What Is Open Left?

by: QueenTiye

Sat Dec 06, 2008 at 23:07


Is Open Left a think-tank for progressives (in which case dissenting voices like my own are a detraction from the mission)?

Is Open Left an open forum for the left-leaning to the far-left (in which case, we need the ability to talk across very different ideologies needs to be enhanced)

Is Open Left a activism breeding ground (in which case, consensus building needs to be developed)?

The answer to this question will make a difference in the expectations of discourse.

QT

QueenTiye :: What Is Open Left?

Tags: , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
What Is Open Left? | 18 comments
I think we got our answer n/t (0.00 / 0)

I believe that OpenLeft is (4.00 / 4)
a news, analysis and action website dedicated to building a progressive governing majority in America.
I like consensus for some things (4.00 / 1)
I like consensus for some things, other things not so much. I want the right answer on which wire to cut to defuse a boobytrap, not the one that gets the least heat from observers. I do want consensus on how to spend the family summer vacation. I want consensus when organizing a demonstration, (BTW I like the French word for demonstration: manifestation).

Is openleft a demonstration or a vacation? Or is openleft designing a spaceship? Is consensus a way to reduce heat and make the experience more communitarian and pleasant or is openleft a rigorous search for and selection of solutions to life and death problems?

I think we should strive accuracy first, with a mass of agreements that make that search more effective. Don't be quick to think effective means nasty. Working together is effective. Pleasant is effective. Wrong however is not effective. And ad hominem arguments are right out, it might bet you banned.

You are pretty progressive for someone who doesn't identify that way. I would like to find common grounds in a lot of what appeals and drives your principles QT.  

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

Thank you, HousesofProgress (0.00 / 0)
I hope you don't mind, but I'm going to try to answer your last paragraph by answering Travis, below. (He and I know each other and regularly argue, apparently, at Bob Cesca's site.)

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
I don't understand why you focus on the ones who disagree with you disagreeably. (4.00 / 1)
There are ways tp progressively achieve some of things t5hast matter to you, or to make progress on them. (Pun certainly enjoyed)

For example look at these teenage birthrates compared to the US

Without arguing too much about abortion laws, it is plain that a sizable percentage of teenage pregnancy results in abortion. Since the US is MORE THAN double the rate anywhere else in teen pregnancy, just lowering the rate at which teens get pregnant to that of Canada or even as low as France, would cut the abortion rate by 60 or 80%
Now unless you think it benefits someone to arrest women, this solves a great many problems. If we add good social housing, or some other right to housing, add in daycare services that are affordable and it goes down again. Add in equal pay for equal work and it goes down again.

These are all progressive policies.

This is what I mean by working together for social ends within a progressive frame. I wanted to talk to you that way, this way. I'm sorry if you are gone.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Thanks! :) (0.00 / 0)
and you're right, of course.  It would be far easier to avoid those who are being disagreeable.  OTOH, I tend to believe that engagement is a way to bring people away from the fringes and back to the center where we can talk.

You're right that sometimes doing that is rewarding bad behavior and ignoring those already willing to talk - as I actually did in this thread.  So, my apologies.

I'm not posting on the front page, and I'm really only engaging my own diaries because I posted them.  I explained in my earlier diary why I'm out of here, and I got word from other former OL'ers about how they came to be gone, and it very much reflects my main concern about the place.

But always - I always show up for people.  SO if you're talking to me, I'm happy to talk back.  More soon on the pregnancy issue.  One question as a teaser:  what is Japan doing right that we are doing wrong? How about Malaysia?  

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
Well Canada is doing things right, 60% fewer teen pregnancies. (0.00 / 0)
One thing is to not let people who are ashamed of sex do the sex education. By happy, have sex -wait till your ready, here are some condoms. Don't have sex if you feel pressured, unsure or are drunk, if you do use this condom! This is how to put it on, this is how to make it sexy for the bozo ( I mean sexy teen bozo).

I am sure beyond candy that preaching abstinence is the main CAUSE of teen pregnancy. Sexual Shame is the main cause, and that shame is the driver in the preaching abstinence bus.

But, lets build up reserves good will, good policy and common feeling. many of the people who shout have been on the sidelines with their country and the world being shoveled into the furnace, they are hoarse from protesting and yelling "stop!" They have studied and worked to get here from there, they are not used to the luxury of chatting about solutions. Also, we are in a colossal mess, an environmental catastrophe is upon us. The willingness of the Republican opposition to prevent needed change, and creat more crises like Iraq, makes people jumpy with fear about falling back.

I am willing to give them slack, this is wild ride we are on. We hope to survive and leave the world in better
condition than we left it.

Thanks for responding!



