Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Friday, September 18, 2020

Every State, Ranked by How Miserable Its Winters Are

 

In most of America, winter sucks. It is cold out. You don’t feel like doing anything, so you get fat. Pipes freeze. Lips, noses, and cheeks get chapped and raw. Black ice kills. Polar vortex enters the lexicon.


But which state is the MOST horrible in the icy depths of winter? After an intense period of research and debate among friends and colleagues -- factoring in everything from weather patterns and average temperatures to the efficacy with which state governments keep roads clear to the historical success rates of their winter-season sports teams -- we ranked each and every state from best to worst. This is one of those things where you probably actually want to finish last.

1. Minnesota


Presented by Minnesota's No. 1 SNOWFLAKE 



Thursday, September 17, 2020

What is Democratic Socialism?

 Democratic socialists believe that both the economy and society should be run democratically—to meet public needs, not to make profits for a few. To achieve a more just society, many structures of our government and economy must be radically transformed through greater economic and social democracy so that ordinary Americans can participate in the many decisions that affect our lives.

Democracy and socialism go hand in hand. All over the world, wherever the idea of democracy has taken root, the vision of socialism has taken root as well—everywhere but in the United States. Because of this, many false ideas about socialism have developed in the US.

Doesn’t socialism mean that the government will own and run everything?

Democratic socialists do not want to create an all-powerful government bureaucracy. But we do not want big corporate bureaucracies to control our society either. Rather, we believe that social and economic decisions should be made by those whom they most affect.

Today, corporate executives who answer only to themselves and a few wealthy stockholders make basic economic decisions affecting millions of people. Resources are used to make money for capitalists rather than to meet human needs. We believe that the workers and consumers who are affected by economic institutions should own and control them.

Social ownership could take many forms, such as worker-owned cooperatives or publicly owned enterprises managed by workers and consumer representatives. Democratic socialists favor as much decentralization as possible. While the large concentrations of capital in industries such as energy and steel may necessitate some form of state ownership, many consumer-goods industries might be best run as cooperatives.

Democratic socialists have long rejected the belief that the whole economy should be centrally planned. While we believe that democratic planning can shape major social investments like mass transit, housing, and energy, market mechanisms are needed to determine the demand for many consumer goods.

Hasn’t socialism been discredited by the collapse of Communism in the USSR and Eastern Europe?

Socialists have been among the harshest critics of authoritarian Communist states. Just because their bureaucratic elites called them “socialist” did not make it so; they also called their regimes “democratic.” Democratic socialists always opposed the ruling party-states of those societies, just as we oppose the ruling classes of capitalist societies. We applaud the democratic revolutions that have transformed the former Communist bloc. However, the improvement of people’s lives requires real democracy without ethnic rivalries and/or new forms of authoritarianism. Democratic socialists will continue to play a key role in that struggle throughout the world.

Moreover, the fall of Communism should not blind us to injustices at home. We cannot allow all radicalism to be dismissed as “Communist.” That suppression of dissent and diversity undermines America’s ability to live up to its promise of equality of opportunity, not to mention the freedoms of speech and assembly.


Private corporations seem to be a permanent fixture in the US, so why work towards socialism?

In the short term we can’t eliminate private corporations, but we can bring them under greater democratic control. The government could use regulations and tax incentives to encourage companies to act in the public interest and outlaw destructive activities such as exporting jobs to low-wage countries and polluting our environment. Public pressure can also have a critical role to play in the struggle to hold corporations accountable. Most of all, socialists look to unions to make private business more accountable.

Won’t socialism be impractical because people will lose their incentive to work?

We don’t agree with the capitalist assumption that starvation or greed are the only reasons people work. People enjoy their work if it is meaningful and enhances their lives. They work out of a sense of responsibility to their community and society. Although a long-term goal of socialism is to eliminate all but the most enjoyable kinds of labor, we recognize that unappealing jobs will long remain. These tasks would be spread among as many people as possible rather than distributed on the basis of class, race, ethnicity, or gender, as they are under capitalism. And this undesirable work should be among the best, not the least, rewarded work within the economy. For now, the burden should be placed on the employer to make work desirable by raising wages, offering benefits and improving the work environment. In short, we believe that a combination of social, economic, and moral incentives will motivate people to work.


Why are there no models of democratic socialism?

