The "Far Left" at DU -

[JasonBerry]

Many seem to be complaining that the so-called "moderates" at DU never define "Far-Left." I think that is a very fair question. So, in the spirit of reconciliation, I feel a definition from one moderate is in order. This is my real-world interpretation and I do not pretend to speak for others. I also don't intend for this to be "Flame-Bait". This was locked earlier and it made no sense to lock and probably was an accident, so I have made some minor changes. This is only my opinion, if you don't like it - don't try to keep others from reading it. Tolerance, please. This is for discussion civilly. We CAN disagree without a thread being considered "negative" or at least I would hope so.

In MY opinion:

1. The Far-Left walks in lock-step on most every single issue. Tell me where one stands on one issue and I can tell you where they stand on ALL issues. They tend to follow the "leftist line" and rarely offer observations that are independent in thought and not already thought-police approved.

2. The Far-Left tends to support positions that the mainstream in America consider way out. Examples would be reparations for slavery, support of international leftist governments that espouse democratic ideals but operate in a very Leninist fashion, Single Payer government-run health insurance. You get the idea - lots of things would fit in this category.

3. The Far-Left often uses tactics that are anathema to mainstream America. Extremists on the left AND right are equally guilty on this and is one reason they are considered extremist. Examples of tactics would include interrupting speakers at a public forum by shouting them down, throwing paint that looks like blood, civil disobedience over every issue in which they don't get their way, use of culturally intolerant speech in individual discussion ie: calling the America government "fascist" and saying we live in a "police state".

4. The Far-Left is less committed to political party and less willing to compromise to get things done. They would rather nothing get done and preserve their idealogical purity than see something halfway. The old saying around where I live is a half a loaf will feed a person. Yes, a full loaf would be better, but a half loaf feeds people. Walking away from the compromise leaves no loaves and hungry people. This kind of idealogical purity is a prescription for constant deadlock and - nothing gets done. This extends to purity in candidates. If a traditional liberal differs from the Far-Left agenda they are more willing to walk - which serves no purpose in our current political system except to elect Republicans. Moderates are happy if we finally get to feed someone with the half of loaf even the full loaf would have been preferable.

5. Finally, the Far-Left is shrill. Too often they portray anybody that doesn't see things their way as someone who just hasn't seen the light. Walking in the "darkness". Because of this righteous thinking, there is a tendency to look down on people with whom they disagree and call them "sheeple" and such.

That is my attempt at definition. As you probably noticed, much of it is a definition that defines a mindset and tactics as much as policy.

That's a start. Agree or disagree, I hope I will not receive nothing but flames as I truly have tried to answer a question that has been asked of moderates on this board. I think it is a fair question and I hope you respect what I think is an attempt at a fair answer. You may not agree - but I have given my opinion as to the answer - at least for some of us. At any rate, we can all agree - I hope - that George Bush has got to go in November

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. I had taken a great deal of time to respond to what you REALLY meant

so here it is..copied and pasted as your last thread where you intended no real dialogue either was locked:

Subject: Well if you wanted less than flames perhaps you could examine
your own dismissive language in the matter.

My response to your categorization:

1. The Far-Left walks in lock-step on most every single issue. Tell me where one stands on one issue and I can tell you where they stand on ALL issues. They tend to follow the "leftist line" and rarely offer observations that are independent in thought and not already thought-police approved.

This is nothing more than what a Johns Hopkins manual would call "glittering generalities." YOu have not provided a single example, but rather used af ew dismissive smears to describe people who disagree with you. An adhominem manner of making your point which says more about you than your presumed adversaries.

2. The Far-Left tends to support positions that the mainstream in America consider way out. Examples would be reparations for slavery, support of international leftist governments that espouse democratic ideals but operate in a very Leninist fashion, Single Payer government-run health insurance. You get the idea - lots of things would fit in this category.

Only a few years ago, mainstream America supported reparations for interned Japanese, Nixon was the first advocate that I recall of single payer so again your definition falls short...you get the idea....more cheap shots at generalizing and dismissing ideas you disagree with rather than disagreeing with them on point.

3. The Far-Left often uses tactics that are anathema to mainstream America. Extremists on the left AND right are equally guilty on this and is one reason they are considered extremist. Examples of tactics would include interrupting speakers at a public forum by shouting them down, throwing paint that looks like blood, civil disobedience over every issue in which they don't get their way, use of culturally intolerant speech in individual discussion ie: calling the America government "fascist" and saying we live in a "police state".

Well at least you have distinguished between a far leftist and an extremist even if you don't seem to recognize that you did.
BTW..similar practices are engaged at football games...are sports fans far leftists?

Oh...and kudos to you on your "tolerant" speech...btw did someone send this to you to cut and paste on his behalf? This all sounds a bit too familiar.


4. The Far-Left is less committed to political party and less willing to compromise to get things done. They would rather nothing get done and preserve their idealogical purity than see something halfway. The old saying around where I live is a half a loaf will feed a person. Yes, a full loaf would be better, but a half loaf feeds people. Walking away from the compromise leaves no loaves and hungry people. This kind of idealogical purity is a prescription for constant deadlock and - nothing gets done. This extends to purity in candidates. If a traditional liberal differs from the Far-Left agenda they are more willing to walk - which serves no purpose in our current political system except to elect Republicans. Moderates are happy if we finally get to feed someone with the half of loaf even the full loaf would have been preferable.

