You agree that we all have power over our reality and believe that people need to accept responsibility for their own reality, and imply that the same is true for you. If you believe that you create your own reality then why are you loath to grant the same power to others? You are not judging others; you are judging a philosophical stance. You may have been born to a privileged class but if you accept responsibility for that fortune as well as your misfortune and abuse then you have every right to make that claim.

I do find myself wondering why it is okay to leave the property and resources in the hands of the few, so many of whose ancestors accumulated those resources via the labor of slaves or exploited labor. I think this is a moral dilemma.

As I stated in the Talking Turkishness thread, The past is a mental concept, composed memory, hearsay and beliefs based on hearsay – there is only NOW and the point of ALL resolution is NOW. No amount of redress (non-violent) for past grievances is appropriate except by the parties directly involved. Not the descendants, not the friends, not the government (except where the state has violated extant citizens’ bodies and chattel or is the only party that can resolve institutional malfeasance) Going forward NOW with everyone’s baggage that they managed by earning or gift or inheritance as a given is the only neutral way to proceed. The unfair advantage while violating Absolute Morality and deplorable is between the exploiters and exploited. They each are responsible for their dramas and if the recipients of this ill-gotten gain wish to make amends then it is up to them and their conscience – NO ONE else.

as a child who was abused, I can tell you that I would have liked nothing more than for someone to forcibly stop my mother. As an adult, I do think that intervention can most often happen without the use of force.

I was also abused by a father who was frustrated and had no outlet for emotions that he had problems controlling. I wished my mother would stop him but she abetted the behavior and told me that if I had behaved appropriately that I wouldn’t make mad. I was told that it was my fault and I believed it (for the wrong reasons as my belief system didn’t contain the understanding that I have in retrospect). I left home at 14 and didn’t return until I was 22 with a broken leg and was not able to easily care for myself. My parents are now in their late 80’s and we have a relationship that is better than it used to be (they deny the abuse ever occurred and believe I left home because I was headstrong and adventurous) so I let them have their illusions and don’t try to disabuse them. They are failing mentally now (mother with Alzheimer’s and father with brain damage due to heart surgery) and it is sad to see but I still love them and don’t destroy my children’s images of their grandparents by recounting my history.

Jazzman, if you were standing near a man with a gun at a child’s head – let’s say he’s a psychopath – and you can’t see any way to save this child without physically harming the man – would you do so?

If I found myself in such a situation (i.e., created the conditions for such an intersection of spacetime co-ordinates) and I would hope I never do, I would attempt to reason with the psychopath and if it were my wife or child, offer myself in trade. One never knows until one is in a situation how one will react but I would hope that I wouldn’t commit violence in any case.

I believe due to my pacifistic belief system, I have a peaceful life and only create seemingly negative circumstances as signposts to point me in the appropriate direction (as I told fiddlesticks, devils are only angels in disguise). I am blessed with good health, a good job, and a family with good health, who has never caused me trouble other than normal childish boundary testing. I am to be a 1st time grandfather this January and am excited influence a new generation.

Peace and a wink to you,

Jazzman

well, you certainly have my ears perked up. I’ll be listening and watching and seeing if I see the same light that you do.

(Don’t get me wrong, I’m not hanging pictures of him on my wall yet) First, he is positive, simple as that. Until I heard him speak I didn’t realize how much of what I was hearing from other Democrats was negative. If you listen to Joe Biden for example, you’ll here a litany of reasons the Republicans have screwed things up and how he predicted this all along (I’m leery of more of this happening if the Dems win Congress) I yearn for the tradition of President Lincoln who didn’t gloat after the war, he was positive and looked forward. Now some may see Obama’s positivity as political rhetoric and that’s their prerogative, I for one sense sincerity and compassion. I especially like how he measures his words in an interview, not in a contrived way, but in a way that says he actually listened to the question and does not have a rehearsed soundbite for every possible occation.

The second thing that gets my juices flowing with Mr. Obama is the example he will set for kids with darker skin throughout the world, just by holding the highest office in the land. I’m sure you know that one of the biggest factors with racism is internalized racism. For so long a young dark skinned child never dreamed of being a doctor much less LEADER OF THE FREE WORLD. I can almost hear the imaginations of children everywhere expanding to new bounds – new circles of dreams.

What more could you possible want to get excited Allison. He’s has a humble heritage, check, he was the top of his class at Harvard, check, he’s on the right side of the issues, check, he’s charismatic, check.

Now it’s possible that he is not progressive enough for you, or me for that matter, but that might come in time, in increments. The reality is he has to appeal to the whole electorate.

My point is, I look his way and see light, it may not be all encompassing sunshine as yet, but there is light and I’m heading in the direction of the light – I hope you’ll come along.