Although no country has fully instituted democratic socialism, the socialist parties and labor movements of other countries have won many victories for their people. We can learn from the comprehensive welfare state maintained by the Swedes, from Canada’s national health care system, France’s nationwide childcare program, and Nicaragua’s literacy programs. Lastly, we can learn from efforts initiated right here in the US, such as the community health centers created by the government in the 1960s. They provided high quality family care, with community involvement in decision-making.

But hasn’t the European Social Democratic experiment failed?

Many northern European countries enjoy tremendous prosperity and relative economic equality thanks to the policies pursued by social democratic parties. These nations used their relative wealth to insure a high standard of living for their citizens—high wages, health care and subsidized education. Most importantly, social democratic parties supported strong labor movements that became central players in economic decision-making. But with the globalization of capitalism, the old social democratic model becomes ever harder to maintain. Stiff competition from low-wage labor markets in developing countries and the constant fear that industry will move to avoid taxes and strong labor regulations has diminished (but not eliminated) the ability of nations to launch ambitious economic reform on their own. Social democratic reform must now happen at the international level. Multinational corporations must be brought under democratic controls, and workers’ organizing efforts must reach across borders.

Now, more than ever, socialism is an international movement. As socialists have always known, the welfare of working people in Finland or California depends largely on standards in Italy or Indonesia. As a result, we must work towards reforms that can withstand the power of multinationals and global banks, and we must fight for a world order that is not controlled by bankers and bosses.

Aren’t you a party that’s in competition with the Democratic Party for votes and support?

No, we are not a separate party. Like our friends and allies in the feminist, labor, civil rights, religious, and community organizing movements, many of us have been active in the Democratic Party. We work with those movements to strengthen the party’s left wing, represented by the Congressional Progressive Caucus.

The process and structure of American elections seriously hurts third party efforts. Winner-take-all elections instead of proportional representation, rigorous party qualification requirements that vary from state to state, a presidential instead of a parliamentary system, and the two-party monopoly on political power have doomed third party efforts. We hope that at some point in the future, in coalition with our allies, an alternative national party will be viable. For now, we will continue to support progressives who have a real chance at winning elections, which usually means left-wing Democrats.


If I am going to devote time to politics, why shouldn’t I focus on something more immediate?

Although capitalism will be with us for a long time, reforms we win now—raising the minimum wage, securing a national health plan, and demanding passage of right-to-strike legislation—can bring us closer to socialism. Many democratic socialists actively work in the single-issue organizations that advocate for those reforms. We are visible in the reproductive freedom movement, the fight for student aid, gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender organizations, anti-racist groups, and the labor movement.

It is precisely our socialist vision that informs and inspires our day-to-day activism for social justice. As socialists we bring a sense of the interdependence of all struggles for justice. No single-issue organization can truly challenge the capitalist system or adequately secure its particular demands. In fact, unless we are all collectively working to win a world without oppression, each fight for reforms will be disconnected, maybe even self-defeating.

What can young people do to move the US towards socialism?

Since the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s, young people have played a critical role in American politics. They have been a tremendous force for both political and cultural change in this country: in limiting the US’s options in the war in Vietnam, in forcing corporations to divest from the racist South African regime, in reforming universities, and in bringing issues of sexual orientation and gender discrimination to public attention. Though none of these struggles were fought by young people alone, they all featured youth as leaders in multi-generational progressive coalitions. Young people are needed in today’s struggles as well: for universal health care and stronger unions, against welfare cuts and predatory multinational corporations.

Schools, colleges and universities are important to American political culture. They are the places where ideas are formulated and policy discussed and developed. Being an active part of that discussion is a critical job for young socialists. We have to work hard to change people’s misconceptions about socialism, to broaden political debate, and to overcome many students’ lack of interest in engaging in political action. Off-campus, too, in our daily cultural lives, young people can be turning the tide against racism, sexism and homophobia, as well as the conservative myth of the virtue of “free” markets.

If so many people misunderstand socialism, why continue to use the word?

First, we call ourselves socialists because we are proud of what we are. Second, no matter what we call ourselves, conservatives will use it against us. Anti-socialism has been repeatedly used to attack reforms that shift power to working class people and away from corporate capital. In 1993, national health insurance was attacked as “socialized medicine” and defeated. Liberals are routinely denounced as socialists in order to discredit reform. Until we face, and beat, the stigma attached to the “S word,” politics in America will continue to be stifled and our options limited. We also call ourselves socialists because we are proud of the traditions upon which we are based, of the heritage of the Socialist Party of Eugene Debs and Norman Thomas, and of other struggles for change that have made America more democratic and just. Finally, we call ourselves socialists to remind everyone that we have a vision of a better world.


https://www.dsausa.org/about-us/what-is-democratic-socialism/

Wednesday, September 16, 2020

Attn: Potential Kool-aid Drinkers

Link to short video here


Is this video a load of Trump’s special kind of "bullshit flavored" Kool-aid, or am I confused?

