photo of ravensong Donor

        139. Fine. Please explain the communication process for changing hearts and minds.

        If it can be done, please explain the specific steps we need to take to go about doing this.

        Specifically, what are your personal, successful methods of communication for changing the the hearts and minds of conservatives, in order to get them to understand the universal need and agenda for change, and getting them to vote for the candidates they need to vote for who will help make all our lives significantly better.

        I suspect I may operate on a different wavelength than a lot of other folks people, because I want people to be direct and honest with me if I’m fucking up, and to tell me how and why I’m fucking up, so that I may understand that I am fucking up, and subsequently change accordingly, if I can accept their criticism as  valid.

        That’s what I expect my real friends to do.

        Together, together, my friends, we have begun a political revolution to transform America, and that revolution, our revolution, continues. ~ Bernie
        • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
          Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

          140. Good question.

          I can’t wait to get advice on this myself.

          I’m an arrogant assh&%#e and mostly turn people off.

           "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
          • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
            Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

            143. Nope.

            Sorry, don’t buy that, not even a little.  Whatever else you are or may be you just proved you were effective at getting conversation and negotiation moving.  You are either being modest or self flagellating and I, an absolute master of self flagellation, see the latter.

            You aren’t getting off the hook that easy.  You started this.. now let’s bring it to a conclusion.  How do we change minds?  Influence and inspire people?  Convince them socialism (or optimism, or whatever the hell you want to call it) actually works?

            How would you convince yourself?  How would you convince a group of academic or intellectual peers?  Think about it.  What kind of Country do YOU want?

            Ravensong asked you a good question, true, but your answer was nonsense.  “Oh I haven’t the slightest, I’m arrogant and people don’t like me”.  Nope.

            This thread is your fault, you know.  You were arrogant enough to challenge the status quo, be arrogant enough to change it.

            I’m not buying any of that “I’m an arrogant weirdo” nonsense, either.

            “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
            • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
              Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

              150. well……….

              shit. That didn’t work.

              Guess I better get busy.

               "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
              • davidthegnome (1990 posts)
                Profile photo of davidthegnome Donor

                151. Love you man.

                Wouldn’t have called you out on that shit otherwise.  We need minds like yours – that think outside the box.  Those like you might just be our best chance at saving our race.  No pressure or anything…

                Get a consensus we can act upon… and we can win.  On democratic socialism, justice, peace, making the world a better place.  You are right that it will take both sides to do it.

                I’ll think on it myself.  My simplest idea though, is that people want useful, practical things that help them… prove we can provide such and…

                “There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.” - Mark Twain
      • Fire with Fire (1124 posts)
        Profile photo of Fire with Fire Donor

        149. Organizing 101

        The first thing to understand about organizing is that people change their minds.  In 2002, the Republicans made significant gains in the midterm elections:

        The 2002 United States elections were held on November 5, in the middle of Republican President George W. Bush’s first term. Unusual in midterm elections, the incumbent president’s party gained seats in both chambers of the United States Congress. The Republicans picked up net gains of 2 Senate seats and 8 House seats.[1]

        These elections were held just a little under fourteen months after the September 11, 2001 attacks. Thus the elections were heavily overshadowed by the war on terror, the impending war with Iraq, the Early 2000s recession, and the sudden death of Democratic Minnesota Senator Paul Wellstone about one week before the election.

        These elections marked only the third time since the Civil War that the president’s party gained seats in a midterm election (the first two being 1934 and 1998), and the first time that this happened under a Republican president. These elections were the second consecutive midterm elections held in a President’s first term (regardless of the President’s party) where Republicans netted a gain in both houses of Congress.

         

        As Wiki notes, this election came after September 11, as the country rallied around Shrub, with his approval rating peaking at 90%.  I remember that time well because I was in the 10%.  I would guess that the overwhelming majority of JPR members were too.  It was literally unsafe at that time to criticize Bush in public.  Comedians were booed off stages.  Bill Maher lost his network gig.  The Dixie Chicks had their problems.  I thought then, and events have confirmed that I was right, that the 90% that supported Bush were blithering idiots to imagine that invading countries would do anything but increase terrorism.

        At that point, if people never changed their minds or if their “ideologies” were fixed intellectual systems in their minds, politics in this country would have been done.  The 90% majority would make us a one-party state until the end of time.  However, four years later, things had changed dramatically and the Dems came roaring back into control of the Congress.

