The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
As for DKOS, I've lurked over there since the site's inception and believe its only goal is to get Dems elected. While some Kossacks continue to put a smile on my face with their wit and intellect, those posters are few and far between. And many of the best have jumped ship by now. It's really much more satisfying to hang out here and follow y'all.
It's based on an ideology of omnipotence and self-determination. Corporations are private individuals, they're private individuals, therefore they don't like government interference.
Of course it's quite mad, but there is an internal logic to it.
Not in the sense that they are themselves brutal thugs (though that too sometimes), but in the sense that they view violence as the only measure of power. Unless there is a man with a gun or a whip behind you, it is assumed that he cannot exercise power over you. And if no power is being exercised over you, your behaviour is assumed to be fully voluntary and completely your own to decide.
In other words, they skipped over all major advances in the social sciences for the last hundred years or so.
- Jake Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
And the problem is usually the libruls who are too wussy to apply force at every opportunity to get their way. Obama's predilection for bipartisanship, consensus and compromise will elicit nothing but contempt from them. It shows them he's weak and not a man of power. It's almost a sexual thing - dominance and submission - which can also be found in fanatical religious organisations.
This carrying a gun is a psychological statement and requirement to demonstrates their power and dominance over others. It demonstrates a contempt for the arts of persuasion and negotiation - something they are usually terrible at. To me it all smacks of extreme emotional immaturity that I associate with repressive societies and sexual norms, male dominance, and reverence for AUTHORITY.
Maybe I should read The mass psychology of fascism... Frank's Home Page and Diary Index
This leads them to the naive assumption that there is no power in private relationships, since the government holds the monopoly on the exercise of organised violence. Since there can be no power in private relationships, there can be no asymmetries of power, and thus there can be no oppression. Therefore, smaller government means less oppression, meaning more freedom.
by rifek - Apr 7 1 comment
by gmoke - Apr 3
by rifek - Apr 1
by rifek - Mar 30 1 comment
by gmoke - Mar 29
by gmoke - Mar 22 1 comment
by Oui - Apr 12
by Oui - Apr 716 comments
by rifek - Apr 71 comment
by Oui - Apr 6
by Oui - Mar 313 comments
by Oui - Mar 3110 comments
by rifek - Mar 301 comment
by gmoke - Mar 221 comment
by Oui - Mar 17 comments
by Oui - Feb 2810 comments