And, while I don’t have a plan in mind, I do find myself wondering why it is okay to leave the property and resources in the hands of the few, so many of whom’s ancestors accumulated those resources via the labor of slaves or exploited labor. I think this is a moral dilemma. So, while you don’t believe anyone should have to give up what they own, I’m not so sure. It’s an exploration I would like to see us have in the public dialogue. It’s all well and good to free the slaves, but if the slave owner – who has committed a crime against humanity, in my mind – gets to keep all the property and the wealth generated from the slave labor, while the slave is told to go off and see how she does in the world, something is not set to rights. I’m not talking reparations, here. I’m thinking about railroad barons who made fortunes on the backs of abused laborers, mining companies, etc. In all of these situations, we may have addressed some of the abuses, but not the unreasonable distribution of the resources attained in these situations. Like I wrote, I don’t have a vision for what kind of action this would mean. I do think a sincere public dialogue might lead to some kind of catharsis.

As for forcible action, you can probably tell that I struggle with this one. I don’t use physical force myself. At least I like to believe I am. Yet, I wonder, if my child were being threatened, how I would react. I don’t think I can truly know my nature unless that is tested. Which I hope never happens. And as a child who was abused, I can tell you that I would have liked nothing more than for someone to forcibly stop my mother. As an adult, I do think that intervention can most often happen without the use of force. Jazzman, if you were standing near a man with a gun at a child’s head – let’s say he’s a psychopath – and you can’t see any way to save this child without physically harming the man – would you do so? Is there ever an appropriate moment? I am only moved to the idea of physical force in order protect another. But I kow that this is a slippery slope. I certainly know that stopping abuse doesn’t always require physical force. Still, sometimes, it seems it does. Thought, I also know that things get to that point because we don’t address bad behavior or it’s cause early enough.

These are just some of my thoughts as I read your comments to me. Especiallay having been called out for that which you don’t admire. (see writes with a wink.)

The 2nd 5 tenets in the Absolute Morality paragraph – http://www.radioopensource.org/elections-06-identities-politics/#comment-34281#comment-34281 should have been credited to Nikos who posted them in the God in our Genes Thread as his made up “religion”. http://www.radioopensource.org/is-god-in-our-genes/#comment-8273#comment-8273 in my rush to leave work at 9:00 PM, I inadvertently pasted the comparison between what I call Absolute Morality and the tenets of the Nikosian “religion.” My apologies to Nikos

almost 100%. To plnelson; I read your posts on poiticians and identity politics.

The reason you don,t fit is because you are not the classic hardcore liberal.You don’t let yourself get pigeonholed into thinking all left wing plicies are good and all right wing policies are bad. You may lean left but you havent tipped over yet.

I am now conservative for the most part. I would rather say libertarian but people in this day and age have little desire for our country to actually follow the constitution. Big govt on both sides has changed the country forever. I am still in favor or should say not against gay marriage, legalized drugs to a small extent. first amendment rights. with no restrictions either rightwing or left wing. The only exception would be people who are engageing in acts of treason.Abortion rights(can we please have a common sense compromise).

Affirmitive outreach programs(Not forced quotas) Govt assistance for the mentally and phisically impaired. This does not include drug abusers and alcoholics. I’m for legal immigration. I’m against illegal aliens.I’m agnostic but fear the ACLU and other left wing groups are trying to unfairly attack religous groups. (The boy scouts is one example) I love the environment and try and recycle and do my best to not harm nature. But I hate it when Green peace or other groups try and tell me how to run my life. I hate guns. I hate hunting. But what I hate even more are people who try and sh-t on the bill of rights by taking away the rights of honest citizens.I hate socialism. I’m for capitolism. It feeds and clothes many more people than all other economic models. I’m pro Isreal. I have actually been to the middle east .I think I have a much better idea of what is really going on than do the talking head leftist academics that I so often listen to.

What should my political identity be?I think that there are more people who

lean one way politically but can listen and agree with some policies that another group advocates.

Yours are good questions and I think I will add the topic of Class to the activated suggest-a-show thread. Very (too) briefly, for me class is based on an objective measurement of people’s economic, cultural (e.g. education), and political capital, what Bourdieu referred to as their habitus. This goes beyond Marx’s emphasis on surplus labour time, and allows us to measure not only the economic wealth and rewards for ones productive effort but also the degree to which someone can control their employability and mobility.

I am thinking of class in very functional terms, not the descriptive labeling that spinners indulge in (and which needs to be countered). Nother mentions issue politics above. What more important issue than one’s means of livelihood. Class-based political movements, then, would work towards creating a more equitable system, globally, by pressing for redistribution though, as jazzman stresses, non-violent (but more pro-active) means.