Um are you blind? MOderate DEMOCRATS VOTED FOR GEORGE BUSH!!! Kevin Phillips, a Republican, accurately describes this group as the RADICAL MIDDLE...they vote depending on whether there is CREAM in their coffee and are FAR more dangerous than the far left since they are A) unpredictable B) less informed as to actual POLICY matters.

5. Finally, the Far-Left is shrill. Too often they portray anybody that doesn't see things their way as someone who just hasn't seen the light. Walking in the "darkness". Because of this righteous thinking, there is a tendency to look down on people with whom they disagree and call them "sheeple" and such.

The one that smelt it, dealt it


There are issues concerning who is willing to compromise and who isn't. The way we determine who will compromise is via discussion. Discussion occurs when someone is speaking and someone is listening, then they trade places and the other person speaks while the other person listens...if this is the filter through which you process adversarial positions then I would suggest you are no more susceptible to compromise than the far left you have assassinated with your rather humorous post.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

4. Once again, NSMA, you nailed it!

:toast:

[wellstone_democrat]

84. You are and remain my personal heroine

n't

[slinkerwink]

5. bravo!

[JasonBerry]

7. Dismissive with shallow generalities

Which you accuse ME of! Many of you have asked and I gave you a blueprint of thought that makes many think - "far left" I'm sorry if you can't handle it. There's nothing wrong with our disagreeing! Frankly, your post this fits #1 to a 'T'.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

21. Frankly you still haven't responded on point

A great way to dismiss your opponent, but a very poor debate tactic. IF you have something of substance to say, say it, but the intolerance in your post is visible to a blind man.

You have little tolerance for opposing views and must therefore portray those views in a negative light, while not really standing for any views of your own in this post.

BTW, using the majority opinion as a means of backing up your interpretations is also a bit dangerous since at one time in certain regions of the country, the majority view was that black people really were second class citizens...therefore...the fac that the majority may agree with you, does not make the position correct.

[blondeatlast]

26. Many of us would consider "far left" a compliment,. Thanks.

Edit: But that's sooooo shrill...

[JasonBerry]

35. I know that

And there's NOTHING wrong with that! BlondeAtLast, you are crusading against my calling anyone "Far Left" -- that's NOT the issue. People have been asking for what moderates consider "Far Left." I made an honest attempt to answer and all they have done is show how right I was about the tenor of their discourse.

[OhioStateProgressive]

61. how about a blueprint of your ideology

here it is














wait for it.....






















"wrong"

[blondeatlast]

19. Shrill standing ovation, NSMA!!! I'll say it again--wish I'd said that. nt

Edit: added new meme to SL.

[TacticalPeek]

40. Except it was Far Leftist Harry Truman who proposed national health ins.

:)

edit: Being fair, we must credit Tricky Dick for the EPA.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

79. My bad! Got my apparatchiks confused.

Then there was that far leftist FDR who got us into WW2 while staving off fascism through regulatory acts :D


America has just been a sespool of socialism for the past 55 years :D

[Taeger]

95. I DO NOT consider Harry Truman ....

Leftist.


Harry Truman was a level headed fellow who WOULD NOT abide a LOT of the left wing culture issues that we have today. Granted, it WAS a different time.

Also I DO NOT consider universal health insurance to be "leftist" either. In fact, in many ways it's VERY pro-business. Since it alleviates business, big and small, from having to worry about the issue.

[Taeger]

70. Survivor benefits

2. The Far-Left tends to support positions that the mainstream in America consider way out. Examples would be reparations for slavery, support of international leftist governments that espouse democratic ideals but operate in a very Leninist fashion, Single Payer government-run health insurance. You get the idea - lots of things would fit in this category.

Only a few years ago, mainstream America supported reparations for interned Japanese, Nixon was the first advocate that I recall of single payer so again your definition falls short...you get the idea....more cheap shots at generalizing and dismissing ideas you disagree with rather than disagreeing with them on point

Japanese internees and Holocaust survivors have something in common. Both groups have LIVING SURVIVORS!!!!!

Let me ask you a few questions about reparations for slavery.

1) Who should get the reparations. Is it just DESCENDANTS of slaves. Or should the descendants of free black persons be given reparations as well.

2) Will their be a 100% inclusion policy??? That is, if you're only 1/2, 1/16 black, should you get 1/2 or 1/16 the benefit adjusted for the percentage of your slave heritage????

3) Should the individual economic effects of affirmative action be subtracted from reparation payments. Should Snoop-Dog and Colin Powell receive as large a payment as the average inner city dweller from Chicago??

4) If I'm white, but have an American slave as a anscestor, should I get reparations as well depending on my percentage of slave heritage? What if I'm white and have a descendant who was a free black man???

5) If I have an enslaved anscestor who was NOT of African descent (Asian, Native American, White, Latino) should I receive compensation as well??

6) Should my level of compensation be dependent on my generations removed from a slave anscestor. So a CHILD of a slave would receive a 100% payout (probably VERY FEW left).
2: Grandchild - 80%
3: Great Grandchild - 60%
4: etc... - 40%
5: etc... - 20%

7) If I have an indirect family linkage (great, great uncle) should I too receive reparation payments???

8) If I'm descended from a southern white family who's wages were depressed by the slave economy, shouldn't I receive reparation payments as well????


I actually saw "The Barbershop" for the first time last night on cable. I realize why Jesse Jackson was so pissed off (besides Cedric saying "FUCK JESSE JACKSON!!!!"). He was scarred of a black person facing facts and being reasonable about the reparations issue (as well as Rosa Parks (it was a symbolic setup)).


