What is the Value of Defeatism?

[bryant69]

Besides blowing off steam. I was pretty defeatist last night, I will admit, but it's another day and I feel more hopeful. I can see being defeatist as a way of blowing off steam - probably not the best way to do it, but definately not the worst either.

I guess defeatism can be good for blowing off steam - but I am not sure what other value it has - if you are sure that things are fucked up beyond repair, what value is there in convincing others who are trying to fix things that things are fucked up beyond repair? I mean what do you get out of it? Why is it a good thing to spread defeatism?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[ProfessorGAC]

1. Being Down, And Being Defeatist Aren't The Same Thing

I agree with your sentiment. I think simply throwing up the arms and surrendering is the antithesis of what DU is about. I'm certainly not pleased with the results of the vote. I'm certainly not happy about what the bill means.

But, i will NOT surrender and admit defeat.

The Professor

By The Way: This legislation will not pass muster with the SCOTUS. Not this current one. Not with any SCOTUS. There are privileges and powers granted to the executive in direct contradiction with the letter and spirit of the constitution. The Repubs pushed this bill as an election year ploy, KNOWING it would never really be the law of the land. Cynical electioneering, is what it is.

[The Magistrate]

7. Hear Hear, Professor!

[MrCoffee]

I respectfully dissent.

This abomination will not make it to the Supreme Court. It cannot. I've been desperately trying to come up with a potential plaintiff with standing to sue, and I can't think of a single one. Congress effectively removed detainees from the jurisdiction of the court.

[ProfessorGAC]

10. See My Reply To You In Another Thread

There are groups who are representing folks ALREADY who can be directly impacted by this new law. So, per my perusal of Mann & Roberts, i think they do have standing.
The Professor

[kentuck]

9. How do you know it will not pass muster with this Supreme Court?

how do you know it will even get to the Supreme Court. This is no time for optimism. I will not admit defeat but I am not optimistic.

[ProfessorGAC]

12. Because. . .

. . .the court is full of strict constuctionists and the LETTER of the constitution is contradicted by this legislation. Congress does NOT have the authority to grant the executive the privilege of subverting the judicial process. The exec can't do it and congress is not granted the authority to let the exec.

Even with the lapdogs on the SCOTUS, they still have egos and concern over their own legacy.
The Professor

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

13. This Supreme Court Won't Hear It....

There will be a different bench in place by the time this arrives. And we continue to pray for the liberal/moderates still left on the bench.

Ooops, sorry, I wasn't being an optimist. Go Team!

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

2. What Is Benefit Of UNBRIDLED OPTIMISM?

That's the same SHIT we get every single day from this "administration." Think about it, has there been ANYTHING which has been a mistake? Is there ANYTHING that could potentially go wrong in the future because of their actions? Is everything going to WONDERFUL & PERFECT FOREVER, according to this admin's LIES?

Yet here, when it's more of the some, those of us who are SCARED SHITLESS, get criticized for being negative.

WELL, GIVE ME SOMETHING TO FEEL GOOD ABOUT GOD DAMNIT. And until the Dems win shit in November, I have a right to think that we're FUCKED UP BEYOND ALL RECOGNITION!!

I may be negative and pessimistic, but that's because I see the light. Sure, you can be La De Da and think real hard that the light coming down the track is harmless. Of course, if it turns out to be a freight train, I guess you won't have to be despondent too long after finding out you were mistaken.

[BlooInBloo]

4. Yah - *that's* the only possible alternative....

Geniuses DUers are - absolute geniuses.

[seabeyond]

5. who the fuck is optimistic about this administration. the POINT

of op is getting this administration out and being defeatist does nothing to obtain that goal

[bryant69]

6. La de da

But of course not even the most optomistic among us think that there's nothing to worry about with the Bush Administration.

When I am talking about defeatism I am talking about people who say that the Democrats are losers who won't win in november and even if they did it wouldn't change a thing, and this country is already over, and we should all just give up on the politica process and either start a revolution or flee the scene.

Bryant

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

11. Question: Does It Ever Reach That Point?

Is there EVER a point where you say it's truly over?

Am I wrong for thinking that point is closer than ever?

I guess I think of it as "tinfoil," but What If? Unless you consider it outside the rhelm of possibility that we're on the verge of reaching no return.

Think back 6 years. Did you EVER think we'd get to this point? Did you think we would be here a month ago, pre-torture bill BS?

Was Charlie Brown persistent in trying to kick Lucy's ball, or should he have tried something new in his approach?

YES, until Dems and those with control(media, etc.) work WITH US, and not against us, we're pretty well Fucked.

What I'm saying is They're Not Part Of The Solution, They're Part Of The Problem. QUIT BEING PART OF THE PROBLEM.

