Yesterday I was reading a diary written by Robert Naiman about the use of the word "apartheid" with regard to Israel and the Palestinians. While I strongly disagree with the premise of the diary, a comment, written by Mr. Naiman, stood out:
Way to go, Courtesy Kos. Mazl tov.
I wonder if - and I hope - that the word will get out that there's been a regime change and a broader group of Kossacks will begin to feel comfortable participating in I/P diaries.
Regime change:
"Regime change" is the replacement of one regime with another. Use of the term dates to at least 1925.[1]
Regime change can occur through conquest by a foreign power, revolution, coup d'état or reconstruction following the failure of a state. Regime change may replace all or part of the state's existing institutions, administrative apparatus, bureaucracy and other elements.
...
The transition from one political regime to another, esp through concerted political or military action...
That comment opened my eyes and got me wondering, did we just experience a regime change on this site?
I didn't have to look very far to start finding answers. Shortly before Mr. Naiman's regime change comment, there was this comment with three recs and no hides:
Apartied is like complaining that men and women have 'seperate toilet facilities'....and 'everyone else in that place have no facilities.
Lets look at it like this. The Zionists dont see the Palistinians as men and women. The Zionists dont see them as people. The Zionists dont belive that those who oppose them should have any 'bathrooms', because 'less than human's dont go to bathrooms.
That is what 'apartied' is EXACTLY, the belief that someone else is less than human, that they dont deserve rights, privilages and so on, and if they were given them, would be incapable of handling them because they are 'savage'...so, (in this case) Zionists belive that they should 'pen' the Palistinians 'for thier own good', and kill those who oppose thier 'penning' like animals that escape from the wilds.
Wow. Believe me, I was itching to respond, but I read the very
next comment and learned that I am probably a member of a group considered "I/P purity trolls" according to the new "regime":
As to the Diarist's concern with our I/P purity trolls, they have succeeded in getting themselves banned, one by one. We had a big dustup a few weeks ago in which the last one GBCWed and was thus autobanned because Kossacks suxor for gang HRing one of the nastiest comments I have ever seen on the site.
But one diary does not a site make. I had seen other diaries to support this "regime change" premise, and I set out to locate them. For example:
I've never considered myself a "purity troll", I do consider myself a Progressive, Jewish person, who believes in a two state solution - with two secure states. I also believe that seeing only one side of an issue (or blaming one side for every problem) is a very dangerous way to look at a complex problem. I also think that we should be allowed to comment in diaries we are interested in without the threat of being HR'd because we disagree with an author or commenter's point of view.
A couple of weeks ago, I had a comment discussion with Clay Claiborne about his use of hashtags in the titles of his diaries. His point was:
Twitter and its hash tags are extremely important for those seeking a broader readership than those that log into the Daily Kos.
And frankly, my writing is valued much more by that wider audience than it is by Kossacks.
Diarist note: Is this the same kind of point being alluded to in the last comment I quoted above?
Clay then seemed confused about the way he was using the site, to the point that he asked:
Are you proposing that everyone blogging at the Daily Kos adhere to a specific line?
To which
the answer was:
Yes. Electing more and better Democrats.
That is the line here and if you cannot stay within it, then I predict that you will be needing a different blogging platform before too long.
I wonder if this regime change is truly going to result in electing more and better Democrats, or if it will simply quiet or eliminate the voices of Progressive Jews who do not see things the same way this new regime does. All of the issues related to this topic need to be discussed from all sides of the issue, otherwise Progressive Democrats will not have the facts they need to make informed decisions.