|
Edited on Mon May-24-10 03:37 PM by T Wolf
on human rights, for example? I agree that the demonization of the other side has poisoned the political well of discourse, but in a lot of instances, it is warranted. And just maybe, what we saw as "reasoned political debate" in the past was really just a sell-out of the ignorant by two parties that were very similar in their goals of protecting the powerful who really benefit from this society they have set up. The rethugs and Dems are still playing that game today. For example, in a perfect(able) world of reasonable, rational human beings, there would not even be a debate between those who support marriage equality and those who would deny this basic human right to their fellow humans because there is no rational support for denying rights to anyone. But we have to deal with the handicap of the enemy that is irrational, shallow, greedy and hateful. There is no possibility of compromise with them, unless we are willing to abandon our principles and any hope of achieving the promise of a progressive society. Just like the financial games that the banksters and Wall Street criminals play, it is all now a zero-sum game. If they win, we lose. It is as simple a that. And we cannot afford to lose this war because the enemy is fighting very hard, using any and all weapons at their disposal. If we do not fight back as hard, they will win.
|