Actually, that's not really what I want you to do, Kos.
And I use the word "Kos" in the title as what literary types call a "synecdoche (sin-EK-duh-key)," in which, as Wikipedia defines it, "a part of something is used to refer to the whole thing." Kos is US.
My point here came to mind after reading the recent and highly contentious diary (http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/18/104326/426/902/685575)
on whether the money spent on the inauguration is well-spent or should be used to help the poor.
Is it my imagination, or has the Kos Community (as a whole, generalizing) become more contentious, more "black or white," more quick to troll-rate ANYone who says ANYthing that they disagree with?
I began to visit this site in earnest, during the runup to the 2004 elections. Sure, there were trolls, contentious commenters, egotists and point-scorers, diarists who loved to provoke, and a plethora of other annoying or divisive members of the community (a few of whom were eventually banished). But in those dark days, I felt as though kossacks made more of an attempt to see other viewpoints, to look at shades of grey. When our "common enemy" was as overwhelmingly powerful as it seemed in 2004, were we more tolerant of each other's sometimes disparate views?
It's not just the I/P diaries.
It's not just the Clinton/Obama stuff from 2008.
It feels, IMHO, more general than that.
Were we better bonded, and more accepting of each other, when we were set against an elephantine, insurmountable, political entity? When we were miniscule Davids facing Goliath?
I like a party as well as the next girl/guy. And I think that we deserve to celebrate a historic and uplifting event in our nation's history (and one that many of us have worked hard for).
But if a diarist says that Obama should downscale the inauguration, and ask people to spend the day at a foodbank, is that not akin to saying that Christian folk should forget the lights and plastic reindeer, and instead give their loved ones gift cards noting a donation to a worthy charity in the recipient's name? Is there not room for more than one valid way of celebrating?
Rather than excoriating the diarist, and any commenters who support her or him, could we not be both civil in response, and look for any wisdom that can be found or extrapolated from the discussion? Comparing, say, the value of the event for "morale" purposes versus the monetary cost that could be used for other things? Or shall we just accuse and troll rate each other, whenever the urge arises?
IIRC from college, the philosophic term "nostalgia de la boue" refers to a longing for something which the individual thinks s/he remembers, but which never really existed. Am I a victim of this? What do you think?
I really enjoy and find value in this site, but the vehemence and vitriol of the negativistas is getting to me.
Anyone else feel like that?
Or am I just cranky that I have to work on 20 January, 2009?