Question Authority.

[asdjrocky]

I grew up with this value. I learned early not to trust what I was being told simply because some guy in a suit said it on TV, or some cop said it or some politician said it.

My questions, do you still hold this value, like I do, to be true? Dose it matter who is in authority? Do you stop questioning once you've won an election?

[damntexdem]

1. Yeah, how do I get a job with the Question Authority?

I'd love a job where I get to decide who is certified to ask questions and who is not.

;-)

[asdjrocky]

2. LOL!

I think the MSM has that job now.

[Whisp]

54. I want one too, Can you put a word in for me?

:)
because ultimately I want to become the authority that is questioned!

[Ignis]

3. I count that value as one of my parents' greatest gifts to me.

:toast:

[hyphenate]

4. Oh, yes, indeed!

I was going to look for the old bumper sticker when I got the van on the road again. My mom made me look at some of the authoritarian mindset with an eye toward disagreeing with their stance on most things. Yup. I can't remember a time when we were ever able to accept a statement at face value--we looked at statements as potentially wrong until they could be proven to be true.

Old fashioned, "down home" Yankee/Maritimer common sense.

[asdjrocky]

5. My Dad called it the Oakie mind set.

Okay, my Dad never used the word mind set in his life, he just called it, looking at things like an oakie.

His eyes would squint a bit, that's when I knew he was questioning authority in his own way.

Two bumper stickers of my youth- Question Authority, and Skateboarding in NOT a Crime.

[immoderate]

10. I was taught to question everything.

I had a habit from early on of thinking about what the consequences would be if the opposite were true. Sometimes, you have to apply it gently.

--imm

[Greyhound]

6. Always. n/t

:kick: & R

[OnyxCollie]

7. "If men were angels,

no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary." --James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 51

Never stop questioning authority.

[Whisp]

55. would that apply to forums as well?

I mean we have to start somewhere. We can't always start at the top questioning the big guy in the big chair.

you have to start smaller and practice.

What have you done today to question Skinner?

;)

[OnyxCollie]

57. Are you asking me to call out an administrator?

That would be inappropriate.

I did ask him how we are to move the country in the same general direction when we couldn't even agree on the definition of constructive criticism.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=8673473&mesg_id=8676607

[Whisp]

59. interesting response. ;)

[Whisp]

60. I am asking you no such thing.

But what I do see is that challenging authority that may be a bit risky (like giving up your membership here) is quite different than challenging authorities that have no such consequences.

So what are you actually risking to challenge the authority of the President and his policies? You can speak pretty freely here (especially of late) against the administration without any risk.

I hope you see what I'm getting at.

[OnyxCollie]

67. How do you know there is no risk?

Why should I believe the government is not monitoring political forums?

The Pittsburgh Anti-terrorism Task Force monitored anti-war protestors; I would be foolish to believe they (the government) aren't monitoring political forums as well.

As for consequences, that depends on the risk assessment, doesn't it? Read what had been proposed in 2007, The Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h110-1955

[Whisp]

73. Do you think there's a higher risk from government tracking

as to what you say here,
or do you think if you challenged the authority of the person than runs this website would get your odds a bit higher that you might have to pay for your challenge?

All I'm saying is it's great to challenge authority, it's a must. But there is a confusion as to what it really means. If it means suffering personally in some way, most people shy away from that. Would you challenge your boss on something knowing that you could risk your job and the support you give your family?

Now let's think about ways to truly challenge the administration besides just copying and pasting in a politics forum (and highly highly unlikely you will get nabbed by Agent Mike for this unless you get into the obvious no no's) and yelling and showing disgust (not directed at you, just generally) but doing nothing much more than that.

You could get involved in local politics. Challenge the democrats in place to do a better job. You might even want to run yourself. But politics gets nasty and there is a chance you make some enemies along the way, and that your family might hear some lies about you... etc. Plus there is the time factor, can you work full time if you do now plus take on another job?

It is too easy for (most of, the majority of?) us here to just pretend we are doing anything truly challenging - we're just hear to blow off steam for the most part.

[OnyxCollie]

79. I blew the whistle on reckless and unethical behavior

and it cost me my job. I could have been content to eat the $2,000 dollars in lost wages; I would have still had a job with benefits, vacation, sick days, etc. But instead I chose to question authority, and when my boss boasted about what he had done, I could have kept it to myself.