--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
I chose Japan and Malaysia on purpose (0.00 / 0)
Because I'm convinced that abstinence programs work just fine - and I am absolutely in favor of teaching abstinence.  What I'm against is NOT teaching contraception and safe sex.  I think that a comprehensive program that explains contraception, where to get it, how to use it, and that also explains the challenges of sex, emotionally, and that respects young people's ability to reason for themselves that abstinence is the better way to go - coupled with opportunities for youth to recognize where their sexuality fits into the whole scheme of things (rather than an objectified out of context thing) is a better formula than either sex ed only or abstinence only approaches.

Our culture has a pretty unhealthy approach to sex, and it is that that makes teen pregnancy more prevalent.  I'm raising a boy, and I guess we'll see soon enough how he's dealing with the lessons I teach him, but my instruction to him is to talk openly, and to think about what he wants to do in his life, and where do girls (and sex) fit in.  I gave him a benchmark of 23 as a reasonable age to start thinking about girls (LOL!)  OK, so that's obviously unreasonable - but the context of the discussion is really his whole life and his ability to handle all that sex and girls and potential pregnancies would mean for his life.  So far (and he's only 12) he's taking it in fairly well.

Anyway - my point is, again, aggressive secularized teaching on this subject is not really ideal.  Sex has to be integrated into the whole of one's life - not something that stands alone.  I would like to see a lifestyle shift for the whole country that respects and glorifies folks who are doing sex in all sorts of ways (including, not doing it) just as much as it respects and glorifies desperate housewives (for instance).

I'm rambling, because I'm sleepy.  Nice talking with you! :)

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
I have no problem with cautioning (0.00 / 0)
I have a big problem with the purposeful withholding of information. This is also how aids is transmitted. Kids, and I mean legally allowed to engage in intimacy with each other but not yet allowed to wear a uniform or vote, get bad information in the absence of real life saving, pregnancy preventing science based information and tools.

I would love to have a talk about 'secular' with you some time, but to begin this is a good word, not a bad one.

American culture is completely mirrored in Canada, I assure you there is nothing on TV or in the movies or sung on the playground that does not find itself sung a t recess in a small port in Nova Scotia. Nothing. Yet teen pregnancy rates in Canada are 60% lower. I think you have to agree, the difference is the withholding of information, as that is the way you are progressing with your son, providing life protecting information along with caution.

So we have recognized an agreement with each other. Information, life saving, life-choice saving, information is a boon, even a right, for children as soon as its possible for them to understand it. I am willing to argue if thats 8 10 or 12, but I would start setting it out closer to the beginning of hormonal change and not at the end. A thirteen year old, a twelve year old, without this information is carrying a loaded gun with no safety switch.

Life choice info =info that lets you keep your choices, such as not having a child at 15, or having a girlfriend who is pregnant at 15 is lowering your choices extremely.

--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
If you're so opposed to progressive principles... (0.00 / 0)
...why come here?
Is that some kind of answer to my question? (0.00 / 0)
My question is - am I welcome? It's a moot point now - outside of responding to my own diaries I'm largely done with Open Left.  But not because its a progressive site, but because of this particular attitude you manifest - that if I'm not like you, I don't belong here (well, and because at least two fp'ers seem to have a fundamental inability to brook disagreement or admit that anyone else has a point about anything).

I came here by link from another site - a sci-fi fan site where there is a politics and current events forum.  During the primaries, a poster named cade linked here.  So that's how I came here.  

I don't identify with "progressives" because of the following:

1. It's against my faith to take on any political labels
2. On some issues that are fairly critical, I'm more "conservative" in outlook (abortion, gay marriage, school vouchers, for instance).
3. It seems that progressivism, as expressed here, is an overarching philosophy - one that I don't share.

That said, because I'm not political, even my "conservative" positions aren't typical.  For instance, on abortion, I disagree with the idea that there is a "right" to an abortion (in the same sense that there is no "right" to heart surgery).  I see abortion as a private medical issue, and I see doctors as violating their hippocratic oath if they perform abortions unnecessarily.  Who speaks for me?  On gay marriage, I see it as offensive to religious freedom to enact a "Defense of Marriage" act.  Not all religions view marriage the same way, including the various Christian denominations.  Who speaks for me on this issue?

I share this so that it's clear that I come here with an open mind, willing to evaluate the opinions expressed here, and share my own thoughts on any issue.  I also take the opportunity, when it seems fitting, to speak into issues where I genuinely believe that the left is echo-chambering, and needs to hear from a sympathetic (but dissenting) voice.  I attempt to bridge the gap between people in that way, because I'm in the unique position to be able to do so.

However - this diary is about the essential purpose of Open Left.  That bridge gapping may be absolutely antithetical to what Open Left is about - if this is not a place for open dialogue except as to refine leftist positions without outside influence, then my presence (and the presence of a number of Obama supporters who aren't as ideologically committed as some of the writers here are) is a distraction.

