DU has always had divisions and it always will

[cali]

Perhaps I should say that for as long as I've been here there have been divisions here.

No, it isn't an accurate reflection of the real world. If you start to believe that than you're living in a bubble. The vast majority of voters aren't even close to being as obsessed by politics and current events as the denizens of DU.

DU goes through cycles. A dem president has changed the dynamic to a certain degree, but think back to last November and the months leading up to election day; pretty united.

I believe that to some degree there's a dynamic here re President Obama that involves people who are more supportive of the President getting their backs up about the criticism directed at him. That leads to increased defensiveness which in turn leads to more criticism. Both sides leap overboard.


We can argue passionately and sometimes angrily, but that's always been true.

We're still a community. At least I think we are. We still have more in common philosophically than that which separates us.

[cascadiance]

1. I think that it is a combination of those feeling left out as the "fringe left"...

... now being a big part of the group that is being accused of siding with the libertarians and the right, when many of the things that are being done in our name that largely are a lot that we don't agree with are showing themselves to fail, opening up the party to more attacks by the right (a lot of which ARE ludicrous).

It is hard to separate ourselves from the ridiculous attacks by the right led by the criminal Issa, and yet still have room to criticize some very big failures that are following in the footsteps of the very things we were up in arms about when Bush did the same things when he was in charge (intelligence agencies activities, etc., more prosecutions of whistleblowers by far than banksters, etc.). And its hard not to react personally when many of us are lumped in with the right and our criticisms of what we've been yelling about for decades that the corporate elements of both parties are doing is being ignored still. Yes, many of us ARE getting angry, and feel justified at feeling that way.

And part of me wants to hold back on that anger, as I think some of the issues facing us (fixing Citizen United damage, fixing the fourth amendment, getting corruption out of government with public financing and IRV, etc., etc.) will involve us appealing o many on both sides of the aisle which seems impossible at times now. This isn't about lining up with others against Obama... It is about being heard and having others take seriously the need for big changes, which mostly those that haven't been tried are what we've been advocating for decades now.

[cali]

4. And those of a more moderate persuasion feel left out

I too find it frustrating to see things that I believe, under bush or another repub, would garner near total condemnation, defended here. It's frustrating to feel that one's positions are being twisted.

I agree that on some vital issues we need to unite or our common goals will perish on the vine.

[longship]

2. I despise the name calling. The ad hominem.

These things make DU suck.

When I post an OP here -- rare -- I expect anybody disagreeing to defend their position with facts, not personal attacks.

I serve on a lot of juries here because I spend an inordinate amount of time on DU. But I have taken the position for some time now that I will vote to hide any personal attack.

There's too damned much chair throwing going on here now. I would hope that the OPer would join me in agreeing that personal attacks and ad hominem arguments have no place here.

The NSA issue seemingly has brought some of our disagreements to a head. I am very sad to see people who respond to reasoned argument with personal attacks.

So I say, Alert on them. If I am a jurist I will invariably vote to hide. It's time to put a stopper on this rubbish.

Argue your position, not the person. Use facts!

[DonCoquixote]

6. personal attacks

One thing I have seen is that people from all sides run over the Terms of Service as if it was a roadblock. I know that the censors and netcops here have their "false equivalence" stamp ready to go, but the truth is, I have seen all sides make personal attacks, even though the TOS says no. I always alert, always judge in juries, and invariably, the ones that had the nastiest, meanest attacks are the ones that get a "Hell yeah!" aka the anonymous "leave it"without comments.

[longship]

9. Maybe the admins ought to remind people about the TOS.

But some here thrive on the chair throwing arguments. I think it is time to rope those people in.

One of the regular, prolific posters here has several stalkers who inevitably chime in on all this poster's threads. I don't always agree with this DUer's position, but it is always presented with references -- for which the DUer has also been criticized for. How dare you provide references!!!

I fear for our party when dialog descends to this level, of petty name calling and silly, ignorant ad hominem attacks.

My advise. Argue your position, damnit! Leave personalities out of it! Pretend like the poster's ID is anonymous. Then you will do less wrong here. And DU will be a better place.