But that's not me. I stood up for myself and everyone else.

I did what I had to do, and when my boss got called on it, he lied his ass off. After that, I was dead man walking.

The asshole who screwed me over, as well as everyone else that worked there, would have been satisfied with the punishment he enacted. Sure, it went beyond his intended targets, but it's not like anyone was going to do something about it, right? Scare people enough, have them worry about what they will lose, and they can be manipulated, real easy like.

Those who hadn't quit and stayed on were treated progressively worse. When I last spoke to my coworkers, they told me how miserable they were. That's the choice they made.

There is a loud minority here who are afraid. Afraid of losing what scraps they have while they are being abused and neglected. Afraid to question authority and deal with the consequences. Willing to eat shit while their abusers laugh.

But that's not me. How 'bout you?

[Karenina]

8. Does anyone remember ?W?

:rofl:

[asdjrocky]

9. Yes.

What does that have to do with anything?

[Karenina]

21. Only that any and all attempts to question him and his administration

were smacked down, to the extent that things like t-shirts at malls, comments at the gym or mentioning burning bushes at bars were met with Darth Vader force. I would conjecture that Obama is in many ways captive to the "authority" that has been cemented in place; entrenched for at least a century.

But a better tack is, WHO is the "authority?" Who should be questioned? And about what? Have Americans surrounded the Supreme Court with torches and pitchforks about Citizens United handing corporate entities UNLIMITED FINANCIAL POWER to influence elections? Has the issue of the VOTING MACHINES been addressed? Carly vs Barbara neck in neck, indeed. Are Californians REALLY THAT STUPID? (Don't answer that. ;-) ) Have Fox News offices been picketed? Has their bullshit been removed from any of the public spaces into which it is blasted? Is Rush still on AFN?

To ask the right question, one needs the capacity which is no longer taught in American schools; the ability to THINK CRITICALLY. What "authority" are we talking about? ;-)

[asdjrocky]

22. They didn't shut me down.

They didn't shut down Code Pink, or Cindy Sheehan, or many, many others.

I really don't understand your logic, it seems when there is an effort to shut down descent, then the efforts at descent need to be doubled.

[Karenina]

27. Do you NOT recall the reactions to Cindy and Medea on this very board?

Would you start a thread here about Cindy's contributions to the struggle today?

We are not in ANY DISAGREEMENT, asdj. DISSENT is an integral part of democracy.
What I find distressing is the pathetic inability of Americans to ascertain WHO'S REALLY FUCKING THEM OVER.

Which brings me back to my original point. WHAT "AUTHORITY" NEEDS TO BE QUESTIONED?

[asdjrocky]

30. I think I answered you.

All authority needs to be questioned. It's a pretty simple philosophy.

[Karenina]

49. Nichts ist so einfach!

And NEVER read Nietzsche before noon. (I offer that advice from experience).

First we must discuss what "authority" really is and WHO we believe has it. This scatter shot American jingoism needs a bit more focus to harness the TREMENDOUS power 'We the People' possess. My heart wants to believe in our "exceptionalism" and ability to do so, although my intellect prompted the decision to get-the-hell-outta-Dodge over a decade ago, as I was curious about the totem pole in other realms and chased out by my Jazz Foremothers who told me in NO UNCERTAIN TERMS to "Go East, Young Girl." They had authority.

I, like DFW, am a thoroughly Europeanized Ami. Your response was a bit dismissive, my intent is to engage you in discourse, if you feel that might be interesting or informative or fun.

Tante K.

[Usrename]

52. I'll play. This is something that I have been troubling over.

You mention Citizens United and it's a perfect example. Having said "Money talks! It's the Law!" the courts are overturning our constitutional prohibition against bribery, which is exactly what they express in their majority opinion. But aren't they pretty much alone in their view here.

In other words, there exists no visible political force that stands in support of the ruling. None that I can see. Who was/is Citizens United anyhow? And yet it is law. How do you think that happens?

OTOH, the ACLU and the AFL-CIO, together with the entire civilized world and all legal and political scholars do not agree that Citizens United was a just decision. They have all been extemely vocal about it. And yet it is law. How do you think that happens?

The stupid people who actually support the decision are few and far between and virtually silent on the issue, and yet they dominate the realpolitik. How? That's all I'm asking. If you know, tell us.

