|
Post by Karen on Dec 7, 2011 0:09:05 GMT -5
Our civil police forces, especially in big cities, are being militarized. Don't freak out, though. Peace and Love will win the day. ETA: I agree with your metaphor. Did you see "V"? It's how those people were ruled. With fear and intimidation. Much like an abusive partner. I have people say to me that if you are down on your luck - unemployed, etc., it's because of the choices you have made - took the wrong courses in school, didn't save enough money for hard times, etc. Too bad for you. You must not be living right. Idiots! Word. I mean, clearly, I'VE been making all the wrong choices, and that's why I'm unemployed. It has nothing to do with the economy and university cutbacks. I suppose, in theory, I could get a job working fast food, but then would come the inevitable question: "So, you have a doctorate? Why do you want this job?" Even I can't come up with the level of bullshit that would convince anyone that it's my choice. It was hard enough to find summer fast food jobs, and that was just when I was in college. Want to form a commune? Liz could doctor, I'd make yogurt and grow herbs and bring along my boys for muscle, Julia would raise chickens and cows, you could keep us entertained with stories and teach, Diane could make our clothes, Anne adorn us and docorate our abode, Rachael's could solve problems, Spring could analyze Buffy for us, mother us and cook great , Sue would make lists, Lola could bring her appreciation for music and whimsy, Sara would keep the peace, Monnie make us laugh, Onjel keep us legal and crochet us warm scarves, etc. etc. etc. And we could talk Buffy, Angel, Firefly, and Joss until the cows come home!
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Dec 7, 2011 8:38:33 GMT -5
Word. I mean, clearly, I'VE been making all the wrong choices, and that's why I'm unemployed. It has nothing to do with the economy and university cutbacks. I suppose, in theory, I could get a job working fast food, but then would come the inevitable question: "So, you have a doctorate? Why do you want this job?" Even I can't come up with the level of bullshit that would convince anyone that it's my choice. It was hard enough to find summer fast food jobs, and that was just when I was in college. To continue the metaphor, it's worth thinking about how the counseling for victims could apply in the situation we find ourselves in. Victims of domestic violence are advised to -mentally prepare themselves to leave -know the exits of their home -prepare a bug out bag -have a place to go -develop a plan -leave I like to think that all the stuff I'm planning to do when I'm done with school and residency is some is some version of the above. How many people would be willing to take similar steps, I don't know.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Dec 7, 2011 11:28:26 GMT -5
Yes, I saw the article you tweeted about the militarization of the police. Very intriguing, though it didn't get enough into the why of it for my taste. There's all these trends that started happening (or had a pivotal moment/inflection point) right before I was born; it's really uncanny and it's freaking me out. I wonder if it can all be tied to the US peaking in oil production or if that's reaching. Hmm. No, I've not seen V yet. It's on my very long list of must see tv. The Why of the militarization of the police? I would follow the money. People are making a lot of money on selling weapons, and housing prisoners. Yeah - and the peak in oil production is part of it, because things are going to get dicey when that happens..if it hasn't already happened. Plus the population at 7 billion...tipping point and all. Not to mention global warming. Makes me want to find a nice piece of land to buy in a warmer climate, with no hurricanes, floods, fires, plenty of water and far from people and nuclear power plants. Interesting - the only way out of this mess is for most of us to act like lemmings and fling ourselves off the cliff before we take it all down, so that the human race can survive..along with the rest of the animals and plants on the planet. Or we can all come to our senses and quit consuming in mass quantities and come together as a race and save it all. We need a leader...or many leaders to turn the tide. OWS could solidify its message. We need a hero! But I don't see it happening. People do not want to face it. What I see happening among the people in denial are 2 things. Those that refuse to discuss it because it scares the shit out of them and they feel they can't change things anyway and if things changed then there would be chaos and that the people in control wouldn't let them change it anyway, and those are waiting for things to collapse and for God to come save them. I read book about global warming that was full of dicey science that denied that people were causing climate change and actually ended with the sentence - "I could be wrong about everything, but that would be okay because I might be wrong, but God is merciful.' or words to that effect. In other words, God won't let us destroy ourselves. That sentence at the very end pretty much negated any argument he had to offer. Oil production in the US peaked in 1973, so I was speculating about how that might be driving some of these changes we've seen since then. We don't know exactly when world peak oil will occur, though most experts thinks it's happening right about now; we'll only be able to know exactly when in retrospect. I actually ended up getting into a discussion about climate change with my relatives over thanksgiving, and their argument against it was that god was in control of everything. And they felt very defensive about it, much like those who aren't christian or religious feel very defensive about their beliefs, which I think is important to acknowledge and respect. I think in times of crisis, everybody starts to feel more and more defensive about everything. The irony is that my relatives here are far, far better prepared for what I think the future is going to hold, as much as these things can be predicted, than the vast majority of people in this country, including those who understand and accept climate change and peak oil.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Dec 7, 2011 11:31:26 GMT -5