[DonCoquixote]

13. ah yes

The ones where "Blue links"are considered in and of themselves an act of lying. As if to provide information about why you think the way you do is thoughtcrime in and of itself.

[longship]

18. Yup! That's what I was about.

I don't always agree with DUers, but I will defend their right to post here and present their position -- subject to the TOS -- as long as it is presented without personal attacks, or ad hominem.

When one argues against the person instead of against the person's position, one has already lost.

I wish more DUers realized this.

[chimpymustgo]

28. IMO too many people are alerting to OPPOSE AN OPINION - warping opposition into a "personal attack."

Perhaps DU'ers should get a limited number of alerts per day or week. Like challenges in tennis, or reviews in football.

[B Calm]

10. Hell I had a poster wanting to argue with me for me saying British accent instead of Scottish.

Last time I checked, Scotland is part of the British empire.

[longship]

11. Never make that argument to a Scot, Laddie.

Just joking.

But that is the kind of petty rubbish which has been going on here.

Often when I disagree with a post, I do it with a wink. That I understand the position but respectfully -- always important -- disagree. Too many here jump into the discussion with fully armed nuclear weapons.

We are all Democrats here. Isn't that enough common ground? Apparently not.

[davidpdx]

20. You are one of the few who vote to hide personal attacks

I totally agree with you, but from what I've seen a very low percentage are hidden. Maybe you can go back through the last 20 or so juries and tell us what the percentage is. I'm just curious.

[longship]

23. I don't know how to do that.

I delete every DU jury mail after I read it.

But my somewhat aged foggy memory seems to recall that personal attack alerts are being upheld more recently.

Don't know if this helps. Probably not. But I hope this were true. I wish the admins would remind DUers of their obligations here to keep discussion respectful.

[davidpdx]

25. Well if you deleted them then that would make it hard

Maybe you could save the next 20. You said you are on juries a lot, maybe you can give us a count later.

I agree with you about reminding people, but it won't do a lick of good.

[1awake]

24. I have been on a couple as well

and I would only vote to hide if it was a personal attack. Even if I strenuously believe it is false, made up or a lie lol... I still would not hide it. Still, I hear people complaining that specific posts weren't hidden by vote when half the time, it wasn't a personal attack but a post they just didn't like.

[longship]

27. Well, people on jury duty need to understand the TOS.

It's like the judge's instructions. This is the law. This is the test under the law with which you must decide.

I think the admins should remind all DU jurists of their obligations to uphold the TOS and put personal opinions aside. That's what juries are supposed to do.

That is what I have decided I will do. It has worked out fairly well. I am rarely in the minority when I vote to hide. Likewise when I vote to not hide. That alone gives me hope. I only wish that people would alert more on these personal attacks. I do so when I see them.

[AverageJoe90]

3. Very true.

For example, with climate change, you've got climate rationalists vs. climate doomers. Those who believe that ACC is a problem but understand that solutions DO exist and that they CAN be applied, versus those who insist that it's too late, that humanity is doomed, civilization is bound to collapse, climate change is bound to run away, yadda yadda.

In '08, we had Hillary supporters versus Obama supporters......And in '10, we had those who blamed the centrists and Obama's failures for the Teabagger sweep, and those who blamed a lack of progressive turnout.....and so on and so forth.

[DissidentVoice]

5. I want to support and elect Democrats

I just want them to be DEMOCRATS, and not the kind of "me too-Republican-Lite" we've been given since the late '80s.

[iamthebandfanman]

7. i disagree

and want to know who paid you to be a government or right wing plant :p

*giggle*

[LuvNewcastle]

8. People need to stop taking the flame bait.

There are some regular posters here who tend to harp on a single subject or a narrow field of subjects and they write their posts in the most provocative way they can. People need to stop feeding these trolls. If you know of someone like that, stay out of their threads. Let the people who agree with them talk among themselves and save your thoughts and energy for the interesting and thought-provoking posts. These flame-fests accomplish nothing but giving satisfaction to the trolls who start them.