[Karenina]

63. How indeed! THAT is precisely the question!

I'll tell you honestly, Usrename, I was depressed for weeks after that decision came down, feeling as though it was the final death rattle of any remaining vestige of the American people's authority. Today, Authority = Ma$$ive amount$ of $$$. We see it in the Gulf, again in the "debate" over Net Neutrality and in the connexion between SB 1070 and the private prison industry.

That ruling, the "horse race" media plus the voting machines do not bode well for the Mid-terms. HOW is it that private companies now OWN YOUR VOTE? I COULD NOT COMPREHEND how NO ONE could stop that March,(or was it May) 2006 DEADLINE to install those stinking machines EVERYWHERE. The Chaos Chess Club stopped that shit right in its tracks over on this side of the pond. "The consent of the governed" is a quaint idea when your "consent" isn't stinking needed. Today, Authority = Ma$$ive amount$ of $$$. (IIRC, that was courtesy of the Ahmanson boy. Bonus: He's a Christian Reconstructionist who answers to a "higher authority" shall we say.

You surely remember back in the day where the line "Spot the lie, follow the money" was frequently seen on this board.

This is why slogans like "Question Authority" are useless. Are we talking about questioning or CHALLENGING? The Tea Party is whole hog into CHALLENGING authority without questioning whose money informs them.

If there MUST be a slogan, rather than QA, perhaps Actively Challenge the Authority of Money? :shrug:

It's SO FAR GONE, I have no idea how to go about that. The "Move Your Money" campaign gave me a glimmer of hope but that ember has since been extinguished...

I dunno, talk me down.

[Usrename]

65. It may be much simpler.

I think Gingrich was one of them at the spearhead of a group that decided take over the courts. They have been fairly successful to this point. Bush v. Gore was my "Aha!" moment, and the Roberts court is decidedly worse than the Rehnquist court was, even though that seems unimaginable since Rehnquist himself personally oversaw a perjury trial of a president where the presidents actual spoken words were never even included in the charging document. But back to the current situation.

Since court appointees are in for life under good behavior, it seems as though there is very little that anyone (including Obama) can do to change the composition of the court. But I'm not sure that is really true. The key here is the good behavior standard.

There is a current member of this court who could very easily be thrown out, if anyone had the inclination to go after him politically. He actually had an overnight slumber party with a defendant in a case that was before him and then he refused to comply with federal law when he was asked to recuse himself by the American press. You probably know who I'm talking about, but most people have no idea that this ever even happened. I believe we can thank the American media for that.

This should be the single issue where any and all discussion of political reform should begin.

I think this is where authority lies. It lies with a judge in the highest court in the land (world?) having a sleepover with a defendant in a case that is before him and then thumbing his nose at the people when they demand that he recuse himself from ruling in the case.

Let the discussion begin there, and let's see who sides with whom.

Isn't this exactly how politics should work and isn't this exactly the issue that should be debated front and center? Let his supporters stand up for him, but force them to do it in an impeachment hearing.

But I also wonder if even this approach would be "off the table" for the many realists here who see a downside in presenting any form of resistance to our descent into tyranny and fascism?

[Karenina]

68. Under whose "authority" could such a process begin?

And HOW in this current climate? There is no solidarity among the people that leads to effective action anymore, unless you're talking elites or knuckle-draggers.

There have been so many missed opportunities. What MIGHT have been done when Symbolman was hanging out here, I no longer believe is possible. The way to stop business as usual is to throw a figurative monkey wrench into it. (People KNOW how to do that on this side of the pond. ;-) ) How different would things be today had Americans taken back their media? How is it that NO ATTEMPT to get Americans to surround those broadcast trucks, studios and offices and STOP the business as usual succeeded?

[L0oniX]

11. Blind obedience to authority is the enemy of the truth. - Albert Einstein

[Silent3]

12. Especially when authority says any different than what you want to hear.

Questioning authority is a great idea. It's what everyone should do.

Quite often, however, the only question asked is a rhetorical and sarcastic, "Oh, really?" if whatever authority is being questioned comes back with an answer that doesn't suite one's predefined notions of the way the world works.

For the right, if "authority" says the planet is getting hotter and human consumption of fossil fuels is responsible, there's really no true questioning, just outright dismissal of any such "authority" as part of a vast liberal conspiracy.