Word. I mean, clearly, I'VE been making all the wrong choices, and that's why I'm unemployed. It has nothing to do with the economy and university cutbacks. I suppose, in theory, I could get a job working fast food, but then would come the inevitable question: "So, you have a doctorate? Why do you want this job?" Even I can't come up with the level of bullshit that would convince anyone that it's my choice. It was hard enough to find summer fast food jobs, and that was just when I was in college. Want to form a commune? Liz could doctor, I'd make yogurt and grow herbs and bring along my boys for muscle, Julia would raise chickens and cows, you could keep us entertained with stories and teach, Diane could make our clothes, Anne adorn us and docorate our abode, Rachael's could solve problems, Spring could analyze Buffy for us, mother us and cook great , Sue would make lists, Lola could bring her appreciation for music and whimsy, Sara would keep the peace, Monnie make us laugh, Onjel keep us legal and crochet us warm scarves, etc. etc. etc. And we could talk Buffy, Angel, Firefly, and Joss until the cows come home! I don't know about anyone else, but I'm staying right here in Wyoming. You know, except for the having to go back east for part of rotations. But y'all are totally invited, for whatever reason, whenever I settle down again. Part of what I'm planning to do is create a haven for wandering souls and anyone else who needs it. My only regret is that I'm not in a position at the present to help anyone, when it's so desperately needed.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Dec 13, 2011 20:38:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Dec 28, 2011 10:14:25 GMT -5
Conservative Firefly/Serenity fans. This youtube was posted on HotAir. Believe it or not, many, many conservatives relate to Firefly. As do classic liberals. We share the values of freedom of speech in common. Warms my heart.
|
|
|
Post by Anne, Old S'cubie Cat on Dec 29, 2011 9:38:14 GMT -5
Carrying on from Onjel's post (Hi, Better Half!), liberals love Firefly too. The show seems to be a universal constant. Yesterday PZ Myers' Pharyngula blog had two posts on the New (or, sometimes, Gnu) Atheist movement which both referenced the show. The first was titled "We're Meddlesome"; the second was "No power in the ‘verse can stop us" and was full of appropriate quotes. Joss Whedon, perfect for any occasion. There should be a line of greeting cards or something.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Dec 29, 2011 14:37:42 GMT -5
I'm rather uninterested in the labels liberal and conservative these days- not the least because actual contemporary political beliefs and behavior in the US are right and extreme right compared to historic and world norms.
What I am intereseted in is how one behaves as a person among other people: self reliant, generous, kind and helpful are good words but how do you define their negatives? Is the disabled person who needs assistance in keeping fed, clothed, housed and comforted more or less self-reliant than the trustafarian? What is the <i>essential</i> difference in generosity between those who give freely to charities which operate under religious or philosophical rules not shared by the rest of society and those who believe that taxpayer supported institutions and the tax structure to keep them stable and fair are more ethical if less individually controllable?
What is the actual logical defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers?
I am no longer willing to entertain discussions which depend largely on "this is not to my taste." What are the differences in outcome? What is the price in human misery of our political decisions? Who dies from them?
Julia, the longer I listen to the voice within, the more it tells me that these questions matter.
|
|
|
Post by Spaced Out Looney on Dec 29, 2011 21:27:50 GMT -5
I'm rather uninterested in the labels liberal and conservative these days- not the least because actual contemporary political beliefs and behavior in the US are right and extreme right compared to historic and world norms. What I am intereseted in is how one behaves as a person among other people: self reliant, generous, kind and helpful are good words but how do you define their negatives? Is the disabled person who needs assistance in keeping fed, clothed, housed and comforted more or less self-reliant than the trustafarian? What is the <i>essential</i> difference in generosity between those who give freely to charities which operate under religious or philosophical rules not shared by the rest of society and those who believe that taxpayer supported institutions and the tax structure to keep them stable and fair are more ethical if less individually controllable? What is the actual logical defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers? I am no longer willing to entertain discussions which depend largely on "this is not to my taste." What are the differences in outcome? What is the price in human misery of our political decisions? Who dies from them? Julia, the longer I listen to the voice within, the more it tells me that these questions matter. I'm totally with Julia on this one.