Finally, I thought another "lefty, lefty" characteristics.

Moderates don't dedicate entire university departments to characterizing EVERY socialogical phenomenom to one of the following:
* Sexism (societal dominance of phallac symbols)
* Racism (Cleopatra was black even though she was descended from Ptolemeic (greek) kings)
* Homophobia (anyone who doesn't believe in gay marriage is homophobic)

And finally, anyone who opposes the BILLIONS collectively spent by universities to such questionable lines intellectual vacuousness is either sexist, racist or homophobic.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

102. Well your post on reparations is a cut and paste of Horowitz's

10 questions, except that you forgot a couple.

And yes, you are correct. The right wing does not invest in science unless it is to prosper or pollute. So what.


Racism and sexism are important areas of social science. Were it not for sexism in medicine we would have known a long time ago that at a certain age, women and men are EQUALLY at risk of heart disease...why didn't we know? Simple...it was women....medicine didn't bother to do any long term studies on the matter.

[Cleita]

2. thanks for the right wing talking points.

It so summarizes a piece I am writing about Republican lies and the people who actually believe them. I will refute them when I get a chance and point out the error of your thinking to you.

[Blue-Jay]

3. Decided to try again, did you?

Or am I just being "shrill"?

I find that the right wing trots out the word "shrill" wherever they want to discount a point without addressing it. Much the same way as they use the term "Bush-Basher" when they don't want engage in intelligent debate.

[blondeatlast]

29. I'm shrill, I know.

Sheesh.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

DUPE

[JasonBerry]

9. That is offensive

That post did NOT target anyone in particular. YOUR reply DID - it violated the rules on calling someone a Republican/Freeper/Rush-Lover, etc. Can you not STAND the fact that not ALL Democrats are of the Far Left stripe? What is the problem with honestly laying out what some of us believe? You, do it so very well in many of your posts. And - that should be OKAY!

[Kathy in Cambridge]

24. I'm not far-left by the way

but your posts reveal a deep and disturbing pattern, of which this flame-bait thread is just one example.

[blondeatlast]

34. I most certainly CAN stand it; but your posts seem to indicate

that YOU can't stand the fact that most of us are left-of-left.

BTW, there are several moderates that I respect on the boards, and several far lefties that I don't. The reverse is also true.

Can you say the same?

Edit: So DAMN shrill...

[wellstone_democrat]

108. oops, listen to the master of staying *just*

inside the boundaries of the rules.

I can't say that I know anyone who fits your "far left" description. I was thinking of the one actual Marxist (Socialist? I forget how he labels himself) who is first on every barricade when he believes a barricade needs to be stormed. And, *he* doesn't fit the description. What *does* fit that description is not the occaisional impassioned DUer but what Replicants *think* Democrats (or "leftists") are like because they read and hear it daily.

Oh, and my physician, who is on the Replicant State Committee is a big advocate of single-payer. Why? He believes it will deliver more money to him at less overhead cost. When you think of it, that's a pretty good capitalist position!

[Kathy in Cambridge]

6. Shrill-are you talking about left-of-center WOMEN in particular?

Nice to see you've parroted a lot of right-wing talking points. Rush would be proud.

So much for being a Christian...

[blondeatlast]

37. Shrill ahem. (Raises hand)

I believe so...

Edit: SL fun!

[kayell]

8. Flame Bait 2: The Return

Now playing at a discussion board near you.

[JasonBerry]

14. How very sad

The responses in this thread PROVE that several of my points in the original post are right on target. These replies DEFINE "shrill". Shame on the lack of tolerance here for anything that isn't lock-step Far Left thinking.

[kayell]

33. Darn, and here I thought I was just making a mildly sarcastic remark

on the choice to repost a flame bait thread within minutes (seconds?) of the original being locked by the mods.

See ya later (or maybe not). I have some shrieking I'm behind on.

Ed. Sarcastic, not satirical. Must keep word straight when tired.

[Rex]

115. FWIW

When you have to capitalize certain words to prove your "defense" it makes you look kinda desperate.

Its so...AOLchatroom-ish! :evilgrin:

[Nlighten1]

28. Indeed...

It smells like someone lit a match in here.

[mhr]

10. Hi Jason, Have You Been Spending A Little Too Much Time At Freeperville?

Just Curious?

[JasonBerry]

18. Alert

THIS is a clear violation. It is also VERY offensive.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

27. Don't you think we've all done that to you already?

:shrug:

[Blue-Jay]

30. Alert!

You're a tool.

[blondeatlast]

65. How terribly SHRILL of you...

but then alerts should be, right?

[DrWeird]

52. Alert! Alert!

Persecution complex alert! Call the persecution patrol!

[Sterling]

73. I alerted on the original post.

This thread is so lame. :eyes:

[kayell]

85. I think half the population of DU alerted

poor mods.

[JasonBerry]

86. WHY?

Because I dared to answer a question that many of you begged someone to answer? SHAME on you and your totalitarian thinking.

[Blue-Jay]

92. Look up the word "totalitarian"

I do not think it means what you think it means. (Inigo Montoya)

[AZCat]

98. LOL- "Inconceivable!" n/t

[Blue-Jay]

87. I alerted this whole forum!

OK, not really.

I didn't even alert the original cowardly asshat poster. He ran away on his own, the tool.

