Monday, August 21, 2017

A transgression, but in a good cause


[Note: I will shortly be posting the following to cacaus99percent.com, a liberal web-based publication.]
1.

I am about to violate the letter, if not the spirit of the law...that is, the law of this website. But, I hope you’ll forgive me, for I do have a good reason.

It has to do with our unity as a movement, and the salvation of our country, in an age of incipient tyranny.

Let me explain.


2.

The rule that I’m about to break is in “The Dreaded Site Meta #1,” by joe shikspack. The rule in question is “Don’t Throw Spitballs,” and joe shikspack elaborates this with, “A lot of folks have come here from another site where there was much unpleasantness,” and he asks that users not waste valuable bandwidth by, well, hating on the unnamed Other Site.

I agree with the rule. It is an excellent idea. And, most of time, I will do my level best to obey it. But, I need to mention that Other Site, not to vent, but to express a concern about the larger political system.

First, background. Yes, like almost everyone else here, I was on the Other Site, posting essays. And, yes, I ended up taking heat about a couple of them.

Though, I ought to mention that this was, in a way, my fault. I had discovered the Other Site and been delighted to find a place where I could post my inarticulate left of center mumblings. But, I committed the one unforgivable sin of the freelance writer. I did not thoroughly investigate the publication before I submitted. If I had, I would have realized that the Other Site had a very particular slant, and a very particular point of view.

There is nothing wrong with that, by the way. Every publication does have a preferred slant, even if they think they don’t. It was just that I hadn’t realized that the Other Site’s particular slant was that Hillary Clinton should have won (I agree) and that Bernie Sanders, or more particularly, Bernie Sanders’ supporters were a problem (I don’t agree).

But, stupidly, I had not bothered to figured that out. I had assumed there was room on the Other Site for some mild criticism of the DNC and perhaps of Hillary Clinton’s campaign strategy, if not for Hillary Clinton herself.

As I say, I’d been stupid.

3.

You all have your own stories, I’m sure, of bad times on the Other Site. And I suspect most of yours are far more gripping than mine. So, I’ll be short. I had two incidents of interest. The first was when I made some fairly off-handed remarks about an article I’d seen in which Nancy Pelosi was quoted as saying that people didn’t want the Democratic party to change, or to have a new strategy—this only a few weeks after the election of Donald Trump, and coming just before a series of additional humiliating defeats in special elections for vacated Congressional seats.

I posted the piece, and I had a few complimentary remarks, but I also had several that were absolutely furious. One individual accused me of being, frankly, not able to read, and that I had completely misinterpreted the article. I went back and looked at it, afraid that I’d made an error. But, no, it said exactly what I’d said it said.

The second incident occurred a little later. Here, I did a mostly comic piece about how the Trump administration was beyond parody. How can you mock a clown? But, again, in one throw-away line...just one line...I made some reference to the idea that if Bernie been allowed to run, he would have won.

Most of the comments I received on that posting were positive, maybe not completely so, but positive in varying degrees. However, to my amazement, I got a comment that was really quite bitter. It took that one line about Bernie Sanders and made it a personal affront. How dare I, this reader asked, say such a thing? How dare I imply that Hillary wasn’t the better candidate? Then she concluded, “Enjoy your flag.”

I was startled. How could anyone be so emotional about one line? Also, I didn’t know what a flag was. I’d never heard of them. I looked them up. I discovered that if enough “trusted users” give you a flag, your comment can get erased, and your own posting privileges endangered. In other words, this individual was so furious with me, furious over one line, that she was willing to pull out the ultimate weapon of the Other Site... and use it.

It was kind of startling.


4.
But...none of the above is really important.

I’m not, repeat not, particularly concerned about the negative comments I received on the Other Site. Even the “flag” doesn’t bother me over much. Simply put, if you’re going to post to the web, or try to publish anything, you’re going to get negative comments. We don’t have to like it (and I don’t), but it is true.

But the issue...the real issue...is the fury that seemed to transfix the individuals who so violently disagreed with my postings. The man who accused me of illiteracy, the woman who flagged me, there was an awful lot of anger there. Which, I’m afraid, is indicative of a much larger phenomenon. I see it in a lot of places. Not just on the Other Site. That is, many Hillary Clinton supporters are justifiably furious that their candidate was so grievously cheated...but, sometimes, that fury is released not on the Republicans who put Trump on office, but on the Bernie supporters whose candidate represented an alternative to Hillary.

Which is not to throw stones. I see a very similar behavior in some Bernie supporters (not to mention third party people). I see a similar fury, and I see that fury sometimes vented on people and organizations who are really quite innocent. I suppose, now and then, I’ve done it myself. Mea Culpa, and all that.

Just human nature at work? Yes, I suppose. But, it worries me. We are in, let’s face it, the fight of our lives. We have in the White House an unstable, would-be despot who is fully capable of plunging the world into a nuclear holocaust. We have around him, either near or far (even if they’ve recently returned to Breitbart), people who can only be called overt Fascists. We have behind him, supporting him with money and propaganda, vastly powerful Oligarchs who dream of reducing the Federal government to a shell, and of reducing us, its citizens, more or less openly to the status of serfs.

That, I submit, is a genuinely existential crisis. Unless we fight back, and fight back hard, we are going down. America as a nation is over. American democracy is finished.

So, I wonder, if maybe, there needs to be some kind of greater attempt at unity. I wonder if, somehow, we need to put aside...at least temporarily...our internal divisions. I wonder if we don’t need to say, “Yes, my side was cheated, and I’m angry at your side, but we will, for the moment, work together. Because the consequences of disunity are too horrible to consider.”

5.
Is that possible, I wonder? Can we somehow come together?

I hope so. I’m certainly going to make an effort. I’m going to continue to post to this site, but also to the Other Site. I’m sure many of you do the same.

So, maybe it is possible. I hope so.

Yet, I also worry. I keep thinking of that “flag.” That flag so quickly and freely given.

Because, you see, it reminds me of another flag I saw once. It, too, was defiant and proud, and it sent a message.

The problem? It flew over the National Cemetery of Santa Fe, just an hour’s drive from where I live.

And that flag, for all its beauty and defiance, will be seen by few of the living...

And absolutely none of the dead.

~mjt

No comments:

Post a Comment