[JNelson6563]

12. Some put a lot of effort into it!

Between causing division and posting as much fatalistic crap as possible there is a guarantee DU will be a dark and stormy place with less and less value to had in reading it.

I'd like to thank you for all your hard work on both counts! Well done! And love the "Oh but it's always been this way...." bullshit. Don't sell yours and the efforts of other short my modest friend! Your tireless efforts have helped to take us to division and beyond!



Julie--who can't wait to read the next installment of "all is lost, just kill yourself now!1!" in the ongoing DU series.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. as long as I have been here it has been. Granted when George W. Bush was President there was a very

strong common enemy. When his administration did something terrible - very few if anyone would defend it. But other than that - there has always been quite a bit of contention. Increasing and decreasing with certain events such as primary election campaigns.

[KrazyinKS]

15. It's the nature of the beast

I think it is just the nature of liberals, we are more independent minded. I personally think we are more prone to analyze a situation critically. If you look at the stories the tea party types swallow, you can see they simply lack the ability to think independently. We are simply not a group that automatically steps in line, that's what makes this site so dynamic and keeps it interesting. It's what keeps us coming back.

[CakeGrrl]

16. But your very premise is skewed

in your fourth paragraph by claiming that the people who are generally more supportive of the President are the cause of tension because they get their "backs up" about criticism of the President.

I disagree. What contributes to the tension is increasing use of terms meant to insult the members of this community themselves, and it can be found in abundance:

Apologists
Cheerleaders
Obamabots and the lame variants
Blind followers (who need to protect their illusion of the President)
...and so on

You can almost pick a GD thread at random these days and find those terms being used freely.

And the response? The smug "If it walks like a duck..."

Some threads are created just so people can indulge in a group bash session.

So it's dishonest to imply that if the President's supporters could only be less defensive, it'd be all good. You only give cover to a lot of negative, inflammatory behavior by doing so.

[davidpdx]

22. You forgot paid chills

Most of the time that one is used it's either not challenged or the jury votes not to hide it.

[JoePhilly]

29. Left out Authoritarian, DCLer, 3rd way-er ...

"Good German" ...

All perfectly fine.

[cali]

34. there is just as much of that going in the other direction

and anyone who can't see that is hopelessly biased.

hopelessly.

[liberal N proud]

17. Divisions among the group are good to a point

I agree there have long been divisions on this board, and that is good. It is required as balance, it gives us all an opportunity to bounce our own ideals and opinions around. Sometimes those divisions provide the proper insight for someone to realize they need to rethink things and sometimes, it reaffirms our positions.

What I have been observing on this board in the recent months goes far beyond divisions to the point where there are groups of users who are targeting other users who do not toe their line. We have had trolls (if you like that term) and others who's purpose is to post false information or are obviously not part of the Democratic leaning philosophy, but now I see post that make me think we have been invaded by something rather undemocratic.

If we just get back to the point where only facts are presented or evidence to back up our positions as it once was and uphold that expectation, we would bring the whole environment of DU back to where it once was.

Just the facts, just the facts!

[DonCoquixote]

19. The ugly truth

The right is made up of many people that, if they had their way, would hang most of their comrades from trees, but they share a base hatred of the process of thinking, which keeps them from blowing away from each other. We, on the other hand, have the opposite issue, we are made of many groups that, if they had their way, would send everyone else to Gulags, but, since we emphasize thought, the pressure to blast apart is stronger.

I mean, Capitalists vs. Socialists vs Communists, Hillary Lovers versus Hillary haters, many of us found ourselves lumped into "Democrat" or "Liberal" because we had no other port in the storm. Now of course, we have had the illusion of winning because we have the Senate and WH. An illusion is what it was, as we realize that now, and as MannyGoldstein joked, what unites us now is that we are all more immune to the illusions, and demand something more solid than the props that have been hanging on the wall long after they needed to be torn down, props like Reid and Pelosi who still act supine to the GOP.

