Too Much Diversity -Too Little Unity?

[devarsi]

If DU is any indication, then the Dem party's quest for strength in diversity has backfired, as we bicker about which splinter issue should reign supreme. The balance between diversity and unity is what attracted me to the Dems in the first place. Have we now sacrificed unity for diversity?

I've seen threads here bashing one religion or another, bashing this candidate or that, one group of supporters over another, one political philosphy over another, and even one questioning whether vegetarians are hypocrites. Open debate is one thing, but the smarmy derision of a person or group's belief or values, simply because one holds a different belief or value, is not just counter-productive, it's lamely juvenile.

What is the purpose?
Will it help beat GW in 2004?

The only thing most DUers can agree on is reproductive rights and gay rights--but are those two issues enough to float a national party? Unfortunately, I don't think so.

Republicans have often laughed at us, because we are as easily unified as a herd of deaf cats. They often don't have to try hard at Dem character assasination, because some faction within our own party will do the job for them. Even here, at DU, where the hardcore Dems are supposed to congregate, we find that this stereotype is kept alive and well. "Dems can't get along, they can't agree on a voice, or a message." 10 minutes on DU, and you start to see where that stereotype gets its teeth.

How can we overcome this steretype, reopen up the big tent before the Repukes steal it from us, and come together as a team to solidly kick
some Republican ASS in the next election?

[whoYaCallinAlib]

1. Our hatred of Bush unites us like nothing else ever could.

Don't worry. We'll come together at the right time to get rid of that foul odor coming out of the WH.

[devarsi]

3. I'd like to believe that...

BUT...

We didn't come together as Bush stole the election from Gore (and all of America) and we didn't come together in 2002 to secure Congress from the Repukes.

We show little signs of unity now.

Is GW the unlikely savior of the Dem party?

[Dob Bole]

6. What happens when Bush goes away?

Not that I "hate" Bush now. I don't hate anyone. But DUers at least do seem content to eat each other.

[devarsi]

13. Excellent point

Bush is not forever. You build a relationship on temporary things, you get a temporary relationship.

[JustJoe]

2. Well, you got yer Mahayana

& yer Theravada.
You Buddhists just caint get it together.

[devarsi]

4. Not a Buddhist

just like the avatar. :-)

Actually, I'm more of a neo-vedantist, proto-christian, reformed atheist. I don't think you have an avatar in that bag for me. ;-)

[Blue-Jay]

5. Too much diversity?

No such thing.

Unlike the Republicans/Freepers, we're willing to speak out when we see stupidity in our own political party. We hold them responsible for their actions. We are NOT apologists and sheep. The "rally around the leader at any cost" mindset of our opponents is despicable. Speak your mind and vote your heart.

Diversity, and the acceptance of it, makes us stronger.

[Redleg]

7. Diversity is potentially good but can cause problems.

Diversity without the ability to communicate ideas and to understand differing points of view and objectives will lead to disorganization and greater division.

Diversity combined with the ability to work together and to understand each other will make us very strong and will promote innovative policies and actions within the party.

The bottom line is that diversity by itself is not enough.

[Blue-Jay]

8. I don't disagree.

Diversity isn't the be-all & end-all of our power. It's but one facet. Mark my words; when a Dem candidate wins the nomination, we'll come together and work out our differences later. It's better than the alternative.

I hope I'm not being too optimistic. I don't think so.

[Redleg]

9. I hope you are right- I think we will unite behind the right Dem.

For me it is too soon to tell who that will be.

[whoYaCallinAlib]

11. Nicely put.

I agree with your thesis . . . "diversity makes us stronger". Repukes are more comfortable with their own . . . rich, white and oftentimes racist.

[devarsi]

12. Unity Is Not The Antithesis Of Diversity

And seeing the stupidity in your own party may be considered helpful, or just critical, I guess, depending on how you define stupidity.

Some people, I've noted, define stupid as anything that disagrees with their views.

But please don't get me wrong, I strongly agree with your overall point. Let me clarify my own point. When I question whether Dems have "Too much diversity," I only mean as directly relative to our unity.

Diversity does make us stronger, but only, as you have stated, when that diversity is accepted. What you call acceptance, I call unity.

I think we agree! One small step for Dems... ;-)


On edit - I wanted to "clarify my own point" not my "pointy."

[w4rma]

10. Dems can't have too much diversity as long as we all *respect* one another

Respect and Diversity

IMHO, *respect* for our differences allows us to hold together the many and diverse groups within the Democratic Party. We respectfully agree to disagree on some things (which shows up in the law in our Bill of Rights and civil liberties, most obviously).