         

        The 2006 United States elections were held on Tuesday, November 7, 2006 in the middle of RepublicanPresident George W. Bush’s second term. All United States House of Representatives seats and one third of the United States Senate seats were contested in this election, as well as 36 state and two territorial governorships, many state legislatures, four territorial legislatures and many state and local races. The election resulted in a sweeping victory for the Democratic Party which captured control of the House of Representatives, the Senate, and won a majority of governorships and state legislatures from the Republican Party.

        The victory of the Democratic Party in the 2006 Congressional elections was a major milestone for an additional reason: it saw the election of the first woman to serve as the Speaker of the House. Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the Democrats in the House of Representatives, became the highest-ranking woman in the history of the government of the United States upon her election as Speaker in January 2007. She continues to hold this distinction, as of November 2017. It was also the first election in U.S. history in which the losses for one side were so lopsided that the victorious party did not lose a single incumbent or open seat in Congress or governor’s mansion.[1]

        Reasons for the Democratic Party takeover include the decline of the public image of George W. Bush, the dissatisfaction of his administration’s handling of both Hurricane Katrina and the War in Iraq, the beginning of the collapse of the United States housing bubble, Bush’s legislative defeat regarding Social Security Privatization, and a series of scandals in 2006 involving Republican politicians.

         

        In hindsight, you can say that Pelosi and the Democrats who won were really just DINOs and the results of the election did not mean anything.  Regardless of the accuracy of that observation, that is not how it was viewed at the time.  Here is a quote from November 8, 2006 from a conservative posting on another message board, arguing from the Conventional Wisdom of the Clinton Era that the public is “conservative” and that for the Dems to win, they have to copy Republicans:

         

        Am I crazy? Yes, yes I am. But that doesnt’ mean I’m wrong. Look at what just happened. The Dems got the majority in the House by swinging to the center, or even the right. The new folks who’ve come in tried hard to divorce themselves from the Democratic leadership. And look at the leadership itself.  Pelosi and her crew are the leaders of a small OPPOSITION PARTY. They’re vocal true believers, because it benefitted the party to be loud and obnoxious when it had nothing else. But now they have power, and I suspect Pelosi’s lifespan is limited. She’ll be put in place initially, but it won’t take her long to start making stupid comments or supporting outrageous bills. She’ll be forced to step down and be replaced by someone the Dems hope will represent a milder, more centrist party in the runup to 2008.  

        Anyway, I give her six months.

         

        That one guy was of course totally wrong coming and going.  Pelosi was not the leader of a small opposition party, she was part of a short span of total Democratic success.  She was not the wild-eyed leftist of his fevered wing nut imagination.  She was and is a hack.  I quote this idiot because he showed that at the time, “San Francisco Liberal” meant Ultra Leftist among news junkies.

        Barach Obama won big in 2008.  If you are a news junky, you probably knew that Obama would turn out to be a fraud.  But that is not what average people thought.  He was black for chrissake, a marker far more stereotypically “liberal” than being a woman from San Francisco.

         

        What all that shows is the people do change their minds, and often quite quickly.  It also shows — and this is the most important point I can make here — most people do not have any ideology.  Even though you may hear bumper sticker ideas from people that can be linked to specific ideology, most of the people spouting sound bites do not even understand what they are saying.  People live their lives, deal with their problems, enjoy their hobbies and pay as little attention as possible to the ideological “debate” between red and blue.

        =====================

         

        The second point I want to make is that you have to be patient as an organizer.  You are unlikely to persuade anybody to change her mind in one conversation.  And even the most cursory review of the political history of this century shows that public opinion changes based on events that affect their lives.  Nineteen assholes with box cutters blow up our sense of security between our oceans, and BOOM! fascism appeals to 90% of the country.  But then, instead of Shock And Awe cowing all the “terrorists,” our fascist wars drag on and on and on without any conceivable end.  The economy shudders and millions of people lose their jobs and even their homes.  A hurricane ravages an American city and the Churchillian President plays air guitar.  Conquering the world to make ourselves “secure” goes from Nuremberg Rally style national consensus to the reason to dump our President and his party out of power in four short years.

         

        Bernie Sanders has been saying the same things for more than three decades.  Until he won the New Hampshire primary, he was a pathetic joke, as far as American mainstream political analysis was concerned.  First, he is a Socialist.  Absolute deal breaker for this “conservative” country.  Second, he is old, he wears clothes awkwardly, he comes from the joke state of Vermont, and he had no fat cat contributors to buy him name recognition.  Third, his package of proposals were all Big Government giveaways, and Conventional Wisdom held that such ideas were totally unpopular.