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Dec 29, 2011 22:56:45 GMT -5
I'm rather uninterested in the labels liberal and conservative these days- not the least because actual contemporary political beliefs and behavior in the US are right and extreme right compared to historic and world norms. What I am intereseted in is how one behaves as a person among other people: self reliant, generous, kind and helpful are good words but how do you define their negatives? Is the disabled person who needs assistance in keeping fed, clothed, housed and comforted more or less self-reliant than the trustafarian? What is the <i>essential</i> difference in generosity between those who give freely to charities which operate under religious or philosophical rules not shared by the rest of society and those who believe that taxpayer supported institutions and the tax structure to keep them stable and fair are more ethical if less individually controllable? What is the actual logical defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers? I am no longer willing to entertain discussions which depend largely on "this is not to my taste." What are the differences in outcome? What is the price in human misery of our political decisions? Who dies from them? Julia, the longer I listen to the voice within, the more it tells me that these questions matter. I'm totally with Julia on this one. YAY! Julia, in a bit of a mood when I wrote that because someone I know is a person capable of great good put up an anti-Muslim por Tim Tebow thing on facebook this morning, again. But I do mean every word.
|
|
|
Post by Karen on Dec 30, 2011 12:25:23 GMT -5
I'm rather uninterested in the labels liberal and conservative these days- not the least because actual contemporary political beliefs and behavior in the US are right and extreme right compared to historic and world norms. What I am intereseted in is how one behaves as a person among other people: self reliant, generous, kind and helpful are good words but how do you define their negatives? Is the disabled person who needs assistance in keeping fed, clothed, housed and comforted more or less self-reliant than the trustafarian? What is the <i>essential</i> difference in generosity between those who give freely to charities which operate under religious or philosophical rules not shared by the rest of society and those who believe that taxpayer supported institutions and the tax structure to keep them stable and fair are more ethical if less individually controllable? What is the actual logical defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers? I am no longer willing to entertain discussions which depend largely on "this is not to my taste." What are the differences in outcome? What is the price in human misery of our political decisions? Who dies from them? Julia, the longer I listen to the voice within, the more it tells me that these questions matter. Listening to the voice within is at the base of the Occupy Movement. I am reading Blessed Unrest. It describes a worldwide movement among people as 'an instinctive, collective response to threat'. I too had a reaction to something devisive my very good conservative Christian friend posted on Facebook and the resulting conversation in which he used the words 'uneducated' to describe people who vote Democrat, and 'as long as their side is winning' to describe how they are usually complacent, just disappointed me. When he uses language like - 'things will only get better when everyone accepts Jesus Christ', it saddens me. In theory, that would work, if what he means - accepts Jesus's teachings - but the very fact that he would make such a statement, and say things like societies fail when there are different belief systems among the people, makes me believe that even though he is a good person, he just doesn't get it. Being a Catholic, I know he shoves me in the group that needs to accept Jesus...because being baptised as a baby doesn't cut it in his estimation. Not to mention the fact that we 'pray to saints'. The only I comment I could make without screaming was that as long as people had the we against them mentality, I agreed with him that the country/world wouldn't be able to pull themselves up out of this current disaster. I am glad I have this place to rant in. As far as the liberal and conservative label, they just don't cut it anymore. Sometimes I think I am a conservative, fiscally, but also a social liberal. It's all about balance, and we just ain't in that place.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Dec 30, 2011 16:46:31 GMT -5
I'm rather uninterested in the labels liberal and conservative these days- not the least because actual contemporary political beliefs and behavior in the US are right and extreme right compared to historic and world norms. What I am intereseted in is how one behaves as a person among other people: self reliant, generous, kind and helpful are good words but how do you define their negatives? Is the disabled person who needs assistance in keeping fed, clothed, housed and comforted more or less self-reliant than the trustafarian? What is the <i>essential</i> difference in generosity between those who give freely to charities which operate under religious or philosophical rules not shared by the rest of society and those who believe that taxpayer supported institutions and the tax structure to keep them stable and fair are more ethical if less individually controllable? What is the actual logical defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers?I am no longer willing to entertain discussions which depend largely on "this is not to my taste." What are the differences in outcome? What is the price in human misery of our political decisions? Who dies from them? Julia, the longer I listen to the voice within, the more it tells me that these questions matter. I agree with you to a very great extent...but I can actually offer a logical, defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers, and one that I feel is extremely important to make: Money. Because I feel it is vital to remember that while being an ideologue is, at best problematic, and at worst, toxic, the combination of money and ideological purity is killing the country. The Koch brothers have enough resources to put their puppets into office (they're like the Rossum Corporation [I'm working on a paper about Dollhouse, don't mind me]) like Scott Walker, or the public eye, like Herman Cain. What you make making documentaries (even ones that make lots of money) is pocket change to people like the Koch brothers. If I had a TARDIS, I'd go back in time and convince both Mrs. Rand and Mrs. Friedman to get their tubes tied, because without Ayn and Milton, we wouldn't be in this mess. Erin, whose annoyed to share a gender with Ayn Rand.
