Odin's Lab & Workdesk - Archives
In recent elections the most important thing has been differences in turnout on either side. Most voters that stay home are ones that labels themselves "Independent", and these Independents are for the most part not the "moderate" of Centrist DLC mythology and propaganda, but are Progressives disillusioned with the Democratic party establishment, on one hand, and Libertarians and nutty populistic bigots disillusioned with the GOP establishment on the other.
This creates an ILLUSION that there is a big group of "Independent Moderate Voters" that flip-flop from party to party, but in fact it's really differences in turnout between Left-Wing and Right-Wing Independents. This is why we were whipped so badly in 2010, left-wing independents were disillusioned with the corporatists in control of the Democratic Party and stayed hone, while the right-wing independents were whipped up into an hysterical froth.
This is why those blasting the "professional Left" or whatever the latest term of abuse are the real ones hurting us at the polls, they are the REAL REASON WE LOST IN 2010. The more hate the Establishment spew at Progressives the more Progressive Independents will stay home.
I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.
IMO philosopher Karl Popper said it best:
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.
The period between 2000BC and 1000BC in the Near East is not really given the respect it deserves, mainly because there was a lot of geopolitical messiness, barbarian invasions, and migrations going on, so the historical record is not as easy to peace together as we would like. Arabia was in it's terminal decline in rainfall to it's modern state, which displaced a lot of Semitic-speaking nomads into the Levant and Mesopotamia. This was the time when the Hittites were a major power and sacked Babylon. The first well known military engagement, the Battle of Megiddo, a draw between between the Egyptians and the Hittites, took place in the middle of this period. Proto-Sanskrit-speaking invaders from Central Asia carved out a chuck of territory in modern Syria that became known as the Kingdom of the Mitanni. Northern Egypt was conquered by Semite barbarians called the Hyksos for a time, which was followed by the New Kingdom.
Just to the west the Minoan civilization reached it's height, apparently coming under the control of a single mercantile empire centered at Knossos, declined, was devastated by a mega-eruption on Santorini, and then was conquered by early Greeks, giving us the legend of Atlantis. We do know what the Minoans called their island because of Egyptian records, which idnicate that they called their island "Kaptor". We kid a clue one these early "Mycenaean" Greaks from Hittite diplomatic records, which called them "Akkewaya", that is, Achaeans, which is one of the terms used for Greeks in the Homeric epics.
Iron smelting was a Hittite state secret during this period and was their secret weapon that made them so successful, but when they went into decline as a result of continuous royal succession struggles the secret got out to the Assyrians and the tribes of SE Europe and all hell broke loose, barbarian invasions triggered a devastating wave of migrations in the Eastern Mediterranean as people in the Aegean Sea region fled barbarian invasions and became what the Egyptians called the "Sea Peoples". Greeks and Minoans settled in Palestine and become the Philistines, some Minoans settled in Italy and became the Etruscans. European barbarians poured into Anatolia and gave rise to the Phrygians (of King Midas fame), who were the ancestors of the Armenians. The Mycenaean Greeks were overwhelmed by a wave of less civilized Greeks to the north that spoke "Doric" dialects.
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. — In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal."
there are 3 political cultures in the US.
Northern Tier: The Moralistic Culture
Moral Political Culture. In this culture type society is held to be more important than the individual. Individualism is not submerged in any way, but the group recognizes the need of individuals to assign value to the group. Government tends to be seen as a positive force. This emphasizes the commonwealth conception as the basis for democratic government. Politics is considered one of the great activities of man in the search for the "good society." Good government is measured by the degree to which it promotes the public good. Issues have an important place in the moralistic style of politics. Politicians are expected not to profit from political activity. Serving the community is the core of the political relationship even at the expense of individual loyalties and political friendships. In practice this often results in more amateur participation in politics than in the other political cultures. Upper New England, the Upper Middle West and portions of the west are the central areas for this culture type.
The South: The Traditional Culture
Traditional Political Culture. Social and family ties are prominent where this type of political culture is found. This often means that some families run the government and others have little to say about it. This reflects an older attitude that embraces a hierarchical society as part of the natural order of things. Government is seen as an actor with a positive role in the community, but the role is largely limited to securing the maintenance of the existing social order. Political leaders play a largely conservative and custodial role rather than being innovative. Otherwise, limited government is viewed as best because that is all that is required to meet the needs of those in power. The South is the regional focus for this type of culture. While undergoing change, traditional southern politics have been dominated by "backdoor" arrangements and strict class divisions.
