I believe that a “meanness of spirit” has invaded DU

I read DU far more often than I post. And lately, I’ve noticed a lack of politeness, a level of ignorance, and perhaps even a degree of malevolence, of which I wasn’t aware of in the past.

It may have always been thus, but I either missed it, or was intentionally blind to it. And yes, I know that there has always been a minority of people here who are incurably argumentative, intentionally obtuse, or just incapable of practicing civility. Such is the nature of our species.

Either way, posting on DU these days can often be an unpleasant experience. Far too many who disagree with a posting, fill their response(s) with thorns, venom, and insults, as opposed to intelligent disagreements with the original, (or subsequent), postings.

When I disagree with someone, I (usually) try to respond to them with a rational, civil, sensible argument, without insulting them personally, or spitting on what they’ve posted. But all too often, I don’t receive the same courtesy in return.

I have received responses to some of my posts that may be from someone who is 19, 45, or 80, but who sounds like a barely literate kid having a tantrum, and waiting for a response they can pounce on. And, as every DUer knows, such people must get in the last word to “win.” This isn’t new to DU, but it’s something that should always be ignored.

My point is that there’s a difference between disagreeing with someone, and what can only be described as a meanness of spirit. And it’s a virus that I believe has infected DU in recent times. It’s a trait that seems to be the same form of intolerance practiced by conservatives.

I’ll end this rant by saying this. I’ve been here since 2004, but recently, I have seen a moral certitude that didn’t seem to have been here before. And “moral certitude” is the enemy of logic and rationality. It’s also a danger to reason, thoughtfulness and sanity.

It's not a little tea party where everybody is always polite and has to abide by the "rules" of "debate," which are only for contests, by the way, not everyday discussion.

It seems to me the ones who were peddling "civility" were those like George Will who thought it only applied to Democrats. Republicans were permitted to engage in gutter tactics.

"debate" someone face-to-face, do you call them idiots, question their sincerity, and act generally hostile toward them? Or, do you just exhibit this juvenile behavior while hiding behind the anonymity and indifference of the Internet?

I quit posting because I got so many STFU reponses. That was it. No explanation. No discussion. No substantiation of why I should just STFU. Just STFU.

DU has slid a long way in the last 18 months.

stupid comments about my font choice and anything but response to my OP

I used to read 4-5+ hrs a day and now I just glance through and leave. It's sad.

Along with STFU there are always the accusations that one is a troll too. That stuff is so lame and sad. I've been here for years and there definitely has been a change in the tone on this board.

If you would have just said "Dennis Kucinich" you would have recieved over 100 recs guaranteed lol.Thats a response on here you cant go wrong with lol.

i try not to call people idiots (though george dubya bush was an exception to this rule)
i sometimes act hostile depending upon THEIR attitude during the discussion

BUT.... yes.... i OFTEN question the sincerity of the people with whom i am debating....
and OFTEN it has been shown true that they are not sincere in their words or actions

in my opinion one of the GREAT things about democrats, liberals, progressives, and similar, is that THEY DO ARGUE WELL

------------i cannot tell you how glad i am to be aparty to open and loud discussion

great way to pass the time, but in truth most Democrats and Liberals that I associate with display copious amounts of reason, empathy, and wit. The "in your face" style of debate is left for those with much to say, but little to contribute...;-)

whenever Obama is criticized.

Which is a RW trait. And there are actual trolls. So when they default to that meanness, you have to wonder.

I recall one who slipped by bashing the health plan about choosing your doctor. That one does not come from the left, but the right. Like the freeper did not realize that.

You can bet there are such people, and they probably are the meaner ones.

Then again, some of the far left posters are sincere and eventually can get me madder than I get at freepers.

I've made some remarks that had the situation been the same with Kucinich (whom I dearly love and wish he were president), I would have criticized Kucinich. I would have criticized Bobby Kennedy. Dems are ALLOWED! We are not locksteppers. That doesn't make me a troll.

NEVERTHELESS, I will always support our Dems, knowing that there are many things to which I'm not privy, and knowing the consequences of not doing so. Were I to be privy, I would more understand the hard choices.

What a lot of folks don't realize, is that when you take the helm, you are going to have to do some things that aren't what you want to live with. Comes with the territory.

What completely SUCKS is someone telling someone else to JUST STFU!! and not explaining why a so rude, unmannerly and ineloquent response is justified. Bring it on, I say to the STFU-ers, BUT tell me why.



:toast:

Without your reminders, some of us forget the important part.

K&R

sort of what the OP was talking about

You don't like hearing that phrase?

Then check into your OWN meanness.

unrec?

The phrase "the likes of you" has a very negative connotation, surely you will admit. All the poster you jumped on did was disagree with the OP (with a short explanation) and unrec the thread to signify that disagreement.

If you think the unrec option is mean or censuring then you could ask the admins to get rid of it, I guess.

And sorry if I was MEAN to you. lol. It is my opinion that your snippy & negative response to the poster was the kind of thing referenced in the OP.

Now THAT sounds sincere.

Good grief yourself.

Your effort at understanding falls a bit short, don't you think?

AND, I think your denegration and unwillingness to see anothers view IS what the OP is about.

So, continue your censoring and ridiculing. It adds so much.

You just don't get it. Can't help that.

Maybe read our exchange again, starting with the entire OP and not excluding your initial response?? Might jar something.

+1

K&R

+1

K&R

I totally agree. There is no need for arrogance on this forum.

:sarcasm:

But it wasn't.

beanbag, nor is it a fight to the death either. DU has become the most dysfunctional group I have ever been involved with, and the attitude that mean-spiritedness goes hand-in-hand with "criticism" is antisocial behavior personified.