[wellstone_democrat]

122. nah, asks where you have been NOT who you are

I'd argue for staying inside that border you hug so faithfully in your posts.

but, thanks for playing. Please, pick up your lovely parting gift on the way out!

[teach1st]

11. Don't confuse civility with political stance

I don't place much stock in the right/left dichotomy, but sometimes those on a far end of a spectrum are correct. Weren't Abolitionists thought to be radical? Now their beliefs are mainstream. Weren't our nation's founders far from centrist?

Sometimes extreme behavior is beneficial to a cause: the Boston Tea Party, for example. But in general, I believe your generalizing is off target. Don't confuse behavior with political stance.

[greatauntoftriplets]

12. I am far left and proud of it.

Do you consider this response "shrill"?

[DuctapeFatwa]

13. I think a more accurate definition would be "opposes the status quo"

If I am not mistaken you are talking about people who oppose the policies themselves, and do not consider a change of anchor talent, even accompanied by very visible cosmetic changes as an acceptable compromise.

And they do tend to be shrill. Especially when most of the voters in the richest country in the world would rather spend a dollar to kill someone else's child than spend a dime to take their own to the doctor.

They tend to have very rigid views on certain issues - like invading other countries to steal their natural resources, and it doesn't seem to matter whether you call it something that does terrific in focus groups. Like "progressive internationalism."

They just keep harping away about dead children.

They refuse to accept that other countries, like women's bodies, are the property of the US government, and that's just the way it is.

Some of the wackier ones will look you straight in the eye and tell you that the life of some dirty illiterate African is worth as much as yours.

[kayell]

22. Excellent definitions for us wild eyed, shrill leftists

Guilty as charged. ;-)

[ret5hd]

44. Thank you, DuctapeFatwa, (and you too NSMA).

Bravo to both of you.

[Darranar]

48. An extremist, shrill, radical leftist here...

and I agree with you totally!

[blondeatlast]

72. Shrill, but true. And very clever to boot. nt

[wellstone_democrat]

125. Best post EVER!

n//t

[Taeger]

15. The FAAARR left

They accuse you of being a homophobe if your against gay marriage but FOR civil unions.

They lambast religious organizations for not being "scientific".

They practice far out rituals as "medicine" with no regard to medical science. They will formulate ELABORATE cocktails of vitamins and herbs and claim they "cure" though they have ZERO scientific evidence.

They latch on to ANY data that would support apocolyptic global warming scenarios WITHOUT vetting it.

They believe that ALL chemicals are bad.

They reject ANY form of alternative energy because IT TOO could potentially kill a few birds or fish (solar (toxic chemicals are used to manufacture), wind (some birds will inevitably get caught in the blades), hydro-electric (salmon ladders are just NEVER enough) ).

They believe that eating meat is evil (despite humans having teeth MEANT for eating meat).

ANY form of social activity is allowed EXCEPT the ones they personally don't approve of. Those ones (like smoking) should be banned.


I don't think these folks are "liberals". True liberals are libertarians. They believe in the absence of restraint. In my book, the lefty-lefts and righty-rights are basically the SAME thing. They both believed they are well intentioned and 100% infallibly RIGHT!!!!!!

[Taeger]

25. Oh, and I forgot !!!

They are 100% against their children independently getting invasive surgeries like breast augmentation, nose jobs, or face lifts. But they are 100% FOR their children getting abortions without parental consent.

[Sterling]

46. Most far lefties I know think stereotypes are for

The weak of mind. What do you think?

[lastknowngood]

16. Perhaps the "Far Left" have realized something you seem to

miss. Compromise is what has destroyed the Democratic party every election since 1992. We have lost every election by compromising with the right wing thugs who have destroyed our country. No MORE compromise we need to stand and fight if we lose at least we stood for something and provided a choice. The"Moderate" wing of the democratic party i.e. the DLC are nothing but moderate repugs looking for a home. Until this party stands for the issues it was founded on it will always lose, if you don't want to stand up against the rethughlicans and shout them down then you will compromise us out of all of our freedoms.

[JasonBerry]

32. Look at any poll

Your comment "The"Moderate" wing of the democratic party i.e. the DLC are nothing but moderate repugs looking for a home" is so totally wrong. You fail to see that mainstream Democrats agree with ME - not you. Mainstream Democrats dislike the shrill tone of "I'M right about this goddamnit and if you don't see that then you are a %#$#@##&^%&*&)*(&$&#$#&%$%&. Mainstream Democrats think like I DO. All polls show they are MODERATE people - NOT Republicans in disguise.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

38. I AM a mainstream Democrat, and I DON'T agree with you

your debate tactics are faulty. you haven't addressed one point that Teena brought up. When are you going to start using facts and links, or are you going to constantly rely on the goodwill of your fellow DUers putting up with your bullshit?

Such narrowmindedness-I hope you're under 20.

[Blue-Jay]

41. Look at any poll

and you'll see GWB trailing. DU has NEVER been the voice of the DNC, if you hadn't noticed. We're not "moderate" for the sake of making friends with the conservatives. We speak our minds, tool, without fear of losing the support of the wishy-washy. That's the beauty of this place. Don't like it? Sod off.

[blondeatlast]

75. Very shrill!

Clapclapclap...

[lastknowngood]

Well if were not right then why the hell are we thinking at all? Am I

supposed to assume that just because a few bluedog democrats answer a repug stacked poll that the democratic party now supports the elimination of civil rights the Constitution the bill of rights and that corporate criminals are heroes? Sorry but I've been a democrat too long to fall for that crap. Polls do not a democracy make we call them sheeple because they watch the boob tube and believe as Homer Simpson dose that if they see it on TV it must be true.

