Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
sibelian
sibelian's Journal
sibelian's Journal
June 8, 2013
... distrust them and their motives.
The term is a movable feast.
It is used by whichever agency employs it to mean whatever said agency wants it to mean so long as the appropriate emotional charge is applied to the subject of the sentence in which it is used. It isn't a descriptor, it's tone device.
It is not an invitation to discuss or consider, it is not a term that explains or clarifies, it is an invitation (when not a covert instruction) to react emotionally to the individual/s to whom the term is applied.
Some years ago on DU, the vast majority of posters here seemed to know this. ("TERRA, TERRA, TERRA!!!"
. There are now a large number of extremely confused people here who seem genuinely to believe that the term has some value beyond simple propaganda.
It is disheartening.
If anyone EVER uses the word "terrorist" in any kind of communication with you
... distrust them and their motives.
The term is a movable feast.
It is used by whichever agency employs it to mean whatever said agency wants it to mean so long as the appropriate emotional charge is applied to the subject of the sentence in which it is used. It isn't a descriptor, it's tone device.
It is not an invitation to discuss or consider, it is not a term that explains or clarifies, it is an invitation (when not a covert instruction) to react emotionally to the individual/s to whom the term is applied.
Some years ago on DU, the vast majority of posters here seemed to know this. ("TERRA, TERRA, TERRA!!!"
. There are now a large number of extremely confused people here who seem genuinely to believe that the term has some value beyond simple propaganda.
It is disheartening.
June 5, 2013
I was in a relationship with an ex-prostitute.
He had also been a heroin addict.
He had lots to say about heroin and very little to say about prostitution other than how often guys came to him and paid for him to just sit and listen to them talk about their lives and how awful they felt, which pissed him off.
He didn't particularly regret doing it. He was much more cut up about the heroin.
He got out of both and eventually moved to the UK and managed to get a job and a steady life. This would very probably never have happened if he had ever been arrested for heroin addiction or prostitution.
I do not know whether this can be considered "symmetrical" with the experience of women as prostitutes. I suspect not.
June 5, 2013
Descriptions of him and arguments regarding how we should "perceive" him are of even less consequence and serve only to obfuscate and misdirect, to re-prioritise and designify.
Any conversation about Wikileaks that bends mysteriously towards the personal qualities of Bradley Manning does so to the continued benefit of those wishing to perpetuate the ignorance of what he brought to light and no-one else.
Bradley Manning is not as consequential as what he revealed.
Descriptions of him and arguments regarding how we should "perceive" him are of even less consequence and serve only to obfuscate and misdirect, to re-prioritise and designify.
Any conversation about Wikileaks that bends mysteriously towards the personal qualities of Bradley Manning does so to the continued benefit of those wishing to perpetuate the ignorance of what he brought to light and no-one else.
May 31, 2013
Workplaces can be very isolating.
Cultures develop around the loudest people, not the best or the most useful or the nicest. The person generating the most output gets all the attention and steers the story towards themselves.
We'll all worked, some of us will have worked in environments with large numbers of employees and I wouldn't be at all surprised if many of us have worked in environments where one loud, idiotic asshole constantly fucked everything up and ruined everything for everyone else. I've had numerous experiences in workplaces where there's a bully at the top stuffing the air with offensive crap, ruining the culture of the entitre place with obnoxious, egotistical garbage. I wouldn't be at all surprised if most police officers were just *itching* to get rid of the jerks in their ranks.
There is a way to get rid of such people, but it's counterintuitive. The emotional response of someone who wants things to be fair and otherwise minds their own business is to localise, the offending behaviour clams them up and the story in their head becomes a confrontational one between them personally and the offender, and THAT's what prevents the offender being ousted.
Actually what needs to happen is the good guys need to recognise the problem, talk about it openly, band together and face it collectively. It can be really hard to do, particularly if you're not from a background that would make you familiar with such processes. It can be seen as a "witchhunt" or "scapegoating".
The most difficult thing is, in order to get it to work, you have to actually play fair with the bully, otherwise you leave them with "ammunition" against you.
All of the difficulties in taking on something like what I've described above are going to be very powerfully compounded by the other eccentricities surrounding pollice work...
I think good cops need help getting rid of bad ones.
Workplaces can be very isolating.
Cultures develop around the loudest people, not the best or the most useful or the nicest. The person generating the most output gets all the attention and steers the story towards themselves.
