Skip to main content

View Diary: The Peasants Revolution and the Miami Seven (52 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Let's acknowledge, if we will... (0+ / 0-)

    that Bush & Co. DO/CAN/WILL continue to link these kinds of things to progressive thought, in very subtle yet powerful ways.

    So while the public is feeling more and more alienated and disempowered by the deliberate mechanisms of the Bushits, we can expect that there WILL be extremist reactions to it.

    The spin docs of the Right WILL use this to put any kind of dissent on the same level as terrorism.  All they have to do is keep associating the very THOUGHT of your government being against you as a "terrorist act."  It invokes, for me, the "reactionary" tag given to anything close to intellectual thought in China or North Korea.

    So when I saw the title of this diary, I was hoping it wasn't something that would further this association.

    I understand what you're saying in this diary, because we have to at least acknowledge that the actions of these seven men (which have not been proven, yet) may be a manifestation of their sense of alienation and powerlessness.  It's hard to ignore that.

    We're constantly accused of siding with the terrorists, and that's an assumption that can only be made by those who see things in blacks and whites, wins and losses, good and evil, with us and against us, war and impending war.

    Would we kill for our cause?  Of course not.   That's the difference.  We have to be clear and plain about that at all times.  

    I guess what I'm saying in all of this is to just be clear about that.  Don't help those who stand to benefit (in deadly ways) to make these kinds of associations with progressive thought and progressive visions for peace and a truer vision of a democracy.  

    Is that self-censorship?  No.  It's just being more thoughtful about the power of association and being aware of the tools spin-docs have at their disposal.

    here boo, here boo, want a cookie? good girl.

    by tepster on Sat Jun 24, 2006 at 08:09:25 AM PDT

    •  Ithink it was very clear. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      tepster

      "We're constantly accused of siding with the terrorists, and that's an assumption that can only be made by those who see things in blacks and whites, wins and losses, good and evil, with us and against us, war and impending war.

      "Would we kill for our cause?  Of course not.   That's the difference.  We have to be clear and plain about that at all times.  

      I guess what I'm saying in all of this is to just be clear about that.  Don't help those who stand to benefit (in deadly ways) to make these kinds of associations with progressive thought and progressive visions for peace and a truer vision of a democracy."

      Progressive thought and progressive vision absolutely involves being able to understand the motivations behind all of the actions this administration frames as "terrorism."  If we ignore this because we fear the "associations" made by ignorant people then we're doomed.  Unfortunately, since the "terrorist sympathizer" meme seems to be convincing some and suppressing others, it will likely be a long bloody time before the truth comes out.  

      The faster route would be to have the courage to speak the truth no matter what, which includes the courage to not worry about how what you are going to say is going to be "spun."  After all, it hasn't seemed to hurt the liars that their lies can be spun, now has it?  I believe in the truth, and it is true that history has lessons in oppression that we need to look at to understand what is going on right now, both in terms of the al Qaeda and the current attempts to paint a new breed of "home-grown terrorists" (which I, for the record, think are highly questionable).  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site