        In fact, they had been unpopular until they became popular.  And they remain so today.  Bernie did not suddenly become a master of political persuasion.  The people came around to realize that the country is going downhill, and they are now ready to listen to different ideas.  His honest and unbought personality comes through the TV screen and now, because times have changed, he is the most popular politician int the country and his New Deal policy proposals are now favored by a growing majority.

        I think that by far our biggest failing on this board is not realizing that people’s opinions have already changed due to the experience of their lives.  It is not that Bernie Sanders suddenly learned the trick of changing people’s minds.  No, it is that Bernie is a natural organizer and he knows how to take advantage of the opportunity provided by Disaster Capitalism.

         

        I will start another thread called Organizing 101 in which I describe the techniques of union organizing, which I believe answers the question of how you go about changing minds.  For now I want to close by saying that what you see on network TV, the cable news channels and the various political platforms and blogs is totally ignored by at least 80% of the country.  Ideology means virtually nothing to that 80%.  If you try to make ideological conversions from Right to Left, you will indeed run into a brick wall virtually every time.  But if you point out that the system is crooked and say that it is crooked because politicians are bought — you will probably get a reasonable conversation going.

        A journey of a trillion light years begins with a single step.  So does a trip to kitchen.  If you don’t start, you will never get anywhere.

         

    • MrMickeysMom (1916 posts)
      Profile photo of MrMickeysMom Donor

      147. What a Effing GREAT post!

      Of course, we don’t seem to BE what we might WANT to be. I’ve been trying very hard to learn this the past few years, beginning with the movement to elect Bernie Sanders… Then, with my attempt to embrace local activism, I’m realizing that it’s the perfect format for learning that WE CANNOT insulate ourselves to what ONLY appeals to our comfortable or little group.

      Hell, I was taught that when I was finishing formally in school to be an educator… Take a current scheme and integrate a new thought. Let the chips fall where they have to in the discussion of what connects to a new idea. That shit’s a lot harder to do in a classroom of high school aged kids, but it’s even harder if they haven’t been introduced to rhetoric or debate, or local politics. I’m lucky enough lately to see that I am another you. (En Lacash?… I am a n o t h e r   Y O U)

      Hell no...I'm not giving up...     cat-gif-238.gif giphy.gif
      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        153. My thanks.

        Let’s see how you feel about my next endeavor to sway even those here on JPR.

        You could be a witness to a truly epic disaster.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • Rocker (561 posts)
      Profile photo of Rocker

      155. A dem socialist named Sanders would've won if not for primary rigging

      Also, the U.S. isn’t 1/2 dem and 1/2 repug, 40% identify as indy.  Those 40% want the corrupt elements of our society dealt with.  Until rampant corruption is dealt with by whomever from whatever party(s), the U.S. will remain corrupt.

      Asking people to just get along is absurd, we don’t.  What people can agree on is that we all hate getting ripped off, defrauded, called communist traitors and propagandized by self-serving corporate and government whores.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        156. First of all,

        the fact is that Bernie lost because he didn’t get the votes needed, even if I hold that they could ‘rig’ the nomination which I don’t. That has nothing to do with the OP.

        I never claimed that their were half of any party at all, because that is a red herring that muddles the purpose of this OP. I said that statistically there are about half left leaning voters and half right leaning without any party affiliation given.

        This however, is exactly what this OP is about:

        “Asking people to just get along is absurd, we don’t.”

        And the OP addresses why that very thing makes it a done deal that the progressive policies we want will never get passed.

        As long as we take that attitude, the opposition, which I mean as anyone not adopting what I feel are progressive policies, are gonna keep right on beating the crap out of us every poll day just like they always have. The rest of your reply is why nobody gets what they want. Think about it.

        You think the rank and file conservative is feeling good about what’s going on?

        Yet they showed up to vote and nothing has really changed. Sure some small mostly symbolic things have changed but those are primarily teabagger things.

        How about we change that for once?

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
      Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

      158. I think there is alot of good info all thru this Op.

      Both pro and con. Nice to see a respectful (well mostly anyway) conversation going on.

      The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        159. Hiya LT!!!

        glad you like it.

