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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
28. That's the problem with conflating a political party with philosophy. The republican party was the
Wed Mar 27, 2013, 05:47 AM
Mar 2013

liberal party that actually instituted real progress for almost half a century before Big Money authoritarians took it over. For the overwhelming majority of its history the Democratic party has been the party that unflinchingly defended the status quo. Both of our Roosevelt Presidents were traitors to their parties and both enjoyed great popularity from those betrayals.

Political parties have no allegiance or purpose beyond gaining political power. The Democratic Party is no more liberal than the republican party is conservative, they are merely facades hiding the real powers behind each of them. Gore Vidal, IMO, put it best when he stated that,

"There is only one party in the United States, the Property Party ... and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt — until recently ... and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties"

The only difference that matters, and I think that if one simply spends some time here it becomes apparent, is the difference between the authoritarians and the egalitarians. If one truly believes in equality, the inevitable conclusion is that we must accept and make allowances for the entire range of diversity and therefore become truly egalitarian. If one cannot make take that step and insists that some things are just too different to be acceptable, than you are, to at least some degree, an authoritarian and willing to suppress some in order to accommodate the prejudices of the current majority. In essence it boils down to either; "I would like to relieve your burden, as long is it doesn't inconvenience me to much." or, "we really are all equal and I am willing to sacrifice in order for you to achieve yours."

Unfortunately, far too many of us fall into the former.
Lovely defense of Chomsky and good to hear that Greenwald is working on a new book... Luminous Animal Mar 2013 #1
Yes, very good defense ... Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #2
I've seen attacks on those two right here on DU. Cleita Mar 2013 #3
I have as well. RedCappedBandit Mar 2013 #5
DU and the Democratic Party have plenty of conservatives. They call themselves Democrats rhett o rick Mar 2013 #6
That's the problem with conflating a political party with philosophy. The republican party was the Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #28
Great post, Egalitarian Thug. Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #29
TYVM. It is appreciated. n/t Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #44
I second the "great post". I wish I could bookmark a post. rhett o rick Mar 2013 #32
YVW as well, and you can. Select the OP, click on the reply you wish to bookmark, then bookmark as Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #47
Good idea. Thanks. nm rhett o rick Mar 2013 #49
well put Puzzledtraveller Mar 2013 #39
TYVM. Egalitarian Thug Mar 2013 #48
I can kind of sort of see people attacking Chomsky here on DU (and have) ... Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #7
There are some who think he's not unbiased enough. Cleita Mar 2013 #9
For the love of fuck. Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #10
It is almost impossible to be "unbiased". Especially history, which IMO is heavily biased one way rhett o rick Mar 2013 #30
he's been known to tell the truth about the obama administration... KG Mar 2013 #19
Party fealty is for the brain-dead. Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #21
I believe that we all have different levels of denial we use to maintain our sanity. rhett o rick Mar 2013 #31
K&R, Excellent Thread! smirkymonkey Mar 2013 #4
Do any paleoconservatives still throw out "chomskyite" as an insult? Blue_Tires Mar 2013 #8
Really? RudynJack Mar 2013 #11
I found a lecture on Netflix, and the sound was so low Kurovski Mar 2013 #13
It's Alternet's headline. The original from The Guardian is titled, "How Noam Chomsky is Discussed" Luminous Animal Mar 2013 #14
Oh, I didn't realize that AlterNet took liberties with the title. Fantastic Anarchist Mar 2013 #15
Author's rarely write their own titles... Luminous Animal Mar 2013 #20
K&R. (nt) Kurovski Mar 2013 #12
I nominate this for post of the day! limpyhobbler Mar 2013 #16
Seconded. woo me with science Mar 2013 #18
K&R woo me with science Mar 2013 #17
He's not really attacked, he's ignored. Which in his field is even worse. JaneyVee Mar 2013 #22
They are attacked by "the establishment" because they speak Truth to Power... ReRe Mar 2013 #23
You are confusing the Watergate break in with Ellsberg shrink's attempted Luminous Animal Mar 2013 #25
There were two break-ins at the Watergate Bldg? ReRe Mar 2013 #26
Are you referring to this part. "Nixon White House officials sought to steal the files from Daniel rhett o rick Mar 2013 #33
Yes. Daniel Ellssberg's Psychiatrist's... ReRe Mar 2013 #35
I am confused as to why you are discussing the Watergate breakin. Did Greenwald mention Watergate?nm rhett o rick Mar 2013 #40
It's me.... ReRe Mar 2013 #41
No problem. We are all friends here. Well most of us. Well a couple of us. rhett o rick Mar 2013 #42
You practice.... ReRe Mar 2013 #45
Kick. Luminous Animal Mar 2013 #24
Kicking. love_katz Mar 2013 #27
K&R idwiyo Mar 2013 #34
The people who attack Chomsky are not the people whom Chomsky is addressing. bemildred Mar 2013 #36
Recommend KoKo Mar 2013 #37
Kicked and recommended. Uncle Joe Mar 2013 #38
kick rhett o rick Mar 2013 #43
to read later snagglepuss Mar 2013 #46
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why Noam Chomsky Is the S...»Reply #28