We'll all worked, some of us will have worked in environments with large numbers of employees and I wouldn't be at all surprised if many of us have worked in environments where one loud, idiotic asshole constantly fucked everything up and ruined everything for everyone else. I've had numerous experiences in workplaces where there's a bully at the top stuffing the air with offensive crap, ruining the culture of the entitre place with obnoxious, egotistical garbage. I wouldn't be at all surprised if most police officers were just *itching* to get rid of the jerks in their ranks.
There is a way to get rid of such people, but it's counterintuitive. The emotional response of someone who wants things to be fair and otherwise minds their own business is to localise, the offending behaviour clams them up and the story in their head becomes a confrontational one between them personally and the offender, and THAT's what prevents the offender being ousted.
Actually what needs to happen is the good guys need to recognise the problem, talk about it openly, band together and face it collectively. It can be really hard to do, particularly if you're not from a background that would make you familiar with such processes. It can be seen as a "witchhunt" or "scapegoating".
The most difficult thing is, in order to get it to work, you have to actually play fair with the bully, otherwise you leave them with "ammunition" against you.
All of the difficulties in taking on something like what I've described above are going to be very powerfully compounded by the other eccentricities surrounding pollice work...
May 9, 2013
If so, I have another question.
Do you believe that homosexuality is innate? Predicated by genes?
If you believe believe both, how did my genes mold my personality into something that was sexually attracted to something artificially constructed by other people?
Do you believe masculinity is a social construct?
If so, I have another question.
Do you believe that homosexuality is innate? Predicated by genes?
If you believe believe both, how did my genes mold my personality into something that was sexually attracted to something artificially constructed by other people?
May 4, 2013
Firstly, revolutions are dangerous. People get killed, injured, buildings get damaged. Not playing nice. Most ordinary people prefer to play nice.
Secondly, the circumstances under which a revolution would take place are not there, in other words, actual death through actual starvation and a clear narrative path through which the populace can hear such stories and develop an appropriate societal response, which response would never be forthcoming in current western society anyway, because...
Thirdly, the underclass must in some sense be unified by an at least similar set of moral tenets for the revolutionary fevrour to be widely legitimised. A nation entranced by opinions and disagreement at every level will not congeal into a revolutionary force.
Fourthly, there needs to be a socially established vision of a replacement for whatever the revolution is going to kick out of the way. There isn't.
Fifthly, well, you know, it's a lot of hassle.
The right wing twits who think armed revolution is going to fix anything are going to be in for a nasty surprise if they pick any kind of fight witht he US gov. Starbucks + co have paid a lot of money for that gov.
The rest of us... well. Deep down we all know that revolutions don't really work.
There won't be a revolution.
Firstly, revolutions are dangerous. People get killed, injured, buildings get damaged. Not playing nice. Most ordinary people prefer to play nice.
Secondly, the circumstances under which a revolution would take place are not there, in other words, actual death through actual starvation and a clear narrative path through which the populace can hear such stories and develop an appropriate societal response, which response would never be forthcoming in current western society anyway, because...
Thirdly, the underclass must in some sense be unified by an at least similar set of moral tenets for the revolutionary fevrour to be widely legitimised. A nation entranced by opinions and disagreement at every level will not congeal into a revolutionary force.
Fourthly, there needs to be a socially established vision of a replacement for whatever the revolution is going to kick out of the way. There isn't.
Fifthly, well, you know, it's a lot of hassle.
The right wing twits who think armed revolution is going to fix anything are going to be in for a nasty surprise if they pick any kind of fight witht he US gov. Starbucks + co have paid a lot of money for that gov.
The rest of us... well. Deep down we all know that revolutions don't really work.
April 28, 2013
I remember seeing a table somewhere with some DU stylee [html] tags that worked in posts and now I can't find it. Is it anywhere pointable to?
Hey doods, can you let me know what bits of html or variant thereof is/are allowed?
I remember seeing a table somewhere with some DU stylee [html] tags that worked in posts and now I can't find it. Is it anywhere pointable to?
April 28, 2013
I did a pointless doodle.
I was deep in a commission and had to escape... I found a new tool and went a bit mad.
Could this be the beginning of a new direction?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
Probably not.
April 28, 2013
How many people on this forum have changed something they do as a result of this forum?
... leaving aside things like voting or writing to your representatives and focussing more on altering your actual day to day life...
Do any of the posts about social issues, things not directly affected (as yet) by legislation, change the way you behave?
Profile Information
Member since: Tue Sep 4, 2007, 07:36 AMNumber of posts: 7,804