        Everything is going along nicely. Examples of the way to close conversations down have appeared for emphasis of the postulated wrongheadedness of that type of method to create change.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
          Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

          160. One Big Takeaway that stood out to me is…

          If you are getting your ass kicked, might be time for a new game plan.

          Like doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results.

          The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            161. Actually I am suggesting

            that we quit playing the usual game entirely.

            Time for a new game.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
    • Scuba (4759 posts)
      Profile photo of Scuba Donor

      162. JPR really needs an "unrec" button.

      I wholly disagree with the notion that there is zero probability that there will be a ‘liberal’ or ‘progressive’ government in the United States.

      Sounds like Turd Way bullshit.

      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

        163. Sorry you feel that way.

        Unfortunately, the reality seems to trump your feelings on this matter. There quite literally is virtually no chance that a progressive government will be elected across the board. Way too many very solid red districts.

         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • FugitiveBirdie (1890 posts)
          Profile photo of FugitiveBirdie

          164. With total respect, I present the election map of 1932

          Thanks for this amazing thread!

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            166. And, also with respect, I show you reality 2016

            with the caveat that there isn’t 25 percent unemployment like  there was in 1932……..

            Everything anyone on JPR has suggested as a way forward has historically failed. And it will again over and over and over.

            Maybe we should change the game.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • FugitiveBirdie (1890 posts)
              Profile photo of FugitiveBirdie

              183. Well I agree we should change the game.

              But I don’t agree we don’t have 25% unemployment.  Of course the employment figures don’t include people who have stopped looking or those who are underemployed and/or underpaid.  If they did it would probably be over 30%.

              And you are being harsh to say that anything that anyone here has proposed has never worked.  See my reply number 5 in this thread and you will see that I am the first to agree that we should go to traditional Republican voters with an agenda of change and compromise.

              I believe that we should heed the words of FDR who said “The only thing we need to fear is fear itself!”

              And a year ago I said we need to be ready when disappointed Trump voters are ready to try leftist populism.

              Further I have been here saying that McCarthyism and Deep State antics lately have been all about keeping the alt-right and leftist left from joining forces.

              Lastly that map is Hillary’s map. I bet she was to the right of Hoover.  Not to mention that the county by county map always looks more red than the state by state map.

              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                184. Sorry it was a generalized statement and you're absolutely correct to

                make me eat some crow.

                I really wonder just how disappointed the Trump voters actually are. I mean, if asked if they would vote for a socialist next time instead of Trump, what do you think the average right idiot would say?

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • FugitiveBirdie (1890 posts)
                  Profile photo of FugitiveBirdie

                  187. There are a lot of people who voted for Trump who are disappointed.

                  And a lot of people here who are happy that Hillary lost are disappointed that Trump isn’t doing any of the populist things he promised.

                  Across the heartland and rust belt there are people still waiting to see some action on China and Mexico trade.

                  But the media is framing this as a left vs right struggle or perhaps a far right vs center-left struggle.  In fact they try to ignore the leftist left on purpose.

                  What it is and has always been is a class war.

                  And until we frame it that way ourselves we are not going to make progress.

                  I agree that socialism is a loaded word. And we should be careful to admit to it only as Democratic Socialist with an explanation.

                  I still prefer the word Progressive, but a Real Progressive, who wants change for the middle class and poor and the environment.  Something worthy of the term Revolutionary.

                  By the way I am thankful to you for taking being called out so well.  Let me compliment you and David and Aldroud and Scuba and others for an excellent conversation.

                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    188. The question still stands.

                    Are you going to continue the same old game that we always lose, or would you like to examine a new perspective on how to win the war?

                    There has always been discontent on both sides of the coin. Yet everything always slides more conservative over time. Are progressives actually thinking that is going to change somehow if they keep doing the same thing they’ve always been doing? And yet they feel ‘left out’ or ‘ignored’ or ‘cheated out of’ everything.

                    Of course they are. The game has gotten everything so polarized that things just keep going nowhere over and over. Except at the local levels, where major inroads have been made by followers of the right. That has taken them something like twenty to thirty years to get where they are even though not one single one of them has ever actually gotten what they thought they would.

                    How about we break this cycle instead? We keep doing what we usually do to expand the base as much as we can, and we ALSO attempt to use the rights wants and desires to sell them OUR policy.

                    I don’t see how that can possibly be anything except better for progressives. We even have to get the damn thirdway idiots to support us or we have quite literally zero chance of getting much of anything accomplished.