[Taeger]

82. Compromise means accepting PROGRESS

If you get SOME progress, you should ACCEPT the deal. If you're NOT GETTING progress, you should REJECT the deal.

The ONLY progress that Democrats really got in the 90s is access to the corporate treasuries and the seeming ability to stay in office. Democrats lost their way because they felt they NEEDED all those corporate riches to run campaigns.

The Republicans will ALWAYS have more money because they represent cynical interests.

Compromising DOES NOT mean becoming what you loathe. It means accepting deals that get you PART of what you want.

[lastknowngood]

128. If you get the part of what you want at the price of your soul

your making a bad deal. That is what the DLC/DNC have been doing and that is why they have no principles to stand on or ideas to stand behind. They just want to remain in power even if that means becoming the enemy of their constituents.

[Taeger]

110. Don't confuse a moderate with a SELLOUT

They aren't the same thing.

[wellstone_democrat]

130. Ah, another DLC careerist heard from!

BTW, why do those of you "moderates" who post RW tripe also chose not to have even the most modest "profile" on the record with DU?

[KG]

17. your simplistic generalities are amusing.

but, the far lefties are here, and we ain't going away, so just deal with it.

[Taeger]

123. I didn't ASK you to go away!!!!

I'm perfectly happy. I'm not even sure who is a "lefty, lefty" and who isn't. I'm really not trying to label ANYONE but rather a phenomenon.

My general beef is a REFUSAL to see any viewpoint beyond your own.

Oh yeah, and I do get pretty sick of being called homophobic because I think a marriage is between a man and a woman.

[Blue-Jay]

20. Let me re-word:

That is my attempt at bullshit. As you probably noticed, much of it is a definition that has been told to me by Rush Limbaugh.

That's a start. Agree or disagree, I hope I will not receive nothing (sic) but flames as I truly have tried to infiltrate in the guise of playing devil's advocate. I think it is a stupid question and I hope you respect what I think is an attempt at a fool those smarter than myself. You may not agree - but I have given somone else's opinion as to the answer - at least for the Dittoheads. At any rate, we can all agree - I hope - that George Bush has got to go in November (blatant pandering)

[gate of the sun]

23. Wow! you are a hoot!

Can you give us all your definitions of the other "fars" as well?

like "far-moderate" or "far-right-liberal" and so on...

it is entertaining, but much more lounge or meeting room material.

further, it is not a definition or an attempt at one as much as it is a comparison of your own thoughts and ideals in relationship to what you percieve as "far-left".

Happy flame-baiting!

[not systems]

far-right liberals and far-right progressives agree...

down with the far left and their shrill anti-war, pro-gay marriage
anti-coup knee-jerk Leninism.

:wtf:

[Taeger]

129. Two great threats to the world!!!

1) People who believe in WAR at ANY cost.

2) People who believe in PEACE AT ANY COST!!!!!

[flaminbats]

31. Am I farleft....

or am I just not lockstep enough for u?? :tinfoilhat:

[trumad]

36. Hey Jason

Aren't you the guy who spouted a bunch of right wing crap when you first joined DU a year or so ago, and then er claimed that your computer was hacked and it wasn't you who posted it? Help me out DU'ers...is this the same dude?

[Mandate My Ass]

39. That's the one

But then again you'd be taking the word of a shrill far-left fringe feminazi if you believe me. Consider the source.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

55. You mean you're one of those anti-Christian, pro-choice lefties?

:o


I bet you don't believe in Creationism either!

;-)

[Mandate My Ass]

88. Not only that

but I eat tofu while marhcing in lockstep with my Leninist hippie atheist alternative-lifestyle-supporting friends.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

Shrill far-left fringe feminazis RULE!

:)

[Mandate My Ass]

97. Hell yeah, sister

Only I wouldn't fuck the DLC with JB's dick. :P

[Kathy in Cambridge]

42. Hmmm...I'll have to check the archives

maybe it was his evil twin...or, could it be, SATAN????

[trumad]

59. Nah..that was someone else...

But here's a thread that I was talking about...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/cgi-bin/duforum/duboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=9643&forum=DCForumID70&archive=yes

post 186 but look at who started the damn thing...

[DrWeird]

107. Ah, but look at the number of posts.

That's quite a coincidence. At look who sticks up and defends JacobG's statements, the one that the "hacker" made.

[JasonBerry]

60. NOOOOOO --!!! Absolutely NOT! n/t

[onecitizen]

90. I love that picture of the...........

Johns. I think I may love them as much as I love WJ Clinton.

[Darranar]

43. If that's your definition, I don't think the "far left" exists...

I:

• Am against American imperialism;
  
• Believe there is too little of a difference between the Dems and Repubs;
  
• Support universal, single-payer healthcare for all;
  
• Believe the Iraq war was for oil;
  
• Believe that all three cases of Bush regime change were wrong (Afghanistan, Iraq, Haiti)
  
• Believe that war is almost always the wrong path to pursue;
  
• Am against the current structure of global trade;
  
• Read Noam Chomsky and agree with many of his analyses of US foreign policy;
  
• Believe that pure capitalism is devestating;
  
• Believe that every living human being is entitled to food, water, and health care, no matter what;
  
• Support several "international leftist governments" that are despised by the media and the US government;
  
• Support an eventual world government run by an international Parliament.
  

