Reply #75: Fair point [View All]

Thank you for clarifying.

My point of disagreement concerns approach. Instead of offering camradery to those individuals who DO work to advance common values, we destroy the good along with the bad.

Perhaps you see within the DLC common values. I am all for camaraderie offered to comrades, but I am a miser where opponents are concerned. And it is not I, or those like me, who have thrown down the gauntlet in this case, anyway: we never asked the DLC to drag our party into neo-liberalism.

With respect to "peoples",...I disagree with your philosophy that "a people" is only that body of human beings which falls into a specific "category" without choice. In my humble opinion, whether by fate or birth or choice or circumstance, "a people" can be defined by loyalty or adherence to any common association/structure.

That is a good and subtle point. I'm not unmoved by it.

Perhaps I misunderstood you initially when you wrote:

I am a member of the human race,...not a political/religious/gender/capital/etc denomination. I am sick of anyone categorizing "a people" as an "enemy" due to some affiliation. I AM SICK OF IT!!!!

As I understand your cri de coeur now it was meant to calibrate the difference between camaraderie and enmity--perhaps to make me see that the latter sometimes comes at the cost of the former. I am all for camaraderie with those doing at least some good; and you would appear to excel at that, given your gracious manner in this exchange, whereas my political nose is all for scrapping. Noses none of us choose, at least not without botox. ;-)