I'd like to think people on the left do less of this. I've seen a study or two (from some "authorities" of some sort) indicating this is true to some extent. To what extent? Enough time on DU and I get the impression that it's maybe about 10% less, if we're lucky.

[IndianaGreen]

13. Never trust those that lied to you

How many people lied about Iraq having WMD? How many newspapers and PACs joined in the drumbeat of war? Why should we trust in them again?

[Silent3]

14. Who are "those"?

The specific authors of specific articles? The specific media outlets those LIES (not misunderstandings, not possibly honestly held but erroneous opinions, all definitely LIES!!11!!!!) appeared in? All "main stream" media for all time?

That isn't a formula for wise, truly questioning consumption of media. It's a formula for conveniently believing whatever you want to hear, and dismissing as untrustworthy whatever you don't want to hear.

[asdjrocky]

15. I think it's a way of looking beyond propaganda to find truth.

But I am glad you are questioning me, though I'm in no way an authority.

[IndianaGreen]

17. During the lead up to the IWR, I learned to trust in the foreign press

I had to read the British newspapers to find out what was really going on in my own country.

[Silent3]

28. Do you believe it when the American press reports...

...that this summer so far is the warmest on record, and tells you about big ice sheets breaking off from Greenland?

[IndianaGreen]

29. The American press was late in picking up the story on climate change related disasters

BBC has been quite good at it.

[Silent3]

33. The point is blanket dismissal doesn't work, however.

I'm sure the British press isn't entirely perfect on all stories either.

As best you can, you have to consider the merits of a particular story, look at multiple sources, and think a lot deeper than if there is some "THEM" you can or cannot trust.

[villager]

16. It is kind of an "Underground" value, yes?

Or at least, it used to be.

[LanternWaste]

18. Why authority specifically?

Why authority specifically? It seems to me that if a person is naturally suspicious or cynical, they'd question everyone, regardless of position of authority, income level, education, etc...

"I learned early not to trust what I was being told simply because some guy in a suit said it on TV, or some cop said it or some politician said it." Or a bum, or a housewife, or a store clerk, or a librarian, or a student, or a friend, or a family member, etc... :shrug:

[asdjrocky]

20. I've learned through experience who to trust and who not to trust.

The MSM has always lied, or at least allowed lies to grow. Authority means someone in power.

Isn't that obvious? A 'bum' or a housewife (love that word, docha know) or a store clerk has no authority over me.

[EFerrari]

31. Because authority asks you to substitute its judgment for your own. n/t

[walldude]

32. BIngo...

Truth is for me I really don't trust anyone till they earn it. But I am more likely to trust someone with no visible agenda than I am a "cop, or a guy in a suit, or a politician who wants something from you.

[asdjrocky]

34. You always say it right.

Tell the truth, you live on a mountain top somewhere, don't you?

[EFerrari]

61. I'd do fine in a fortune cookie factory!

lol

:hi:

[asdjrocky]

71. Oh you totally would.

Then we'd just need someone to sit around an make up lottery numbers. Wait! I think I finnally found my calling!

26-5-19-39-3-16 Right off the top of my head!

[Ignis]

35. Those in positions of power deserve extra scrutiny.

I'm confused why you think that is not obvious. :shrug: It's part of the social contract.

[Individualist]

19. I certainly do.

[TheKentuckian]

23. Question everything, authority most of all

[Lydia Leftcoast]

24. Knowledge is your best defense against authority

Question, but question on the basis of KNOWLEDGE, not on the basis of what some other authority told you (which is what right-wingers do).

Question authority and question conventional wisdom. Every time I have questioned conventional wisdom ("You should marry that nice boy. He'll be a good provider." "You should study something more practical." "You can't go to Japan by yourself." "Self-employment is too insecure." "You really ought to buy a house, because they always increase in value.") I have come out ahead.

[asdjrocky]

26. Very good points all. nt

[havocmom]

37. Yep. Get knowledge and SHARE knowledge

My ol momma used to say 'If somebody is trying to keep things that have impact on other people secret, it's because they are ashamed of what they are doing.'

In 2010 speak, she might put it: If there is great effort at message control, beware those who try to do the controlling; they are NOT your friends and they do NOT work in your interests.

edited for typo in subject line

[havocmom]

39. And pappy used to say never trust someone who tries to be everyone's friend

[closeupready]

25. Always.

+1000 "Says who?" "How do we know that?" "Is that true?"