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • FugitiveBirdie (1890 posts)
                      Profile photo of FugitiveBirdie

                      189. Yes and the question is the challenge of our time.

                      Very crafty people with a lot of resources have been contemplating for centuries how to corner Progressives looking for change towards economic justice.

                      Assassinations have even been the result when they wanted to reign things back in.

                      I think the biggest challenge is overcoming our own Party that has been hijacked and weaponized against us.

                      I have a lot of chances to talk to older Conservatives and I find it refreshing to hear their perspectives and to understand them.  Then I tell them my perspective and even mix in anecdotes from my world travels.

                      At worst we agree to disagree, but usually we find common ground.  Honestly many of them realize they have been following much more radical policy than free healthcare and free education.  If you paint a picture of a small town that is self sufficient, they usually agree that the townsfolk would get together and make sure the doctor and schoolteacher have an income.  There is a lot of propaganda that the left is all about pandering to special interests, and suddenly they realize they have been pandering to profit driven insurance companies and elitist schools.  When I tell them I abhor divisive identity politics as well then they get it: both sides are being played.

                      I welcome more discussion about how to change the game as you put it.  Perhaps we can create a framework of how to take back our country.

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        191. And that

                        is what these posts will be all about.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
        • Scuba (4759 posts)
          Profile photo of Scuba Donor

          165. We haven't tried running progressives or 80 years, so how would anyone know?

          Remember, 40% of the potential voters don’t bother to show up, because neither party has given them a reason in ages.

          • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
            Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

            167. That in't true at all.

            Progressives have always been in the mix somewhere. The policies of what we are calling the progressive movement were a mainstay of the Peoples Party and then there was the socialists and the communists and on and on.

            The problem with this statement is the underlying assumption that all we have to do is put out our message and the people will flock to our cause and by golly we’ll win.

            I say that type of story only comes true in Disneyland.

            When you have approximate equal numbers between those who lean right as well as left, any split of either side will cause catastrophic defeat. You know, like losing the house, the senate and the presidency. Not to mention 31 governorships and as many if not more state houses. You know, like today.

            NEVER count on those that don’t historically show up at the polls. You win those that DO vote and get on with it.

             "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
            • Scuba (4759 posts)
              Profile photo of Scuba Donor

              168. Sure, we've run a progressive here and there, like Russ Feingold. But …

              … we’ve not put together a wide slate of progressive candidates running on a legitimate progressive platform anytime during my life, but them I’m only 70.

              • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                169. And how are you going to convince anyone to vote for them?

                You think doing the old tell what you’re gonna do strategy is going to get enough votes to actually win? The only people that are going to even give you the time of day are those from the left. So you’re going to blow off half the electorate and piss them off because it’s the same old shit, my idea is better than yours blah blah blah. If what you want is to run a 50 state strategy and actually win something, you better get real busy winning hearts and minds from all sides.

                That is what this OP is all about. Think of it as converting the natives to your religion because they WANT your religion, not because you cram it down their throats.

                 "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                • Scuba (4759 posts)
                  Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                  172. My point is that a broad slate of candidates pushing a progressive agenda …

                  … does offer the electorate what they want.  Public opinion surveys support that premise.

                  Please note that ~40% of the electorate doesn’t bother to show up because neither party offers them squat.  I frankly don’t care if we piss off the traditional Republican voters.  Who needs them?  We need to motivate the rank-and-file Democrats and convince a small slice of that 40% to turn out for our slate/platform and we can tip the scales.  Most elections are won/lost by very narrow margins.

                  • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                    Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                    173. I only see one real big problem here.

                    “Public opinion surveys support that premise.”

                    Unfortunately, those polls have zero votes.

                    Forty percent don’t vote because they aren’t given the candidate they want is a two edged sword. If you work under the premise that a) they’ll actually go vote, then you stand a small chance of getting a fraction of them because no tow individuals want the exact same thing, and b) under the absolute best of conditions which has a zero percent chance of happening, you may actually have them help elect some of the candidates.

                    In the electoral map I posted above, each and every county is show by the fraction that one party controlled the vote. Take a real good look at it. There aren’t enough people in the vast majority of red to be able to change their county to blue. All the population is concentrated where it’s already blue. This national poll stuff is only useful if you include the county by county or district by district polls as well, which is never actually taken because the polls only get the opinions of a very small slice of the population as a whole and then ‘messaged’ to reflect the overall total population.