The OP is spot on.

...that wasn't A) a rightwing talking point, or B) unnecessarily combative.

Welcome to yet another ignore list.

Neither is posting comments on a bulletin board.

I can understand being passionate about our political positions; but let's not confuse what we are doing here with politics.

I imagine politics is merely one justification for our incivility and boorish behavior. I imagine if we really thought about, we could come up with many different ways to defend our base classless behavior. Heck, why even defend it as it seems to be something so many are proud of engaging in.

The absolutely perfect response to illustrate the thesis of the OP.
DU ain't beanbag either.
It IS a discussion board and general rules of civility and intelligent discussion should apply.
Of course, you are free to either acknowledge that, or ignore it.
The choice is yours.
What will YOU choose to bring to DU?

WTG.

the trolls and freepers have taken over left wing sites and call in radio shows and stupid Dems fall for their garbage..

as a matter of fact.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7488112&mesg_id=7488112

Try less emotion and more reality.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7488112&mesg_id=7488795

not DU in general.

further proof.

Calling out those who disagree with you as "mean in spirit" is just proof your argument isn't supported by facts.

and civil disagreement, and then there is what you seem to perceive as your right to be overbearing, self-righteous, and condescending.

coming from people like the OP, who feel it's their right to spam the board with junk that's factually incorrect and then have pity-party threads like this one.

who are blessed with omniscient insight into all things political are allowed to spam DU with "factual" opinions laced with vitriol and negativity? Thanks anyway, but I can get all of that kind of biased and hateful "fact" I need at FR, along with the telltale personal attack method of delivery.

Thanks also for the clarification of what is "junk," and what will pass as "approved" opinion by the self-appointed DU Content Police.

For my money, what the OP has stated in this thread (and repeated many times in other threads by other OP writers) is a lot closer to reality than those who attempt to excuse their own hostile and uncivil attack-the-messenger opinions as nothing more than righteous indignation and "indisputable fact."

Those who believe that a call for understanding, compassion, civility, and reasoned debate comprises a "pity-party thread like this one," are missing the point by a very wide margin.

:dem:

yet ANOTHER "the aid workers are screwing up in Haiti" flame war right before starting this thread (read post #3). I saw that he was just as rude and nasty in there as anyone, and then he had the gall to start this thread. And when I say he was factually incorrect, I mean it. 4.5 days is not a week, no matter how firmly you believe it is. As far as most political threads go, you're about right. But the OP is a different story. Good night.

I believe it does.

I don't know about the other thread, but in and of itself, I agree with the OP.

It did not go 2 peace. sad.

Or just criticisms in general of anyone who posts?

They expected warm fuzzies or something but got such mean replies as "What a stupid self serving post.", "5 days isn't a week", "Nonsense" and "FAIL". Go read it yourself if you like.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7488112&mesg_id=7488112

but it actually is what EMonk says it is. a surprisingly bad post, which needs to be called out forcefully (and rightly was). Perhaps it doesn't take away from this thread, but perhaps it does. most people didn't attack the poster, but definitely tore apart the substance that they posted. Saying "what you say is stupid" is not the same as saying "you are stupid"

Bull shit a go go. I'm always weary of the weepy ones.

I has someone give me a ration of crazy shit on a thread sometime in the last month. I figured, hey,
high profile person Kirking out...easy to counter and it means my post hit home.

Thanks. Sorry #3 got pushed down so far;)

And thank you.

Agreed.

My older friends are saying they are glad their lives are at the end, because they don't want to live in such a harsh world people are gleefully creating.

SAD.

We need more good leadership, but then we need serious efforts to get dialog going about our core values. They are so screwy that our entire society is slowly becoming mentally ill.

You hit right on the head the REAL challenge before us. I think that is what divides the more "progressive" on this board from the moderate "liberals". They still are under the illusion that our problems are just policy based. Progressives understand it is far deeper than that, and some fairly deep changes need to happen and the sooner the better.

and that means strengthening those of us who have this understanding.

We are being torn apart by the attackers, and that is the plan. BEcause of our inherited Rugged Individualism, we then retreat and lick our wounds the best we can, and promise ourselves we won't allow more wounding, so we retreat further and further from each other. That is only cooperating with the plan.

We need to confront our OWN Rugged Individualism, and learnn how to strengthen each other, so we can all be supported and acknowledged.

THEN we can do the hard work of trying to reach other to others.

But without that foundation, we are floundering.

Let's face it, this is how the Repukes "communicate & debate" with anyone who doesn't fall into lock-step w/their opinions & ideas. I believe this is a learned response after 8 long years of conditioning.

Being on "Constant Attack Mode" is not only a sign of immaturity, but of ignorance & lack of rational reasoning power.

The Devolution of Our Society in Action.....a direct result of The Dumbing Down of America.
What a plan!

But it gained new energy when Reagan was elected. We are a nation of fundamentalists, not just in religion, but in many of our approaches. That is why we are on a collision course with other fundamentalists in the world.

We are reacting on a base level.

Manners and courtesy seem to be disappearing from every walk of life.

As an older person it is tempting to blame it on young people not being taught such by their parents, but older people brought up in an age where manners where emphasized in every day culture seem to be forgetting theirs as well.

It is a rude, mean world out there, and with every thing getting so much worse, I do not see it getting better.

I used to pride myself on being kind but I am ashamed that I too succumb to the Culture of Mean.

Sadly, communication on line is so instant and so anonymous that it is even easier to forget personal values in response to ugly things.

that if they allow this type of behavior they will not be supported financially and otherwise. Most people, and that includes potential customers, will not waste their time.