I know I’m dizzy and I haven’t even drunk any Kool-aid!

*          *          *

Trump: “I have it [a healthcare plan] already (or all ready??) and it’s a much better plan for you.”

Stephanopoulos: “It’s been 3 ½ years now.”  “You told me last June it would come in 2-wks.”  “You told Chris Wallace this summer, it would come in 3-wks.”

What’s wrong with this picture?


 

Tuesday, September 15, 2020

The President is Making His Run at Dictator for Life

Trump aide Michael Caputo on the coming civil war: 
If you carry guns, buy ammunition, ladies and gentlemen, 
because it’s going to be hard to get


The president is ratcheting up the intensity of his divisive lies and irrational fear mongering on multiple fronts. The New York Times reports on crackpot conspiracies and continuing science denials from our lying president and his mendacious aides. One article focuses on crackpot COVID and armed insurrection conspiracies that are not supported by any evidence:
“The top communications official at the powerful cabinet department in charge of combating the coronavirus made outlandish and false accusations on Sunday that career government scientists were engaging in “sedition” in their handling of the pandemic and that left-wing hit squads were preparing for armed insurrection after the election.

Michael R. Caputo, the assistant secretary of public affairs at the Department of Health and Human Services, accused the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention of harboring a “resistance unit” determined to undermine President Trump, even if that opposition bolsters the Covid-19 death toll.

Mr. Caputo, who has faced intense criticism for leading efforts to warp C.D.C. weekly bulletins to fit Mr. Trump’s pandemic narrative, suggested that he personally could be in danger from opponents of the administration. ‘If you carry guns, buy ammunition, ladies and gentlemen, because it’s going to be hard to get,’ he urged his followers.

To a certain extent, Mr. Caputo’s comments in a video he hosted live on his personal Facebook page were simply an amplified version of remarks that the president himself has made. Both men have singled out government scientists and health officials as disloyal, suggested that the election will not be fairly decided, and insinuated that left-wing groups are secretly plotting to incite violence across the United States.”
So, when the president defends his lethal COVID-19 lies to the public in the name of not wanting to panic anyone, just consider how hard he tries to instill fear of a non-existent left wing insurrection. The pandemic is very real and deadly but we should not be worried about it, while we should be terrified on a completely fake left wing insurrection.

In another article on climate change, the NYT reports the president calling Biden a climate arsonist, whatever that is. This is more of the president’s mendacity in service to his run at dictator-for-life position. He wants to terrify people about environmental regulations that Biden advocates, while denying settled climate science showing there are things to actually worry about, e.g., massive wildfires.
“With wildfires raging across the West, climate change took center stage in the race for the White House on Monday as former Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr. called President Trump a “climate arsonist” while the president said that “I don’t think science knows” what is actually happening.

A day of dueling appearances laid out the stark differences between the two candidates, an incumbent president who has long scorned climate change as a hoax and rolled back environmental regulations and a challenger who has called for an aggressive campaign to curb the greenhouse gases blamed for increasingly extreme weather.

Mr. Trump flew to California after weeks of public silence about the flames that have forced hundreds of thousands of people from their homes, wiped out communities and forests, burned millions of acres, shrouded the region in smoke and left at least 27 people dead. But even when confronted by California’s governor and other state officials, the president insisted on attributing the crisis solely to poor forest management, not climate change.

As soon as the president disembarked from the plane at Sacramento McClellan Airport, where the stench of smoke filled the air, he did not wait for his scheduled briefing to tell reporters that the cause of the conflagration was poor forest management, not climate change.”
At this point, it is worth noting that in the years when the president has been in office, 2017, 2018 and 2019, most of the area burned in wildfires was on federal land, as shown below (source here). That makes the president the single most culpable person for the alleged failure to manage forests and the massive fires. States, local authorities and private owners are not responsible for managing wild lands the federal government controls.



Regarding the situation in California, another source comments: “But the Democratic governor also pointed out that 57% of California's 33 million acres of forest is owned by the federal government. About 40% is privately owned, and just 3% is owned by the state.”