                    Which means that your poll is a lie on a district or county level. Look at it this way, assume that 40 percent of the population failed to vote in Brownwood, Texas. No matter which scenario you want to look at there is no way in hell it’ll turn blue. That’s because (assuming the fifty-fifty split is true) the 20 percent left that didn’t vote don’t have enough votes to carry the county. The assumption that it’s a 50-50 split is ridiculous because the county is flaming red. So, that counties’ representation in the state legislature is gonna be flaming red regardless of this ‘missing 40 percent’. That is going to happen in almost every county in the state so guess what you just gained? Nothing.

                    But what happens when I convince them that their way doesn’t give them nearly as much of what they want as my way does?

                    Then all bets are off because I have effectively neutralized some of their dominance. But first I have to respect their wants and desires and understand exactly how those play into their worldview or I have a snowballs chance in hell of converting them to our side.

                     "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                    • Scuba (4759 posts)
                      Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                      174. There's no link for your map, so I can't see the data behind it. I do know …

                      … that Barack Obama ran on a progressive platform in 2008 and he turned that map to mostly blue.

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        175. Sorry, it's in reply #166 just upthread.

                        I’m not interested in the pres.

                        You get nothing without control of the house and senate.

                        You get nothing without a majority of govs who will not charge the state legislatures to obstruct anything liberal taking effect in their state.

                        Then I have to have the state legislatures.

                        Everything except the president means that map.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        176. But there's no link with your map, so one cannot see the data behind it.

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        177. It's the percentage of right or left where 50 50 would be white

                        and red is right higher that 50 and blue is left higher that 50 percent where the shade is the percentage above 50 percent. All data is votes cast in the 1016 presidential election by county.

                        I think it’s taken from wikipedia, but I need to make sure of its source.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        179. Well, I found it and it's here:

                        http://brilliantmaps.com/2016-county-election-map/

                        as well as why I claim that the national poll is meaningless as far as getting a progressive government goes. I admit that it is more than reasonable to assume Bernie would win that, but be virtually powerless after he got it. That map shows the dominance of conservative takeover in approximately 70 percent or so of all counties in the US.

                        Counties mean governorships, state legislatures and congressmen, and depending, senators. Oh, and the all important Electoral College.

                        We gotta focus on getting that map a whole lot bluer.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        181. Unfortunately, clicking on the map returns an error.

                        Nonetheless, I don’t believe the data behind the map will support your assertion that “there aren’t enough people in the vast majority of red to be able to change their county to blue.”

                         

                         

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        182. I gave the link to the original article of the map in a reply to you.

                        All you need consider is where the map is red.

                        Of all those red counties, how many do you think will turn blue by any means other than convincing at least some of those on the right to give progressive policies a try?

                        How many of the light pink are going to let progressive candidates win?

                        This notion that progressives can win and bring substantive political change without at least some support by the right is doomed. We can’t even count on the missing left leaning voters much less the missing right.

                         

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        185. Let's say a county went red by 20 points in a county with 200 potential voters.

                        That means that 36% of the potential voters (60% of the 60% that voted) voted R while 24% (40% of the 60%) voted D.

                        Meanwhile, 40% of the electorate didn’t vote at all.  So in this landslide county the R candidate got 72 votes while the D candidate got 48 votes with 80 potential voters not showing up.

                        Getting 25 of those 80 might be a challenge, but it’s not impossible as you claimed.

                         

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        186. I didn't say impossible in that context.

                        Of the 80, there is on average going to be about the same percentage as those that voted, so the real numbers would be 40 percent of 80 voters, or 32 votes IF YOU GOT ALL OF THEM TO VOTE.

                        Getting something like 75 percent of those remaining ‘potential’ voters to actually show up and vote is something that is fast approaching ‘impossible’. No way for more than a real small fraction of the counties.

                        Better to play another game. With far bigger potential reward.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        190. You wrote "There aren’t enough people in the …

                        …  vast majority of red to be able to change their county to blue. ”

                        So yeah, you said it was impossible in that context.  I showed you that it’s not impossible, and now you’re trying something else, which is also wrong.

                        Now you wrote “Of the 80, there is on average going to be about the same percentage as those that voted.”  That assumption is where you went astray.  It’s not consistent with my premise that a progressive slate with a progressive agenda will appeal to some of those who don’t typically vote.

                        The whole idea is to offer better policies so we get a larger percentage of the vote.  Duh.