However, I:

• Support ABB;
  
• Support the removal of brutal dictators as long as it is done peacefully and in accordance with the wishes of the population;
  
• Believe that pure socialism isn't a sustainable economic policy;
  
• Am not convinced of LIHOP, MIHOP, and other such conspiracy theories;
  
• Do not believe that the major Middle Eastern terrorist organizations are at this time supported by the US.
  

So, apparentally, I agree with some of what you would label as "radical left" but disagree with many radical leftists. What am I?

No group of people are exactly the same in their political views.

[welshTerrier2]

45. oh, where to begin

well, you asked so nicely not to get flamed that i thought i would oblige you ...

1. The Far-Left walks in lock-step
i consider myself far left ... i do not believe capitalism and democracy can co-exist ... but guess what, i support balanced budgets because i think they are the only sane fiscal policy ... do you think everyone on the far left supports balanced budgets?? i doubt it ...

2. The Far-Left tends to support positions that the mainstream in America consider way out.
hence the term "far" ... far in this context means "not mainstream" ... so your point is valid only by definition ...

3. The Far-Left often uses tactics that are anathema to mainstream America.
well, i just joined the democratic party in my town to try to wake them up a little ... i marched against the war in Iraq ... the courts have already overturned parts of the Patriot Act ... perhaps we do indeed live in a police state ... i am not destructive ... i do not throw paint ... and civil disobedience? i respect those who are willing to take a non-violent personal risk to fight for something they believe in ... you have something against Gandhi ??

4. The Far-Left is less committed to political party and less willing to compromise to get things done.
i believe our capitalistic greed will eventually cause our system to fail ... any system that values corporate profits and investment capital more than it values the blood, sweat and tears of workers is doomed to failure ... having said that, I will strongly support the democratic nominee ... bush is corrupt and evil ... we have to get him out before we seek ideological purity ...

5. Finally, the Far-Left is shrill.
Have I been shrill ??

your post is very alienating and ill informed ... you seem to think it acceptable to stereotype people who identify with the far left ... if you seek respect for your opinions, perhaps you should be more respectful of those with whom you do not agree ...

[BillZBubb]

47. Thanks for the laugh!

The irony (or hypocrisy) in your post was delightful.
Your post is negative in every sense of the word. How you could not see that is baffling.

I consider myself very far left yet I will support the eventual Democratic nominee. Am I shrill? Am I not committed to compromise? Am I helping the Republicans?

There is probably not another person in DU that agrees with me on every issue. So much for the lock step conformity of the far left.

And what's so Leninist about single payer health care? If it's voted for by the congress and signed into law, how is that Leninist? Geez, talk about shrill.

[jonnyblitz]

66. hell i supported Dean and I am far left and he is hardly that

so much for lock step with no compromise.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[Blue-Jay]

56. Nice try.

Run away when you're faced with adversity, without making a single relevant point. No loss.

[JasonBerry]

64. Like I have to listen

to nothing but attacks on me PERSONALLY? That's bullshit and I think YOU know it.

[Blue-Jay]

101. Fine.

Back up ONE point that you C&P'd from somewhere else, and I'll listen.

Go ahead.

[blondeatlast]

112. Who is attacking your personality? Your ravings are all that's

been attacked here.

As for your per--oops, mustn't be SHRILL!

[blondeatlast]

116. He NEVER runs away--he promised in another thread, but, alas...

he SHRILLY returned.

[ret5hd]

57. Goodnight...dry your tears and try again tomorrow.

[Kathy in Cambridge]

62. Taking your ball and going home

Boo-Fucking-Hoo.

[blondeatlast]

119. If only...mark my SHRILL words. nt

[DrWeird]

63. Ah! A Yoosta Bee!

Where's that Raid?

[Darranar]

67. Er...

don't you think calling people "shrill", "extremist", and "conformist" (the last one paraphrased) is a tad bit rude?

If you don't want flames, don't flame people. Or is it another shrill, radical left thought that when you anger people, they will respond angrily?

[JanMichael]

Your initial post was boorish. Boo f'ing hoo if'n you caught crap.

<sob>

[kayell]

69. ROFLMAOPMP

...and damn, now I've got hiccups too.

[KG]

71. what did you really expect?

you have the nerve to do some major stereotyping, and get mad when people object to it? please.

[blondeatlast]

100. I got no beef with you disagreeing--be my guest.

But parroting right wing talking points, then getting angry and nasty with us becuase we DARE to question them is just, well...

SHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILLSHRILL!

[MurikanDemocrat]

105. I've been flamed for use of the terms far left and fringe left but I don't

support your definition AT ALL.

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

117. What are you talking about?

I responded in a civilized manner and on point. :shrug:

[saltpoint]

50. Ramsey Clark is among the left-most minds --

-- of the last several decades.

I would not describe Ramsey Clark as "shrill."

[OhioStateProgressive]

51. you are correct in your assertion, we are correct in our actions

I guess pissing us off enough to vote for Nader once isn't enough

[jonnyblitz]

53. the center of politics has moved so far to the right

I guess I would be considered far left by your standards. But we fringies arent the only ones who are shrill..thats for sure.

[BradCKY]

54. I agree 100%

unfortunately the far left and I have parted so severely that I most definitely feel in my own political catagory, ABB 04!