[bryant69]

14. OK, see this is defeatism. This is simply "Give the fuck up"

Because you aren't making any suggestions on what to do next - I give up on the Media, give up on the Democrats, and give up on the system, then what do I do? Go home and make tacos?

Bryant

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

16. I Just Don't Know

I agree with you completely. There is no benefit to defeatism or negativity.

I just think there is reality and there is possibility. When reality is FIXED and RIGGED, it eliminates the possibility.

If the game is FIXED, no amount of persistence in the world is going to make a difference.

What if that's the reality? I may be completely off base, and I really don't enjoy being pessimistic, but the pattern is more than troubling, don't ya think?

If reality were reality, we would be winning something. ANYTHING. Don't ya think? Doesn't it look like the game is rigged beyond recognition at this point?

[pooja]

3. We all were down last night. I broke out the wine and pizza.

But today is another day, and the fight is on.

[PATRICK]

8. The vertigo of self-fulfilling defeatism

The real Richard III, the one eternally defamed by Shakespeare and the Tudors, once he knew he had been betrayed and the battle lost, nonetheless did not ask for a horse but took his axe and waded into his enemies in a long-shot bid that one of the clone dressages might actually be his clever rival.

If he had known how long history would bury even that last act would he have shivered and plead for "a horse, a horse"?

You know by the face of the person when they believe they have lost. Few are very good actors. Words betray them, old cliches of desperation always abound. The next stage of panic and rout further adds to the "victory" with small circles of the brave or the true believers(or the just plain bravely obstinate) making their last stand.

The wisdom of the Red Queen in Looking Glass world. Yes, you almost have to be mad to look at all the foreseeable consequences, the likelihoods, take ALL the pain and then go on in perfect peace and once the crisis is reached treat it with equanimity. Our false expectations or betrayed hopes are a fantasy barrier to true effort. Once the point of illusion is crushed by a reality test humans cut and run as a general rule. So who is more mad?

Everything, even for an optimist, was laid out starkly in 2000. Nothing has changed except the popular perception is growing of what reality is. The only ones holding in large numbers to incredible fantasy are Bush supporters. Humbler and more widespread myth still quakes in the majority popular soul. Those who harbored hopes for something better despite consistent evidence and dashing of those hopes are ironically as prone to break and run as the deluded RW and the tricked somnolent public? I think not.
Because you have the ramparts of truth itself to rally around and its momentum, in seeming retreat or defeat is on our side. OUR side.

The "joke" is that humanity's real crisis is not political. Politics only determines how humanity will face its natural test. This is a mere skirmish to test our soul for what is to come.

[The2ndWheel]

15. It depends on how it's being fixed

Trying to change the system from the inside? Attempting to force fairness into a system that was built on the exact opposite? Nobody ever actually changes anything, the problem just gets moved around.

For example, poverty. If a middle class is needed for a democracy, than by definition that means there must be a lower class. If poverty must exist for there to be a middle class, is poverty simply something to rally around for votes come election time? Hey, we have a great plan to get rid of poverty by 2030. Everyone in poverty until then, screw you, but vote for me.

[OrangeCountyDemocrat]

18. Re: Poverty

If you imagine a bell curve, a true symbionic economic system would certainly have a percentage at the low end, and in poverty. However, that amount would be offset by a fair balance on the high end. Which right now, obviously doesn't exist. Although you would neve know it from the LIES coming out of the media SPIN.

If the wealthy were just "wealthy," instead of "OBSCENELY WEALTHY BEYOND BELIEF!!" then there would be poverty, but it would not be getting worse and worse, and more of the middle class would not be falling into poverty to offset the OBSCENELY WEALTHY which are INCREASING their $$$$$$$$$$$$$ with each passing day.

The larger the "middle class," the lower the # of people in poverty. But that is a fair approach, one which has higher taxes on wealthy, lower on the poor. VERY different than what's in place post-Clinton.

[The2ndWheel]

19. True, it has to balance out

But unless you create one class(which would be fairly difficult to do), there will still be poverty. In a global economic system where we want a global middle class, there will still be global poverty.

And I agree, I don't like being so cynical and defeatist all the time. However, I agree that agriculture creates class, and we'll never get rid of the problem(because it would kill billions), and we'll go from more poverty to less, back to more, back to less, in a never ending mind-numbing cycle because everyone wants more. The poor will be taken advantage of by being swung back and forth, and we'll have the same wealth accummulation problems decade after decade, as power never stops trying to centralize and consolidate.

[Sean138666]

17. It's not so much the defeat-ism. It's the defeat.

Just like in boxing, defeats happen. And like any defeat, it can and will be avenged.

(I've been watching "The Contender". And with all this other stuff going on, I'm in a bit of a fighting mood).