                        Finally, the reason I tried to access the data behind the map was to see the splits at the state and county level.  The R’s would have to win a county by more than 60 points before your assertion that “there aren’t enough people in the vast majority of red to turn their county to blue.”  I suspect that the vast majority of counties were won with something less than a 60 point margin.

                        So I’m still at my original premise:  fuck those red voters, we don’t need them.  We need policies that motivate both those who typically vote Democratic and some of those who don’t vote at all and we can tip the scales.

                        There are votes to be had, but trying to win over the mythical moderate Republican while ignoring the huge pool of potential voters who don’t bother is pretty damned shortsighted.

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        192. Sorry to disappoint.

                        Given the likelihoods, it’s never gonna happen.

                        Ever. Not as things stand and the the way the game is played.

                        Extrapolate the numbers and the end is just a variation of today, with no change in sight. I’m not going to thry to ‘win over’ anyone.

                        I’m gonna give them what they want and they’ll do what I need for them to do.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        193. What is it that they want that you'll give them?

                        By the way, your never, ever gonna happen did happen.  This map shows just how little the red on your map really means.

                         

                         

                        You may not recall, but in 2008 Democrats won the White House and both chambers of Congress.  This was done on Obama’s coattails.  Obama ran as a progressive.

                        You know I had the feeling the map you posted way above looked familiar.  Now I remember why …

                        http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/04/heres-the-electoral-map-president-trump-gave-reporters.html

                        If there was any doubt that Trump’s first 100 days didn’t give him the signature win he covets, it’s gone now. In search of something to brag about, he had to go all the way back to November. What makes it worse is that the maps are hardly worth bragging about; they may be more red than blue, but that’s a better indication of the square footage Trump won, not the voters.

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        194. The presidency means nothing.

                        I think they proved that with Obama.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        195. You must have missed the part about the House and Senate.

                        But keep trotting out Trump’s favorite election map, it shows your true character!

                      • so far from heaven (15808 posts)
                        Profile photo of So Far From Heaven Donor

                        196. And since you seem to think you know what you're talking about

                        perhaps you’ll tell me just what I have for character.

                        Then again, you can’t count past five so I’m not too worried about how you think you know jack shit about me.

                        You want to win, quit playing like you are.

                        You’ve already lost everything this way so YOU have nothing to lose to actually listen to someone who may actually know what they’re talking about. If you can get past whatever it is that’s holding you back from seeing reality.

                         "When you're in jail, a good friend will be trying to bail you out. A best friend will be in the cell next to you saying, 'Damn, that was fun.'" -Groucho Marx.
                      • Scuba (4759 posts)
                        Profile photo of Scuba Donor

                        197. I'll humbly bow to your transcendent expertise.

                        Yeah, that’s the ticket.

      • TRex (3760 posts)
        Profile photo of TRex Donor

        178. No way, unrec is part of the Heathers main weapon.

        Way too much passive-aggressive play with the unrec button. Maybe we don’t need rec or unrec. Just read and respond.

        I agree we will have a progressive government one day, we ended up with a loser like Trump so anything can happen.

        Proven point.

         

        Oh sweety, no just no, when I or those of us here talk about the ultra rich - it is NOT you! Not you by a longshot, oh my God did you think...no way you actually thought we meant you? Lord, this country is full of rich stupid people and you seem to be one of the worst. No sweety, you are just a low paid pawn to those ultra rich we talk about. They are wrecking the world, you are an enabler and I understand not being able to sleep at night. I wouldn't either, selling out our future. You have kids right?  
    • TRex (3760 posts)
      Profile photo of TRex Donor

      180. What have we become?

      Both main parties leaders refuse to listen to others opinions, I guess you could say that might never change. I think it will as future generations take hold of power, they will refuse to live the dogma of the past.

      Oh sweety, no just no, when I or those of us here talk about the ultra rich - it is NOT you! Not you by a longshot, oh my God did you think...no way you actually thought we meant you? Lord, this country is full of rich stupid people and you seem to be one of the worst. No sweety, you are just a low paid pawn to those ultra rich we talk about. They are wrecking the world, you are an enabler and I understand not being able to sleep at night. I wouldn't either, selling out our future. You have kids right?  
    • Lord Thomas (2422 posts)
      Profile photo of Lord Thomas Donor

      198. I am amazed at all the different views on this Op.

      The Only Consistent Thing in Life is Change.