[JasonBerry]

80. Remember?

Remember what I told you in another thread? This Far Left crowd has NO ROOM for any thinking other than their own. Step out of line on anything and they attack you personally. It's a goddamn shame and makes me sad for the future as my guess is that most of these are coming from young people. They can call it "boo hooing" -- I call it knowing when to fight, and when to go home and leave the children to scream at you as you leave. It's a bunch of crap. Your avatar alone will have a lot of these people spitting in your face. The sad thing? I truly was trying to give them what they have been repeatedly asking someone to do! "Someone please post what "Far Left" means to you!" They were angry that nobody had. Well, look what happens when someone tries. Many of the these people are as bad a Freepers - intolerant and tyrannical. Welcome, again, to DU. It's a beautiful day in the neighborhood as the Leftist Mafia has proved several of my points above - in this one thread alone.

[jonnyblitz]

91. but you never acknowledged any of the points in the posts

that challenged your stereotypes. bounced right off of you.

[BradCKY]

99. Believe me I saw it

The tactics of the far left and far right are scarily simlilar.

[blondeatlast]

126. Name one SHRILLdamned personal attack!

I SHRILLY DARE YOU!

I make damn sure when I'm POed that I frame my words very carefully to follow the rules. I attack only the message, per the SHRILL rules.

Edit: THESE people?

[einniv]

58. I think your perception is pretty far off

Message:
#1 Yeah sure you can say that about any group correct? If you define it narrowly enough. Some of your mis-statements and misunderstandings later show that you are an unlikely candidate to determine how the far left should categorized.

#2 I don't support reparations for slavery. (oops. there goes the lockstep theory)
I do not support Lenninist or any form of Communism (the mislabeled "socialism" of the former Soviet Union). However I do have some understanding for the challenges facing someone like Hugo Chavez. I think most of the folks that complain about his methods are overlooking the obvious question : who benefits . Often the leader himself is present in the answer, however, people that see this also seldom see that his potential replacements are the same or much worse. So the question arises "who benefits". Under these leftists leaders things DO improve for these poor folk.
I think it is really a tough situation in these central/south/latin american countries and the answers ceratinly aren't easy.
But what supporters of rule by terrorist coups never seem to want to acknowdlege is that the people that take over make things worse! Worse for the masses of the poverty stricken in these coutnries (which is usually a very large portion of the society.
Is that a bad thing? Are we in lockstep on this issue? I would image not in total agreement but yes that is one area that defines "the left" and I am damn proud of it.

Single Payer government-run health insurance: Supported by a large majority of the public before Clinton and Dole had their debate on which way to hand it over to the insurance companies. That's right. That isn't lefty at all. It is mainstream. (you may want to check out side of the US to see how more modern progressive democracies view these ideas)

#3 I'm not really a tactics expert. Some of those ideas I agree with others not.
BTW, Do you think change ever comes any other way? Rarely . Extremely rarely.
If you don't like it then I tell ya what. Tell your wife she is no longer allowed to vote or work. Tells blacks to get back in the back of the bus. Etc etc etc etc
I would suggest Howard Zinn's People's History if you would like to educate yourself about the history of people's movements and how they are responsible for most of the liberties you enjoy today.
Gte back in the coal mines for 16 hours a day if you don't like civil disobediance.


#4 There is nothing wrong with compromise. That is how democracy works. I would like to see more democracy. We know from mathematical study , post-1789 that a plurality system is the absolute worst one for including and representing a diverse set of needs and points of views.
Am I really supposed to feel "silly" because I think it is absurd to lump the needs of 300 million people into 2 groups?
Let's update our election methods for one. Proportional representative, approval voting and pairwise counting systems.
This stuff isn;t radical. This is solid mathematics.
The reason it is "fringe" is because there are two very powerful forces that would be hurt by updating our democracy and making it look more like modern democracies in Europe.
Yes. We on the left are LESS inclined to walk lockstep with a party.
Hmm funny. Did you even notice you had completely contradicted yourself? LOL
Makes ya wonder.

[BradCKY]

74. Look we have ran farther left candidates

McGovern 72
Mondale 84
Dukakis 88

Then Clinton came along and we WON maybe that should send a message to us?

[Sterling]

118. Clinton

what a let down that whole thing turned out to be. You are probably not interested but if you were motivated to you could researdh and learn that the Clinton strategy has cost us dearly in the long run. Without him and the DLC Bush would not be possible.

[einniv]

120. That a plurality system tends to create bland hard to distinguish

positions (the present fascist administration excluded)?

I totally agree. Thus Ralph Nader (whom I dislike btw because I feel he talks the talk but in his own organizations doesn't walk the walk)

So what is your point? That a leftists voice and perspective is not valuable? That it is therefore ok to have a system that excludes such voices?

Seems like you are grasping at straws. The merits of left , right and center have been debated here ad nauseum. But that wasn't what I was talking about was it?

A plurality system is the worst system for representing a diverse set of opinions.

I'm voting for Kerry, don't worry. There IS a difference between the bland business class and fascists.

It is up to Kerry and the party in general whether I stay or for the first time go in search of another party.

You don't want my voice. That is fine I can remove it for you after the election.

[asthmaticeog]

68. You want civil discussion?

Teach by example, then.

"...rarely offer observations that are independent in thought and not already thought-police approved."

How very civil to paint those with whom you disagree as automata. And not at all shrill.

Here's an independent thought that I came up with all by myself, independently: you're the first person ever I'm using the "ignore" function on, troll.

[JasonBerry]

104. Troll?

I gave an answer to a question. I answered it honestly with what many moderates think of the Far Left. I'm sorry I did now as it has shown me how DU has gone to the children.