Everywhere in between: The Individualist Culture
Individual Political Culture. In areas with this type of political culture, government is seen as having a very practical orientation. Government is instituted for largely utilitarian reasons. It need not have any direct concern with questions of the "good society." Emphasis on on limiting community/government intervention into private activities. Government should be largely restricted to those areas which encourage private initiative. Private concerns are more important than public concerns here. To a significant degree there is cynicism about government. Dirty politics tends be accepted as a fact. The key to understanding this type is that people accept dirty politics as the way things are and should be. The Middle-Atlantic States through Illinois, and to the West, is the area most prevalent for this type of culture.
It seems that for the past 40 years we have had Politics-By-Who-Screams-Loudest, the expectation being you keep screaming until The Government does what you want it to. We have forgotten what the Leftist activists of the Depression knew, real change must come from below, from the mass of The People MAKING CHANGE HAPPEN. The national government is corrupt with corporate money, we cannot expect it to be a catalyst for progress. WE OURSELVES need to force progress, not expect our rotted-out government to do it for us.
The NPR reporter pointed out to the woman that Obama cut taxes for 95% of us and she responds with "I don't believe that".
This shit really annoys me. For how much the wing-nuts like to attack us for "Relativism" they sure have a problem with differentiating between opinion and objective truth. How sad we have become as a society in that OBJECTIVE FACTS can be dismissed as "just your opinion". Postmodernist brain rot and Right-Wing Nut brain rot is not a pretty combination. It seems to be the lack of respect for the objective nature of facts is destroying our society.
Look for the posts by the poster "Fruitcake"
So, I start a thread on that message board about the Texas school curriculum BS and this poster totally hijacks the thread and starts spewing the most disgusting racist garbage I have ever seen, and keeps getting worse as the thread goes on, including believing that race and culture are one in the same and similar White Nationalist garbage and claiming that "Liberals" let immigrants get away with rape.
Just thought I'd point that out.
These corporatist tools in Washington don't give one DAMN about us. The only way we are going to change this country is to change our local communities and the people in those communities one by one. it is at the local level where corporate influence is most evil and insidious, getting communities to compete with each other in how fast they will race to the bottom so a big multinational will come and create a few jobs for a few years and then stab the community in the back, off shoring to Mexico or China, ot to bring in some Big Retail Chain that destroys local stores. Or land developers bribe local officials to allow them to build environmentally destructive, economically unsustainable, and sociologically damaging suburban sprawl.
We must work to create economically, ecologically, and sociologically sustainable LIVING communities, as opposed to our current soulless wasteland of sprawl. Only then cam we change the greater society.
The fact that people are not in the streets because of the SCOTUS decision shows how much the MSM...
...has manufactured "reality" for most people. The MSM is there to keep us dumb and ignorant, not to inform us. If we had a real news media this would be given hours of news coverage. Instead Fascism has come to America with barely a peep, excepting KO.
This is what so angers me about the "IT'S ONLY BEEN A YEAR" and "WE CAN FIX IT LATER" squakers. Prople need help NOW, people need income NOW, they need a job NOW, they need treatment for cancer NOW. How many more people can we afford to be thrown out onto the street? How many more people have to DIE form lack of health coverage? How many are allowed to be "sacrificed" while we "fix it later"?
Economically minded people with their numbers seem to forget that their abstractions pertain to flesh and blood people, an economy is composed of HUMAN BEINGS that need food, shelter, healthcare, education, and personal safety. They are not comparable to cogs in a machine.
Volcker's actions as Fed Chairman were completely uncesseary, the inflation would have stabilized on it's own. His real purpose was to use fear of inflation to legitimize corporatist monetary policy.
There is a cyclical pattern to historical change. Most institutional change occurs in periods the book calls "Crisis Eras", whjich occur once every 80 years. The last Crisis Era was the Great Depression and WW2. Before that was the Civil War. And before that was the American Revolution. In between each Crisis Era there is an "Awakening Era" of rapid cultural change. The period from 1964 to 1984 was the last Awakening Era.
Member since Fri Nov 11th 2005
Moorhead, Minnesota, United States
Student at Minnesota State University Moorhead, major is Biology. Born 4/28/86. Grew up in Ulen, MN, population 532.
The ten most recommended threads posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums in the last 24 hours.
Use the tools below to keep track of updates to this Journal.
Today's Featured Forums