In view of the facts, the president has clearly failed to properly manage the forest lands he is responsible for properly maintaining. He doesn’t even want to help California with fire fighting costs and manpower because he blames the state for the fires that are burning on lands entrusted to him.


Monday, September 14, 2020

A Liar for Trump is Put in Charge of Denying Climate Change



Over the weekend, our climate science denier president quietly installed a climate science denier in a senior position (deputy assistant secretary of Commerce for environmental observation and prediction) at NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration). We can expect that environmental observations and predictions will probably be much rosier than now. The Washington Post writes:
"The Trump administration has tapped David Legates, an academic who has long questioned the scientific consensus that human activity is causing global warming, to help run the agency that produces much of the climate research funded by the U.S. government.

Legates, a University of Delaware professor who was forced out of his role as that state’s climatologist because of his controversial views, has taken a senior leadership role at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
The agency, which oversees weather forecasting, climate research and fisheries, has until now continued its climate research and communications activities unfettered by political influence. For that, NOAA stands in stark contrast to the Environmental Protection Agency and science agencies at the Interior Department, where the Trump administration has dismissed and sidelined climate scientists or altered their work before publication.
Legates was formerly Delaware’s state climatologist, a position from which he he stepped down in 2011. He had come under pressure from then-Gov. Ruth Ann Minner (D), because of his fossil fuel industry-funded research casting doubt on the science showing that burning coal, oil and other fossil fuels is the main factor behind heating the planet and would lead to dangerous effects such as sea level rise and extreme weather events. 
Legates is affiliated with the Heartland Institute, a free-market think tank funded in part by the fossil fuel industry that supports research arguing that human-caused climate change is not a serious threat. 
“And we have the climate data. We’ve got years of data,” they wrote. “The data show the models don’t match reality,” they wrote, despite numerous peer-reviewed studies showing otherwise."

So once again, our corrupt, incompetent president has installed another crackpot liar in a senior position in government. His mission is to serve the president, not the people or the constitution. To do that he will deny science and lie, lie, lie.



A German university is awarding $1,900 scholarships for 'doing nothing,' and all applicants have to do is answer what they won't do and why


  • HFBK University of Fine Arts in Hamburg, Germany, is offering three people a $1,900 scholarship if they can come up with a good reason to do nothing.
  • The university's "Scholarships for Doing Nothing" program was announced on August 25, and submissions are open until September 15.
  • Applicants must answer four questions about how their plan to not take action could be beneficial.
  • The scholarship was created by a professor in hopes of encouraging students to strive for "a lack of consequences" rather than success.
  • One university is offering students from around the world the opportunity to win a $1,900 scholarship for doing nothing at all.

    The unique scholarship program — called "Scholarships for Doing Nothing" — is offered by the HFBK University of Fine Arts in Hamburg, Germany.

    The application opened on August 25, and submissions are accepted between now and September 15. Applicants are required to create a proposal based on this central question: "What action might I refrain from performing in order to prevent my life from having negative consequences for others?"

    Friedrich von Borries, a design professor at HFBK, created the scholarship to challenge social perceptions of achievement and success.

  • "The world we are living in is driven by the belief in success, in growth, in money. This thinking was leading us into the ecological crisis — and social injustice — we are living in," Borries told CNN.

    "We wanted to turn that upside down — giving a grant not for the 'best' and for 'doing a project,' but for doing nothing," he added.

  • Scholarship winners will have their ideas showcased at Hamburg's Museum of Art and Design. 
  • To apply, students must submit answers to four questions: "What do you want not to do? How long do you want not to do it for? Why is it important not to do this particular thing? Why are you the right person not to do it?"

    Borries said that his idea was partly inspired by the lack of activity during COVID-19 lockdowns.


  • "During COVID, we stopped being busy not only to protect ourselves but to protect others. That is something I find very important and I hope we will be able to transfer this attitude into the post-COVID times," he told CNN.

    Applicants from around the world, not just students of the Hamburg-based university, are encouraged to apply for the scholarship.

    The three winners of the scholarship will have their ideas featured in an exhibition at Hamburg's Museum of Art and Design called "The School of Inconsequentiality: Exercises for a Different Life" from November 5 until May 9, 2021.

    Friedrich von Borries and representatives for HFBK University of Fine Arts in Hamburg did not immediately respond to Insider's request for comment.

  • https://www.insider.com/win-scholarship-doing-nothing-university-germany-hamburg-2020-8