If the opposition floods groups like this with idiotic posts perhaps they want people to break up and leave.

The right thing to do is put the idiots on ignore immediately. End of story.

Moderators can not be everywhere.

Of course it's the point. "Ignore" is definitely your friend.

on this site concerning civility and the content of posts, but they don't trickle down so much to the everyday exchanges, partly because not everything that could be alerted on is, and partly because the mods are not heavy handed in their enforcement (and there just aren't that many of them). And frankly, if the rules as they were written were enforced to the letter, every time it was appropriate, and if everything but obsequious politeness was deleted or self-censored, this would be a very dull and uninteresting board. I've been to board like that, and not much useful gets said.

They were handled by the operators poorly and many good people were ejected or driven away. Some just won't speak up anymore.

Not we have a plurality of loud hotheads who tend to be way far left or right of the Democratic mainstream.

Hasn't been the same since.

It's a pity, really.

but it went to 17recs. You hit the nail on the head.

of time, that meanness of spirit has spread to GD.

I remember getting flamed as a newbie, and thanking the flamer for it, because it was like a rite of passage on a big forum like this.

I have gotten sick of the anti-Obama posts, but I think that is more a factor of the shift in power and not having defeating the opposition as our current major goal. Now we are fighting for our issues of importance, and when our elected officials don't make the decisions we want them to, tempers flare.

But no, I do not think there has been some overall degradation of DU.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Personally, I wish people confined their posts to info, analysis, and assistance toward constructive action, and kept their emotional outbursts -- esp. the nasty ones -- for their personal diaries or other more appropriate venues.

Perhaps we should be more Christian and not judge responses to our post. NOT EVERYONE IS UP TO THE STANDARD I PERCEIVE I AM. Embrace them and support them like the right winger promote the TEA PARTY clowns.

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

They will unrec anything positive, reasonable or even triumphant about the Democratic Party, then call other posters "cowards" when their own "silly season" threads get unrecc'd.

I agree, there has been a coarsening of discourse, and at one time, I tried to hold on to a way of posting that simply addressed the points of the topic. But again, the problem is, there is a caliber of posters on here that clearly have zero interest in an actual discussion -- that is simply not their objective.

At least it has since I joined in 2001.

"Differences of opinion are what make horse races." Mark Twain

Although some here seem to want the horse races to take place on a merry-go-round.

Point taken, but i will raise you with this:

In a Horse Race, no one is trying to kill each other or cripple the other riders and horses. Even in the most hard fought of athletic contests, there is a civility, if nothing else, because players know rules plus civility makes the game possible to be played.

What DU is becoming is not a race, it is a war, where people from ALL spectrums are trying to say that any horse that is not their horse deserves to be boiled into glue. If person A does not fit person's B test, that person is ripped ap[art, called a traitor, called less than human, and people give each other high fives.

recognize bomb a thread with one liners that are more about striking out at the writer rather than issues. I think I recognize a troll and then there is a team of them and I make some notes so I know who is saying what, but I can't keep it up and I notice that I am ready to pounce when I think someone is a troll.

I kind of pounce when someone reports something as fact without supporting it when it is something that isn't logical at all.

I think there are some young posters who don't know how to make a case for their statements and position which are often outrageious. When the unsupported position is coupled with an attack on other members, I abandon some diplomacy.

There is so much coming at us and many of us are on tenderhooks because our bubble of hope is waffling and wobbling.

Thanks for the thread, Cyrano.

Those are the meanest things because they are Also done anonymously with no comment to make a point.

Now the battle is WITHIN the Democratic Party, between the progressives and the corporatists.

When Darth came out with some BS, the responses to that thread were different.

If DUers were polite the place would be overrun with right wing talking points.

have been here from the beginning. I have periodically had to remind DUers of our various battles. Perhaps now the battles are permanent, without a respite or an M$M cause (it used to seem like we would pick up on the issue du jour that was being pushed by the M$M whether it was MJ or Anna Nicole Smith or Henry Louis Gates or another war in Israel and a battle would flare up over that until we finally lost interest. Although we also had a fairly big battle over a Snickers ad and that was never an M$M issue.) I think those battles have often gotten nasty, and many people here probably have lists of enemies in their head. Like, "oh, there's that jerk hfojvt again" or Cali or Debbierlus or whoever. The longer people are here probably the more people they remember and divide into either "decent people and friends" or "enemies and a-holes".

Honestly, I expect liberals posting here to be more educated than the average right winger I run into, but having been here pretty much the beginning, I've seen in the last couple years what seems like a mass infiltration of right wing ideology and attitudes here. I have zero tolerance for anything that even hints at a right wing talking point being posted here, and too many posts echo them from the rooftops. I come here to escape that shit. I'm not saying I'm more educated, or that I'm not an impatient asshole, but when you've already read dozens of posts from people complaining about the slowness with which aide is getting to Haiti, when at the same time there are countless articles from well-respected sources explaining why it has been difficult for our Government and NGO's to get the desperately needed aide to the people, I don't know, at some point my head explodes. I do agree that there is a 'meanness of spirit' here and sadly, more often than not, I'm contributing to it. I'm going to resolve right now to start working on that.

When folks post things that are *ahem* "unfactual" - expect a strident response...

nothing mean spirited about that

There are a lot more people since 2004 so a lot more potential attackers. The main change I see is that threads polarize quicker and your potential "friends" just avoid those threads. So there are more people to attack and fewer people defending you on a given thread. The "meanness of spirit" was there in the past, but mixed with healthy debate in the same thread and easier to overlook the meanness. I've never posted much because of the "meanness of spirit", but I'm finding it harder to learn anything from the threads, not because there's more meanness, but because there's less substance (either cheerleading or attacking, not as much good discussion/debate).

with which some opinions are expressed.

