Woozle Hypertwin
 Durham, NC,  last edited: Thu, 11 Oct 2018 07:55:58 -0400  
(via Sheila Nagig)
Image/photo
Image/photo

Asking the oppressed to be civil is basically saying you're on the side of the oppressor.

(Side note: Hubzilla used to have a cool link-auto-preview feature, but I can't seem to figure out how to make that happen anymore. Maybe it only works if the page has the right meta-tags?)

Woozle Hypertwin
 Durham, NC,  
(Via @Valkyrie)
Betsy McCallBetsy McCall wrote the following post Tue, 09 Oct 2018 15:19:29 -0400

And though we don’t really discuss it, the Democratic Party is a girl.

...by which the author means "not allowed to express rage, no matter how rationally justified, for fear of being ridiculed for weakness."

I wish this were true. The real situation is more complex, because there are a lot of different factions within any party -- especially one that isn't oriented towards uniformity and power-concentration like the Republicans.

The Democratic leadership is more like the younger brother whose older brother is abusive and domineering (and can get away with expressions of outrage because he has a lot of bully-friends who will beat up anyone who makes fun of him), and they see this as ultimately the only way to be cool -- but most of the time, they're too afraid to do it, so instead they find other smaller kids to marginalize in order to show how tough they are.

Democratic whistleblowers like Ford and Snowden (and countless others) are at best left to fend for themselves by the Dem leadership and at worst are actively opposed because they want to destroy concentrations of unaccountable power, while the Dem leadership just wants to take that unaccountable power for itself. Little brother wants to become big brother, not fight him. Little brother thinks whistleblowers and dissenters are girls and sissies and should just shut up and learn their place.

...and the rest of us tend to fall into two camps: either Dem party loyalists who can't see beyond the (true) fact that the Dems are orders of magnitude better than the Republicans, and will fight anyone in the other camp -- which sees that the Dems should be fighting for systemic reform rather than just fighting to be on top within that system, and who will refuse to fall in line behind any candidate who will just perpetuate that system, no matter how much more "politically feasible" they may be than a candidate who will at least try to reform it, because what's the point of supporting "meet the new boss, slightly better than but basically the same as the old boss"?

If the Dems are better than the Republicans, it's only because we refuse to accept that we're just competing with the Republicans for the same goal. The more the Dem leadership refuses to acknowledge this, refuses to support anger and rage against systemic injustice, the more they do become exactly like the Republicans and the less we can be bothered to support them.