[bvar22]

36. Who are you?...And WHY are you posting this?

.
.
.
.
.

[asdjrocky]

38. I am the omnipresent voice of authority.

You have passed the test and you are now free to move onto the next, and higher realm of understanding.:)

Too funny dude!

[quinnox]

40. Odd that I don't see any of the ardent Obama supporters in this thread

Hmmmm....I wonder why.

[havocmom]

42. call me paranoid,

but it seems likely they are paying close attention.

[havocmom]

41. As relevant today as in the 60s

Maybe even more relevant.

[laughingliberal]

43. K & R nt

[ibegurpard]

44. you better believe it

why do you think they want to hand public schools over to the corporations?

[amborin]

45. always good practice

[Zorra]

46. How insolent! You should be shot for that!

And you probably would be if we didn't question authority.

Thanks. I was going to post the same idea in a reply to a post on a different thread, but decided against it.

Maybe that post is what prompted you to post the OP?

[asdjrocky]

48. I'd like to say yes, but sometimes I just wake up with words in my head.

Of course, I'm a big fan of cannabis, so my attention often wanders, so you could have easily inspired this without me realizing.

[hobbit709]

47. One of the two buttons I wear when I vote

The other says "I am an enemy of the state"

[havocmom]

50. kicking it for the thinkers on the evening shift

:kick:

[bigwillq]

51. K and R!

:bounce:
Agree, agree, agree

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

53. Why?

*think about it* :)

[Subdivisions]

56. I absolutely question authority. Especially when I helped put

them in their postition of authority.

ESPECIALLY, especially.

[Steely_Dan]

58. I'd Question Myself...

...but I'm no authority.

-PLA

[Goldstein1984]

62. Yes

Sometimes I wonder how much money I'd have in the bank now if I were just a good citizen who pledged allegiance to the flag, stood during the National Anthem, bowed my head during public prayer, and stayed away from banned books.

[voteearlyvoteoften]

64. A family value since the 60's

No war!

[femrap]

66. This trait I was born with.....

BTW, this attribute is now classified as 'ODD'...Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Pretty un-fucking-believable, huh?

You get diagnosed with that in high school and I guess it will follow you forever.

I've been fired at least twice for questioning authority. And what is funny, I turned out to be right. And both companies went belly-up! Karma at work.

[asdjrocky]

72. I find that amazing.

I had no idea my personality had been deemed a disorder. Oppositional Defiance Disorder. Can I get SSI disability for that?

I too have been fired for this, more than twice and I've also quit some jobs in epic fashion.

[femrap]

74. I wish we could get

SSI for this. Hell, people with cancer can't even get SSI.

I wish I knew a place where ODD people were an asset. But today, everyone wants 'yes men.' BTW, have you watched any of The Yes Men movies? So damn funny!

[asdjrocky]

75. Love the Yes Men!

One of the funniest things I've ever seen was the survival suit.

[femrap]

77. I agree....

the Yes Men make me laugh at ultimate levels....they have a great 'job.'

[lpbk2713]

69. That's the most valuable lesson I learned 65 - 69.

I served in the military during four years of the "Vietnam Era" under a number of assholes who were my superiors simply because they had ROTC in college or some other stroke of luck that served them well. It didn't take long for me to realize that I was highly expendible in their eyes and that they would do whatever was needed to keep their worthless asses out of harm's way and to make them look good in the eyes of their superiors. Ever since that time you can believe I question any decision made by those above me whom I don't know enough about to not take their with a degree of skepticism.

[LWolf]

70. I grew up with it, too. It's hardwired into my system, and can't be removed.

My boys grew up this way, as well. It's part of what makes me like them so much as men, outside of the unconditional mother-love that grips me so fiercely.

One of the side benefits? They keep me honest. While they love, me, they don't hesitate to hold up a mirror when I need it.

[ProgressIn2008]

76. Not only true, but crucial. How else is power held accountable?

I don't give a rat's posterior who is in power. If you don't speak truth to them, what's the point?

On edit: I have noticed that no matter who is in power, they are annoyed when the peasants talk back to 'em. Bonus.

[snooper2]

78. I learned truthy to power! as well....

Until that transmission dropped on my chest at 14 when doing my first solo change :rofl: , 1978 Pontiac with a 305pos and a 350 turbo :)