I don't care if you think Obama's great or fake, or if aid to Haiti's fast or slow. What I object to is attacking other DU'er's. I believe it simply retards our progress.

It's like using excessive force; damage is done needlessly, without furthering one's supposed main objectives, and there's a cost to that.

And yes, I think it's significantly worse than when I joined in 2004.

to a nightmare version of your worst Jr. high school class...

Thus we see what DU becomes in "victory..."

Sigh.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Its widespread and its a shame.

Noticed it my self.I Have probably done it on occasion,hope it was only to trolls.But remember there have been some infiltration of newcomers and others who are not particularly with the Democratic agenda.The newcomers don't understand. And I don't mean new to DU. I mean have switched parties or profess to be independents who lean toward democratic policies.They still think in the old ways of their party.But after Dubya put it on them they decided they would give it a try.But like their former party platforms it eventually shows itself.And that is some of what you see.That is why sometimes there is contention when there shouldn't be any,troll trick,divide and conquer.That has a lot to do with some of what you see.Not everything,but some.We won't fall for it.

the meanness entered some time ago...

Democrats have always been all over the map with their thoughts and feelings, but it does seem that we have been invaded by an underground that is not ours.

And I agree, beginners mind is open and allows you to explore...there does seem to be a lot of certainty with touches of malice spread through the board.

With Bush (blessedly) out of office, the one thing that held all these different opinions together is left. As such, opinions that once had one thing in common (Bush was opposed to both) now find themselves opposed to each other - and trying to win over the other side, because with Democrats in power, winning people for your idea equals getting things changed your way.

The meanness of spirit, as you call it, was there all along. It was reserved for people we severely disagreed with - Republicans. These days, unfortunately, we also severely disagree with each other.

And then there is the deception. Some base liberals feel genuinely betrayed. They put so much effort into getting Obama his victory, and then so little changed (from their point of view). Speaking for myself, I felt disgusted with Obama after his Department of Justice issued that hideous letter that equated homosexuality and pedophilia (and I'm not even a lesbian).

When you joined, all opponents of Bush were united in dire fear of the future (which held four more years of the wrong guy). In a way, things could only get better from then on. And they did.

But now, we have to start learning that our vitriol should still be reserved for republicans. And Joe Lieberman, probably, too. But that will be difficult, considering how many opinions find themselves opposed to each other within one party (and its sympathisers' periphery).

I agree that people here are more rude than ever. Why my ignore list has about 4 dozen posters on it. Often my choice to ignore such people is vindicated later, when I peek at their subsequent posts of no value and maximum flame.

I will try to either reply civilly or debate...diss me twice and the gloves come off...diss me the third time and its to iggy with them.
I realize that there are some people that are never pleased or kind or that sometimes when I post just to share what I believe might be important news..I will be attacked.
Sometimes they are correct and its a right wing job that I might have not realized...other times I think they are just being mean.
I have thought about just going away and never posting again but then I think..that is what they want to happen.
So my capricorn nature makes me put my head down and butt right back. :)

The angry tones in some of the posts keep me away from the threads. But the welcome notes I've received have been very appreciated. When all is said and done, I still feel among friends here.

There are a lot of great people here :)
But always remember....there are sharks in these waters too :)

And don't forget to visit the DU Lounge!!

And that includes loud insensitive assholes.

If we were all forced to use our real names when posting here, you'd see a lot less of it. While anonymity has its advantages, it also gives license to some people to let out their inner jerk.

This needed to be said

Look back at the primaries in 2008 and 2004.

:applause:

and it begs the question...could it have something to do with this?

Greenwald: Sunstein's spine-chilling proposal. Covert agents to "cognitively infiltrate" websites.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x7475860

Damn.

It's almost as if the more people we get here, the more they start to resemble any other large group of people.

I'm fucking outraged.

These people worked so hard to elect Democrats, many taking time away from their families, jobs (if, they were lucky enough to still have them), and other activities to canvas their neighborhoods, make phone calls, write letters, etc., all for the sake of "change they could believe in" and are now royally pissed that little has changed.

A lot of us who are sad about the state of things get attacked for saying as much. That's one reason I almost never post here anymore. Here, where I thought I'd be among friends.

There is an active effort to undermine activism. When support is being rallied for Democrats against Republicans, there is a fairly concerted effort to try to dampen such efforts.

You see it in the one line attack posts in response to positive OPs, as well as the continuous kicking of posts that are designed to initiate a flame war. Other times, pro-Democratic posters on a Democratic board are derided as "cheerleaders," which is perhaps the oddest criticism to make on a partisan board. Its the internet equlivalent of trying to disrupt a town hall.

The board is being game'd by folks who are not interested in dialogue and discussion, but in trying to drown out Democratic voices on a Democratic board.

believe that is a tactic that is actively being used by right-wingers in overall American discourse of all kinds.

Divide and conquer. Make us fight among ourselves and lose heart.

nt

Nail, Hammer, etc....:think:

Like the Teabaggers, and the Birthers, a very vocal minority can disrupt a much larger movement by coordinating their attacks. Common themes such as, "just because he/she is a democrat (note the little "d") makes no difference," and "I vote for the individual and not the Party," are dead giveaways for "progressives" (note the little "p") posing as Liberals.

The left over sour (rotten) grapes from the Primary Elections are smelling to high heaven, and Liberal Democrats are being attacked on a daily basis by those whose "Independent," and Far Left candidates-of-choice were overwhelmingly rejected by Middle American voters. On the bright side, there are a majority of DU-ers who are loyal Democrats, and who remain optimistic about our Liberal agenda for the long-term future and growth of this country.