[Q]

131. You come here and spit in our face...

...with your bullshit RWing/DLC rhetoric and you expected...what? Gratitude?

- We're tired of your insults...and feigned indignation. You obviously have no interest in debating...just name-calling.

[Q]

76. You make 'far-left' sound like a dirty word...

...and frankly that pisses me off.

- The 'far-left' you seem to hate is the very heart and soul of the Democratic party. We're the ones that fought for the rights you now take for granted...and seem to want to give away in the name of political expediency.

- There's nothing left to 'compromise'. The cowardly leadership and the DLC has already given everything away...including our right to redress grievances and protest. You can take your compromise and moderation and start a new party. You can call it Republican-Lite.

[BradCKY]

81. The far left

Makes moderates out to be VILLIANS, we are all out to get rid of Bush, maybe someday we can unite. I don't agree with everything the DLC has done, I just agree with their ideals.

[Q]

93. Nah...this thread makes liberals/progressives out to be villians...

...or didn't you notice?

- Are you tag-teaming with the 'moderate' author of this thread?

[Sterling]

124. What are those ideals?

I am curious what you think they are.

[Sterling]

77. delete

delete

[MurikanDemocrat]

78. As someone who has used the terms far left and fringe left

and consider myself left of center, I can see why your first attempt probably got locked. While I have been frustrated with a vocal minority among the far left, I don't think it is fair to paint them all with a broad brush.

This is a pretty scathing and hostile definition you have written. Certainly not one I would subscribe to.

[JasonBerry]

113. I said

It was what I THOUGHT OF when someone says "Far Left" - I SAID I wasn't speaking for anyone else.

Sheesh.

THIS - is unbelievable. I am shocked at the anger and childish name calling. This place is a political kindergarten at times.

[Blue-Jay]

83. <sigh> Fish in a barrel.

When will they make it difficult, or at least interesting?

The RW asshole talking points are easily shot down. The views of real conservatives are often valid, whether you agree or disagree with those views.

[neoteric lefty]

89. lets see how long this lasts

before the big ol' padlock.

Jason, if you are a true DLC democrat (which I have to assume you are, I have no evidence to the contrary) then I think you went about this all wrong. Maybe it was your terminology. Many people here use far-left to characterize themselves here at DU so saying "The Far-Left is this and that" is not going to bode well for those people. And your generalizations are rather crude. No group of people is "all this or all that". If you have specific observations and instances then let us know. But generalizations are bad for everyone. I personally don't agree with you but I do feel that there are extremes on both sides that we have to be wary of.

edit spelling

[trumad]

106. Oh please...it's Jason..LOL

He just hasn't learned that talking points from the right of center simply don't fly around here... He's tried it before and has been shot down...He serves a purpose here on DU I guess...

[neoteric lefty]

132. sorry`

i dont know Jason. I'm just a newborn...errr.... newbie. Whatever his background, he definately angered alot of you guys.

[Wonk]

94. kick ;-)

;-)

[Lars39]

114. Times like these.....

I miss Carlos! :evilgrin:

[ParanoidPat]

96. Who cares what YOU think!

That's MY opinion! :evilgrin: Far left? BWAAHAHAHAHAHA!

[KoKo]

103. I used to be a "centrist Southern Democrat. Since Bush, I've become Left

bordering on Socialist, but had a huge problem with "Janet's Boob" for which I've been ignored on DU....because to be a Democrat you need to ignore the implications of female issues involved with "white male ripping off Janet's top to expose "studded nipple" and I was trashed that Janet's boob was a "mother's breast" and how could I be taken seriously that I think the media is into trash, porn and perversion.

But, here on DU, I would be in what you call the "Left Wing." I'm really a "Populist Democrat" whose seen my "worker's rights, fair wage for fair jobs, and monetary and social equity for all Americans TRASHED in the last 40 years.....but I was always a "moderate/centrist/anti US War/VietNam type" Dem.

I've been called recently on DU a "Feminazi!" Now I'm a "Leftist" to you!

ROFL.......how the labels change according to "circumstance."

Be Careful. The one you call "Left" today....might be tomorrow's Centrist or Lieberman/Miller Dem .....tomorrow! How would would know?

Big Tent here.....and when we get out of the rings...who knows what we are? ;-)

[Plaid Adder]

109. Single-payer health care system=Leninist?

Wow. Who knew.

You know, where the far left is depend on how far to the right you're standing, dude.

C ya,

The Plaid Adder

[kiahzero]

111. Pop quiz

"Tell me where one stands on one issue and I can tell you where they stand on ALL issues."

I am for equal freedom to marry.

Tell me my positions on:

Iraq War
Kosovo
NAFTA
Energy Independance
School of the Americas
No Child Left Behind
USA PATRIOT Act
Freedom of speech
Single-payer healthcare
Prison reform

[Disturbed]

121. Flamebaiter

"rarely offer observations that are independent in thought and not already thought-police approved."

I consider this person to be one that invites flaming and then acts the victim. He flames others but says he isn't doing so.

Green Pary member.

[cmayer]

127. As a moderate, I think you're off the mark.

And I think it is your own idiosyncratic analysis. Perhaps some moderates would agree with you, but I don't think it speaks in any way to a "moderate" viewpoint.

I have to go with nothingshocksmeanymore on most of it. I don't think that's left, right or center--just accurate.

[Moderator]

133. Locking.

Flamebait.