I do not despair, because frankly, it does not matter if we hate each other, any more than it matters to a bunch of cave dwellers trying not to freeze to death in a Blizzard. Americans tend to think they determine their identity, that they are the Captain of their souls, when often, circumstances define who we are, as the circumstances are turning to the point where will cannot help but work together against the fascist and the plutocrat. The issue is not if we will win, we have the numbers, it is whether or not we can stop the process by which we snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

[geckosfeet]

21. "A dem president has changed the dynamic to a certain degree" - I would say a lot

Not that that is a bad thing, but things have changed. And people change too. I know I have had some life altering events that caused me to change position on some issues. The new positions are not necessarily aligned with the DU norm, or even the Democratic parties norm, but I am still solidly liberal.

Arguing is ok - passionate controlled discussion may be more positive but some people come off as hotheads when it comes to keyboard command. People speak/write and act online in ways they NEVER would face to face - at least I think and hope that is the case...

Community? Sure. A wider and broader one. And it seems it is getting younger as well. I think some farther left and farther right people have joined in and that makes for a wider level of acceptance and tolerance. (Unless they are trolling disrupters...)

But yes - having a dem president has absolutely changed the dynamic. Those buSh, chaiNey and r0ve years were dark indeed.

[joshcryer]

26. When Hillary is the nominee there will be a purge unlike anything.

It will be hilarious. So many blowouts.

[HereSince1628]

30. I would agree support for dem politicians/celebrities is often where chisels & wedges get inserted

Which is probably why there has been a need to create the various subgroups during primary years.

Contemporary American politics is divisive and oppositional. Little seems gained by discussion and reinforcement of social or political philosophies/principles.

The real personal satisfaction of participation is found in the "US" vs "THEM" confrontations. That orientation of discussion may not require but frequently does break out into periodic brawls.

[last1standing]

31. Nothing has changed since 2001 other than the place has gotten bigger.

In the early days there was more of a community feel because there were so few of us. But there were still trolls and hotheads who lived to create problems then as there are now.

I wonder how many remember the Cuban_Liberal fiaso? That was entertainment for weeks with one clique trying to get him banned and another working to save him/them. I never did see proof of the assertions made but the account was eventually tombstoned and I did get to see some pretty hot pics of him lifting weights. LOL

tl;dr: The more things change the more they stay the same.

[brer cat]

32. Good points, cali.

Both from reading posts and serving on a lot of juries, I would add that perception plays a big role in the animosity here. Often posters take umbrage (and may alert) when snark or name calling is directed against the position they hold, but consider it witty repartee when it supports their position. I get frustrated as a juror when there is suddenly an alert after dozens of name-calling posts were ignored. I guess it is just human nature, but I do wish we could take a moment before posting to consider whether we are respecting the feelings of others. We are all entitled to express our opinion without receiving ridicule in return.

One of the great values of discussion on DU is education...learning about different points of view can be very instructive in forming ones decision. For example, as a white, female, senior member of society I may need to hear the perspective from a black 20-something male in order to fully understand the implications of a particular issue, and vice versa. If either of us is reacting with snark then the opportunity to actually learn something is lost.

[RitchieRich]

33. Saw a thread that referred to previous DU sites

Did whole new DU sites get started for similar reasons?

Is there a mechanism to call a Constitutional Convention for DU?

[bluedeathray]

35. Heated, spirited exchange of ideas? (and sometimes insults?)

I regularly learn something new. Or get exposed to a new viewpoint or perspective.

It's why I'm here!

[geek tragedy]

36. Different issues produce different schisms.

On the NSA, a lot of pro-gun conservadems who believe in limited government are on the 'progressive' side whereas on the gun safety/Trayvon Martin side they were on the 'third way sellout' side.

[dawg]

37. There's no time left for being civil.

If we allow journalism to become a crime, it's game over for democracy.

If we allow the government to classify any and every piece of information they find embarrassing, then we no longer have a representative form of government. We may still vote, but we will be denied the necessary information needed to make an informed choice.

With all the metadata for every citizen compiled on government servers, any individual journalist can be tracked and all his contacts traced.

You had better watch what you say. Watch what you do.

Watch who you associate yourself with.

Does this effect us all on a personal level? Not immediately. I promise you the NSA doesn't give a damn who I call or who calls me.

But my access to information about what my government is up to is already being seriously curtailed.