The very vocal, extremist minority will continue to disrupt, but they are not a danger to the Democratic Party in general, because they are only brave enough to be anonymously disruptive. Just like the Teabaggers, and the Birthers, most Middle American voters will never know they exist.

We know for sure that there are RWers with nothing better to do and their style reveals them.

positions; I totally agree with this OP. I would only disagree with it being a somewhat recent development.

The level of discourse that was allowed here during the primaries is still seen here daily.

even think of it now.

There's no intelligent discourse, just finger-pointing and name-calling. A conversation
you can learn from is a thing of the past.

Very disappointing, because DU helped me keep my sanity during Bush's evil reign
and I was very grateful for that. I still come here every day for the news but try
to stay away from the nasty dialogues.

Pity. The exchanges between members was half the fun.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I registered to post at another political site, something I have not done since joining DU in 2004.

Just kidding.
:evilgrin:

I hate that shit too. There's always some bully, asshole, put down artist in every crowd and this place is no exception to that.

And I am NOT kidding.
No one needs to see your juvenile and boorish attempt at "humor"

"Do not say that you are hitting the alert link to report another member. You are permitted to tell someone that you are adding them to your ignore list, provided that you actually do so."

and you can see perfect examples of what you are talking about in some of the replies on this very thread.

I put at least 3 people on ignore in this thread alone.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Resorting to meaness is one of the first signs of either a weak argument or a mind unfamiliar with logical thought.

... and sometimes after I've left a particularly biting post I feel bad about it, for others not so much it is deserved.

Bottom line, there is a lot of frustration here. We endured 8 long years of Bush idiocy and only months after we thought it was over we find to our horror that it most decidedly is not.

I don't think I'm alone in this. And I think you are right, there is a lot less civility here than there was. Partly because we used to all have a common enemy, and now some think Obama should get a pass because he has a D after his name and that's bullshit.

It's as if people equate being rude with being persuasive, when the opposite is true. Usually if I post an opinion I've thought it through and no amount of insult or shouting is going to change my mind, while a reasoned, logical response just might.

Also agree that the first two replies showed how NOT to carry on an intelligent discussion.

i feel like the obama presidency has highlighted a rift in the democratic party (and on DU) that was glossed over in the past. but the dlc-ish neoliberal democrats and the progressive democrats are increasingly at odds. i don't blame obama for this. he's just doing his thing (the one he campaigned on....mostly...except for the ending iraq and public option things). but progressives who put their hope in him are quickly being disillusioned and told to STFU when they say so on DU.

it is unfortunate. it would be better if we could actually talk about these things and decide what is worth compromising and what is a core democratic value worth fighting for. but its usually just a lot of angry posting. and the rift may be building pressure moving towards a tectonic shift.

very hard about what you are saying. In particular this quote: "My point is that there’s a difference between disagreeing with someone, and what can only be described as a meanness of spirit. And it’s a virus that I believe has infected DU in recent times. It’s a trait that seems to be the same form of intolerance practiced by conservatives."

Do you think that the way we express ourselves and even the way we feel about how we do it result from constant exposure to the conservative rhetoric and talking posts we have been exposed to over the last 8 years? This is a serious question and not an attempt to ridicule you or make you look bad. When I think about it, this type of debate is virtually all I have heard or seen unless I am reading the lefty bloggers who are mostly still funny and polite.

Slang and catch phrases have a way of traveling almost unconsciously from person to person and group to group. Have we become so saturated with spite and bad manners that we practice them and expect to receive them wherever we go?

When I post on DU I mostly get civilized responses, but not always. Sometimes I am attacked, called names and vilified because I am in disagreement with what I am responding to. I post anyway and accept it as the cost of expressing myself, but should I have to? And even worse, am I doing the same thing without even trying? It is very sobering. I posted here in 2004 before I got too sick with MS to continue and I can't honestly say that I remember much difference. Then people were caught up in the upcoming elections and we were all trying to survive Bush. But I could be wrong.

If we have tarred ourselves with conservative bad manners, how the heck do we get rid of them?

though it occurs to me that who is guilty of this might be a matter of perspective. I fully agree that this poisonous environment exists on DU, but assert, even when I am being rude, that I have been provoked and am merely responding in-kind so as not to be a doormat.

Attribution Error. My behavior is justifiable and the result of circumstances beyond my control, whereas the same behavior on your part is innate and inexcusable.

I strongly support the op. That said, I experience the world through emotion and feel that I better know someone when I experience theirs.

I suspect that people who say "feel" often to describe their thoughts or situations may be more accepting and more frequently use emotions to communicate. That may make some others uncomfortable, especially ones who do not experience the world similarly.

For many these are desperate times. Emotions are higher and many feel our lives may get much worse before they get better. Amped up emotions affect discussion and shouldn't be likened to some sort of conservative intolerance.

And in response to moral certitude, there are some things I know to be true and I am without doubt. Would appreciate the op writer's definition of moral certitude rather than assume that we all know what is meant. And no, the dictionaries and other references left me with some wiggle room as to the meaning.

These kind of ops get old by the way but I suppose the ideas need to be repeated from time to time.

in the "Gungeon." And the record will show that the "compassionate" gun-controllers have used just about every insult you would hear in a drunken bar fight, and you hear them everyday. In fact, one gun-control advocate accused pro-2A folks of "planting" shills whose gun-control views were so extreme that they would be seen as "typical" of that side of the debate. I guess they can't believe their own language, at times.