|
|
|
Post by Onjel on Dec 30, 2011 16:46:45 GMT -5
Oy. Karen, I feel for you. I, too, am pretty socially liberal but fiscally and constitutionally conservative. A lot of my differing view is based on what I see as the proper role for government, and looking around the world, and especially at ours, I can't see that government has managed to cure society's ills instead of exacerbating them. Hell, the US government couldn't even manage to run a whorehouse and make money. I sure don't trust them to do anything right. Besides, our population numbers make it a pipe dream that we can all be taken care of in the same way. Sooner or later, we'll run out of money. It isn't working too well in Europe and they have fewer people by country than we do. *sigh* I'd love there to be a way for everyone to be healthy, happy and have the same opportunity as everyone else, but as you say, we ain't there yet.
|
|
|
Post by Queen E on Dec 30, 2011 18:02:59 GMT -5
Oy. Karen, I feel for you. I, too, am pretty socially liberal but fiscally and constitutionally conservative. A lot of my differing view is based on what I see as the proper role for government, and looking around the world, and especially at ours, I can't see that government has managed to cure society's ills instead of exacerbating them. Hell, the US government couldn't even manage to run a whorehouse and make money. I sure don't trust them to do anything right. Besides, our population numbers make it a pipe dream that we can all be taken care of in the same way. Sooner or later, we'll run out of money. It isn't working too well in Europe and they have fewer people by country than we do. *sigh* I'd love there to be a way for everyone to be healthy, happy and have the same opportunity as everyone else, but as you say, we ain't there yet. Hmm. I can see where your coming from, but... The problem, as always in my view, is money. We are not currently a representative government; only about 300,000 of us are being truly represented. Yet the government, in essence, are our employees; it is our tax dollars that pay for their salaries (not the 1%, who pay far less a percentage of tax then the average person), thus, they are being bad employees by not representing US. They are shirking their responsibilities. Yes, I believe that I am entitled to care when I'm elderly, to social security, to the government programs I have paid into. These programs, Medicare, Social Security, work excellently well when they are not fucked with. They are good things, they cost little, and they provide for those whose industry and time keep this country running. The 1% are NOT job creators, at least not for Americans; they exploit tax loopholes, poison our environment, and then move to a struggling country and exploit their workers and environment by paying far below subsistence and poisoning another part of the world that does not have the very excellent government regulations against, say, arsenic in our drinking water, that we have. So that's my view: We have hired these individuals to act as caretakers, and they are letting the estate fall to pieces through negligence, through pettiness and greed. And I'm not trying to be an asshole here, but in my own lifetime, I have never seen such a sharp division between Repubs. and Dems. as I do now. For all their faults, the Dems. are trying to elevate this above a playground fight. The current (house) Republicans want to break all the toys rather than share. It makes me furious. NOTE: Please understand I am referring to those in Congress, not all those who identify as Republicans, OK?
|
|
|
Post by Julia, wrought iron-y on Dec 31, 2011 12:58:43 GMT -5
I'm rather uninterested in the labels liberal and conservative these days- not the least because actual contemporary political beliefs and behavior in the US are right and extreme right compared to historic and world norms. What I am intereseted in is how one behaves as a person among other people: self reliant, generous, kind and helpful are good words but how do you define their negatives? Is the disabled person who needs assistance in keeping fed, clothed, housed and comforted more or less self-reliant than the trustafarian? What is the <i>essential</i> difference in generosity between those who give freely to charities which operate under religious or philosophical rules not shared by the rest of society and those who believe that taxpayer supported institutions and the tax structure to keep them stable and fair are more ethical if less individually controllable? What is the actual logical defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers?I am no longer willing to entertain discussions which depend largely on "this is not to my taste." What are the differences in outcome? What is the price in human misery of our political decisions? Who dies from them? Julia, the longer I listen to the voice within, the more it tells me that these questions matter. I agree with you to a very great extent...but I can actually offer a logical, defensible distinction between Michael Moore and the Koch brothers, and one that I feel is extremely important to make: Money. Because I feel it is vital to remember that while being an ideologue is, at best problematic, and at worst, toxic, the combination of money and ideological purity is killing the country. The Koch brothers have enough resources to put their puppets into office (they're like the Rossum Corporation [I'm working on a paper about Dollhouse, don't mind me]) like Scott Walker, or the public eye, like Herman Cain. What you make making documentaries (even ones that make lots of money) is pocket change to people like the Koch brothers. If I had a TARDIS, I'd go back in time and convince both Mrs. Rand and Mrs. Friedman to get their tubes tied, because without Ayn and Milton, we wouldn't be in this mess. Erin, whose annoyed to share a gender with Ayn Rand. That was sort of what I was getting at, that and the fact that Michael Moore stands out in public and says what he wants said, and doesn't secretly pay other people to do it. I wasn't implying a false equivalency intentionally, but trying to say they are different and use different tactics. Julia, not always good at making things clear, sorry.
|
|