You'll hear it all: "pervets," "freepers," "paranoids," "wanting to kill someone," "NRA plants," "RW types," "afflicted with short penises," and rather prosaically, "I hate you." And there is far, far worse.

And unfortunately, we don't have the Uniter (aka Whistleass Bush) to unite us anymore.

Good to see you around here still tho. :hi:

especially about the need to validate themselves by 'having the last word'. As if that means they've somehow 'won'. It's so conservative-like.

That would probably explain some of it.

I agree and I'm sick of it, too. It ruins debate.

get double and tripled teamed with hecklers who work a thread like neocons worked those those town hall brawls.

One of those respectably resilient folks has actually participated in this thread. Other colorful voices have been quieted, one in particular who has provided DUers with a great laugh on many occasion through the candor and simplicity of her wit is a voice I want returned to my community.
I am pretty new here, comparatively speaking. I discovered this place while trolling blogs for news as an ambitious radio news producer. I've only been posting since last May, mostly as a responder to the posts of others. In that short time, it has been suggested that I don't know what I'm talking about, that I speak in glittering generalities, and that I'm backwards. A wise senior DUer told me when I first started coming that I'd need thick skin.

These interlopers have proven that even leather can be cut like butter. I'm proud to be here and honored to circle what wagons can be gathered around some of the community's most precious gems, and bark some of those hecklers back down.

When it comes to confrontation and conflict I generally try to issue something of a warning:

"It is not my first inclination to break out my bitchy bone, but should you insist on seeing it, I have one to show you."

kicked for candor.

:fistbump:

and well stated!

It's not really clear from your post --

My point is that there’s a difference between disagreeing with someone, and what can only be described as a meanness of spirit. And it’s a virus that I believe has infected DU in recent times. It’s a trait that seems to be the same form of intolerance practiced by conservatives

???

There have always been people here with obscene or highly aggressive forms of debate --

put them on "ignore."

On the other hand, if you understand what is happening to our nation -- that fascism has

long ago crossed our threshold --

If you understand the real and urgent threat of Global Warming --

If you are anti-war as most of us are -- and if you understand the bankrupting of our

Treasury by war, re-funding wars -- and surges --

If you understand that corporatism is fascism and that it has infiltrated both of our

political parties --

If you understand America's desperate need for health care as other nations have it --

Then this wouldn't be the subject you'd be complaining about -- !!



:eyes:




And keep in mind that I recommended your post as a liberal AGAINST censorship --

I can see the US disintegrating within 5 years.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

I hope you understand the deep division here - many of us in middle class liberal camp have watched our earning power and influence massively eroded away away since Reagan. When you couple that fact with the degrading moral center of politics (or politics moving hard right), the picture is bleak.

When people argue that torture is realistic, that wire tapping is realistic, that Wall Street bailout is realistic, whether having CEOs design health care legislation is realistic, whether constant republican capitulation and coddling is relaistic, whether more than 10 years of war is realistic, there is a place for moral certitude.

I claim with full moral certitude that the way these policies have been handled are not in the best interest of the citizens of this country - democrat or republican, but especially liberal citizens like me.

The problem is the classic problem of party over principals. The democratic party has chosen what many of us believe is the wrong path on these issues. When we call leadership out, we are met with the "pony".

As far as liberals go, democrats have instilled a "don't ask, don't tell policy". All of this makes us very angry. Passions are high, deception is alleged. So much time and energy is spent by democratic leadership winning the hearts and minds of republicans. So little energy is spent winning the hearts and minds of liberals.

Liberals have been trashed on right wing radio for so long that even democrats won't look us in the eye. Now even the democrats are piling on. Instead of acknowledging our roles in the success of a democratic majority, we are scolded by democrats as "those on the left". After decades of neo-con and neo-dem disasters in deregulation and corporate influence, the liberal is still the boogie man. We fought against banking deregulation, NAFTA, H1B, outsourcing, global warming, coroporate take-over of legislation, each and every time the core democratic party mocked us as they voted for these things.

I believe we are hated by both parties. That's what I believe is behind the anger here. And when we vote for 3rd party and stop sending the democrats cash, we are called traitors. Many of us have finally had enough of this shit. And there is a time and place for anger and anger is appropriate now.

Some of us have invested in the democratic party for many many years. Emanuel continues to pretend we don't exist and we are angry.

The liberals are correct and have been correct on the misdirection of the country all along. If that is not obvious by now I don't know when it ever will.

the level of hatred is palpable - and I don't mean the level of hatred for Republicans....but rather for fellow DUers

I think its the level of hatred in general that is palpable. But, many of the posts are really well thought out. It's nice to get a look at some issues from a different perspective, just when I thought I had my mind made up about a topic. I can find myself agreeing with someone on one post that I totally disagreed with on another. I think DU can be a great resource and great way for self expression. Perhaps I will have to figure out the ignore feature. But, even someone who says something that seems perfectly evil on one post, may say something enlightening on the next. It seems to be an ever changing environment.

How about a few links.

or click here http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=7488112&mesg_id=7488112

This is not the only thread addressing this problem lately.

2 and a half days, by my math.

That's how this started.

I posted this story without comment and look at just a little of
what I got. I didn't complain. This is DU, not some debutante ball;)

And it's sad.

:grr:

I've been here for about 7 years and I often see posts about how negative it is.
They appear every four months to a year.

I think part of it is a creeping change in the sense that it gets a little coarser, which is true of society in general.

However, a lot people are feeling let down, not just by the President, but by congress as well.
And as the wise Col Sherman T Potter (MASH) once said, "I expected nothing, but you haven't even reached that yet. But, these people expected a lot. And getting your hopes dashed is worse than having no hope at all."
That kind of analysis is spot on. (IMO)

In addition, and think this is where your post bears out true, is the stunning lack of intellectual discourse that is displayed by some people here.

"What did you expect? A pony!"
"Totally failed Presidency."
"I suppose you'd rather have had McCain win."
"You're just as bad as the Republicans." (this comes from both sides of the argument)

Heh no actually it doesn't. But yeah the negativity can be a bummer - however I think much of it is due to just the plain ol current generally shittyness of things. The economy, the so called health care reform, the wars, DADT still in place, all our jobs being shipped overseas, the rich getting richer, the bankers getting richer, everyone else doing much worse - and people just need to vent their anger sometimes I think. It's not so much the moral certitude that bothers me, cause honestly at some point we the people are going to have to push back - but the lack of any real way to fight the corporate two party system that has brought any real change to a total standstill - or at least a crawl - that is where our energy could be better spent IMO. But hell the 5-4 right wing supreme court will set us back decades in many progressive areas. I can see why people are pissed/bummed, ya know?

From Dr. Robert Altemeyer's book, The Authoritarians.



There are many things the bush administration did that I want corrected. Not only corrected, I want punishment to be dealt out to deter others from doing these things again. The Democratic party claimed it was in agreement with me on these issues. Knowing that this is a two-party system and a vote for a third-party would be a waste, I voted Democratic. Now when I expect these issues to be addressed, I am told that I expected a "pony" and that I am "far left". I am fed a litany of ridiculous excuses that I am all too familiar with from the likes of right-wingers. I didn't vote for my "team" to "win", I voted for someone I thought was going to fix things. This appears to be the subject of a fundamental disagreement on this board.

these authoritarian reich-wingers cannot be trusted. Their conviction that people are generally dishonest, will lie, cheat, and steal at every opportunity, and must therefore be forced to obey, reveals their own natures.

as being those who argue, as you do, that they want "punishment to be dealt out to to others." That has been a strain of the far left that led to the Reign of Terror (from which France did not recover for some 100 years), Stalinism after the Bolshevik revolution, the Red Army Brigades, and others. It's what led the Weather Underground to decide that bombing and armed robbery were justifiable responses to a government that was fighting in Vietnam and failing to achieve social justice quickly and broadly enough. I shared the aspirations of the French Revolution for the Rights of Man and a democratic government, of the Bolshevik revolution for a socialist state, and the even the Red Army Faction for an end to imperialism. But I disagreed thoroughly with the authoritarian tendencies that recruited people to cheer the guillotine, massacre the landowners, or kidnap and kill the industrialists.

Your 'definition' of authoritarianism suggests that the authoritiarian left consists of those who "submit too much to the leaders, trust them too much, and give them too much leeway to do whatever they want." I suggest it consists of those who submit too much to their blogger heroes and ideological authorities. The aggression, as I see it, is on your side.

Today, on Martin Luther King Day, your definition would place King among the "authoritarian left," since he did place trust in the government, even as he goaded it on to keep improving its stances on Civil Rights, through nonviolent actions. Most would identify Malcolm X on the "authoritarian left," however, because of an ideological intransigence that led to governmental opposition and, at times, violence. Certainly, he was the angry one. I'm not taking sides on that one, but I think history bears out which side has left a more enduring example.

"Upholding the laws that protect citizens from harm through enforcement of penalties designed to deter potential lawbreakers" would be better. Do you have a problem with that?



It's hard to persecute someone when you don't have any power. Nice straw man, though.

You wouldn't happen to be one of those poor, persecuted Christians whose religious existence is threatened by the godless agenda of the secular progressives, would you?

Not my definition, Dr. Robert Altemeyer's definition. You should read his book on the subject. And what's with the quotes? You think you have a better definition? Are you an expert in the field? Publish anything on the subject?



Let's see, did MLK "submit too much to the leaders, trust them too much, and give them too much leeway to do whatever they want?" Yeah, MLK was shouting down people who wanted civil rights, while praising those who maintained the status quo. Are you an idiot?

Here's a nifty definition for you, courtesy of another DUer:

eis⋅e⋅ge⋅sis
–noun, plural -ses
an interpretation, esp. of Scripture, that expresses the interpreter's own ideas, bias, or the like, rather than the meaning of the text.

Altemayer's book deals with so-called right-wing authoritarianism, and thus has little to do with internecine fights among liberals. The demand for punishment, in my estimation, is an authoritarian concept in general. (For example, liberals do not see the justice system as "punishment"--it's a right-wing concept. Justice and punishment are not covalent terms.) My counterexample was to show the absurdity of applying these psychological concepts (and yes, Altemeyer is a psychologist) willy nilly. It was meant to be absurd, but I guess it went above heads.

It's becoming SOP for those who use incorrect definitions for their rants.

Altemeyer's book deals with those who defer to power, approve attacks in their name, and have a high degree of conventionalism. What else would you call someone who can defend the actions of John Yoo? Domestic surveillance? Illegal wars and occupations? Politicized justice? Corporate immunity? Eric Holder said he would not "criminalize policy differences." Silly me. I thought they were high crimes and misdemeanors. I guess I'm just an angry liberal who threw a poutrage because he couldn't saddle up My Little Pony.

i don't know how many times i've begun to respond to a post here and thought, nah, it's not worth it. so much sniping and negativity. i've taken to the mudflats.

First of all--Rec. Your perception regarding the lack of civility, which generally reduces the value of any thread, is accurate, whether it was based on general observations of DU or responses to one of your OPs. The name-calling and fascist unreccing are characteristics I associate with the opposition, not democratic thought.

But I saw one post in particular, claiming that any pro-Obama OP is immediately pounced upon an unrecced. The irony is that OPs criticizing the President receive the same treatment.

I'm sure the dynamic is more complicated than just this, but it seems to me that there is a faction that truly expected a revolution, and they have been much disappointed. And there is another faction that is just happy to have a Democrat in office after 8 years of chaos, and not too demanding where performance is concerned.

Okay, let me offer my two cents

We never were going to agree with each other on everything; hell, if we did, I would be scared, because the lockstep goose step is what i disliked about the GOP. However, it does not matter whether you are a Clinton Centrist/Trotsky Radical/whatever, all of the various factions of the left have been prone to demonizing each other as of late. I do not have to agree with you on everything, or even much of anything, but I do know that when the adrenaline flows, the end result turns out to be unhappiness for both of us. Part of being a mature human being is to realize that you have to deal with people; how the hell are we going to sell anything remotely to the left when we cannot get along ourselves?

which was verbally assaulted by a pack of wild dogs. I thought I'd mistyped, having ended up on a RW hatesite.

Yeah, and I post little, too. I don't even log on that much anymore.

I joined around 2005, so I missed the 2004 primary discussions.

Things were pretty much homogeneous until the primary fight of 2008. Things got pretty mean around here then.

Then came the election, and things got pretty focused again, but it didn't last. Just as the nut case right
sees everyone who doesn't swallow everything they spew out as a "libbrul," suddenly there are a lot of people
who know all about "corporatists" lurking around every corner in the dark.

Threads now get an unrec the second they appear, no matter what the subject. Rather than a reason as to why
someone finds a thread off-base, just an anonymous click. And we call Republicans the "Party of NO."

If there is a way to tone down the bile, I don't know it. I have never used the unrec or put someone on ignore,
but then I'm not here often enough to matter, or care. As the OP said, it IS "the same form of intolerance
practiced by conservatives," except that I disagree that today's American extremist right is "conservative."
I find them cowardly, frightened, intolerant, plagued by a massive inferiority complex, and dominated by a bunch
of very selfish control-freaks, but conservative? Beyond the wealth of their gurus, I don't see them as wanting
to conserve much of anything. Waste and destroy, yes, but not conserve.

There is still plenty of thoughtfulness and sanity on DU. I started to give some examples, but realized the list
would be too long to bother with--and that is a good thing. Agreed: there is a LOT of ill humor, personal sniping,
etc. I've been on the receiving end enough times, so someone who spends a lot of time here will necessarily
carry a lot of battle scars. Most of them will have been inflicted by supposedly friendly fire, if one is accept
that this a Democratic Party board.

But in the end, it's an internet board. People's personalities will shine through the anonymity, and not all of them
are those of people who have had the good fortune to develop as even-tempered a demeanor as others. Our diversity will
show weaknesses as well as strengths. It's a normal reaction to bristle when someone attacks you, but don't let it
ruin your day. Chances are, if someone feels compelled to attack you in a mean-spirited way, they are probably having
a far worse day (or life) than you are.

The meanness of tone used by a few (or more than a few) might eventually ruin this board, but only if it is allowed
to do so. If you don't play their game, you can't lose at it.

At first, I was shocked by the attacks directed at me almost from the first time I ever posted.

But I am used to it now, and have figured out where they came from.

I don't really mind it anymore.

I can take care of myself.

Grow a thick skin, make some friends, know where you stand in the dynamic, and soldier on.

I always take the time to read your stuff. I almost always agree with your points, and you don't seem to mind mixing it up with the corporatists.

I don't really care what someone's ideological "camp" might be... but I don't like it when ANYONE tries to shut down discussion.

I learn a lot by reading/listening to other people's points of view.

The more diverse and THOUGHTFUL they are, the better.

When someone has a problem with that, or with me, I am inclined to address it head on.

But I try to keep it about substance... well, MOST of the time.

my time on this earth is too short to pay them even a moments heed.

I'm panicky too. I admit it.

they jump at every opportunity to stroke their own egos at the expense of anyone and everyone.

Is DU's sole purpose to discuss politics or is it a place to vent frustration also? It seems to serve both purposes. I agree that the discourse has deteriorated since the 2008 primaries. It also deteriorated after the 2006 congressional victories, when the Dems refused to use its hard earned power. There were still no checks or balances on W, who had de facto dictatorial powers. The Dems got elected on promising to change the course of the nation, and then promptly rolled over.

Another presidential election comes by and this time the Dems promise change for sure. However, money is still flowing into the rich, the corporations, and the military.

Discussion then appears to be a waste of time, and the frustration sets in.

I can direct you to some of the choice abusive and profanity laden posts from two years ago. Many of them were made in response to my posts about how neither presidential candidate was a "bitch" (in the two different meanings of the word) and about how they would both come together after the primary for the good of the party. You would have thought I was suggesting that devils and angels would mate.

DU has always been this way. It is just that the rancor was focused Bush-Cheney for a long time. Now that corporate dems are in power, we are criticizing our own---and that provokes a sense of disharmony.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

starting to find their daily raging funny...

"186. The freeptard trolls, the foaming Naderites, and the PUMA leftovers
have most definitely come wriggling out of the woodwork--some of whom have been DU sleepers for years"

Anyone calling anyone else on here such things should be booted, imho.

There are good arguments and there are invalid arguments, sound policies and unsound policies; either you can defend or attack them or you can't.

IMHO once a poster lables some one else as above (also including "racist") they go on ignore.

Prozac and alcohol helps...

I don't do either.........

to think highly of and rec their OPs.

We've been divided because the dem party is in the process of being taken over by dinos that act like freepers.