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
You seem to be under the impression... (0.00 / 1)
...that everything in life is open to interpretation and a matter of opinion.

Your stance on abortion is kind of silly, as medical necessity should by definition be determined by the physician.  Who speaks for you?  People who can't choose a side, I guess.

Your gay marriage stance lines up with the anti-Prop 8 crowd, I don't see how it could be construed as otherwise.

I'd be endlessly amused interested to hear your stance on vouchers, which are an awesome idea if you bear some sort of personal grudge against public education.

The point is, in my un-esteemed opinion anyway, a person who really believes in progress doesn't see it as optional.  For the good of the country, we have to move as far left as is practical and possible.  The trajectory this country has been on since the end of World War 2 has done nothing but enrich a smaller and smaller portion of the population.

I'm not a founder of this site or even a long time member, but personally I've had it up to my eyes with "bridging the gap".  The people on the other side of the gap have awful ideas and are probably themselves terrible people. That said, I don't think it's anyone's responsibility to welcome or reject anyone else on a site like this (as opposed to say Cesca's site, where I'm sure I'll be banned for being a dirty commie crybaby).  I'm not sure why you need that kind of validation.

Of course, your mileage may vary on all of this.  Odd choice, though, to come here, hang around so long, and then make a big deal of leaving.  Going quietly into the night isn't as bad as it's made out to be.

[ Parent ]
Ok. Thanks. You have succeeded in getting me to stop (0.00 / 0)
But I do intend to respond to this one post:

Your stance on abortion is kind of silly, as medical necessity should by definition be determined by the physician.  Who speaks for you?  People who can't choose a side, I guess.

Not sure I see the silliness here.  A woman, in consultation with her doctor, should be able to choose a necessary abortion.  Most abortions aren't "necessary."  Not in a medical sense, and not even in a mental health sense.

Your gay marriage stance lines up with the anti-Prop 8 crowd, I don't see how it could be construed as otherwise.

No on Prop 8.  Yeah.  I probably would have voted that way.  But so - that makes me a (mostly) pro-life, pro-religious tolerance person.  What camp does that put me in?

I'd be endlessly amused interested to hear your stance on vouchers, which are an awesome idea if you bear some sort of personal grudge against public education.

My views on vouchers are this - unless and until genuine school reform happens (which the teachers union is largely in the way of), I want the opportunity to get my son the heck out of inner city schools.  I was able to move out of an innercity neighborhood to an area where the public school is as good as any private one - but I can barely afford groceries in this neighborhood - I'm in over my head, but its worth it for my kid.  When I see someone really addressing school problems, good.  But my son's life hangs in the balance NOW.  

The point is, in my un-esteemed opinion anyway, a person who really believes in progress doesn't see it as optional.

And what do you mean by "progress"?  As determined by whom?  Isn't it a little conservative to be striving to preserve an antiquated public school system?

For the good of the country, we have to move as far left as is practical and possible.  The trajectory this country has been on since the end of World War 2 has done nothing but enrich a smaller and smaller portion of the population.

The problem defined as enriching a smaller and smaller population of the country.  Agreed.  The solution - move as far left as practical and possible?  In what senses? Economically? Socially? Militarily?  And how do the last two address the problem as defined?

Note: I'm not disagreeing with you - I'm just pointing out that the argument as given is certainly inconclusive.  And the left-right paradigm seems (to me) a dichotomy that avoids looking at things in any other way.

I'm not a founder of this site or even a long time member, but personally I've had it up to my eyes with "bridging the gap".  The people on the other side of the gap have awful ideas and are probably themselves terrible people.

Really?  Awful people?  We just elected a president who doesn't agree that having different political philosophies makes one an awful person.  I can think of lots of things that do make one an awful person.  Some of the treatment I've seen doled out to members here qualifies - and your willingness to blanketly assume awfulness of others does as well.

That said, I don't think it's anyone's responsibility to welcome or reject anyone else on a site like this

I asked for no welcomes.

(as opposed to say Cesca's site, where I'm sure I'll be banned for being a dirty commie crybaby).

Doubtful. Unless you start telling others to get lost, at which point it's perfectly fair that it's your visa that's revoked.  But it doesn't seem that Bob is inclined to censor people just because he doesn't agree with them.

I'm not sure why you need that kind of validation.

I don't even know what this sentence means.  What kind of validation?  Validation of what?  The opening post makes clear that I'm asking about the nature of this site.  And it further makes clear that I see very legitimate reasons why my participation here might not be welcomed.

Of course, your mileage may vary on all of this.  Odd choice, though, to come here, hang around so long, and then make a big deal of leaving.  Going quietly into the night isn't as bad as it's made out to be.

Sure.  But I prefer to make a big deal of leaving, because I think it sucks the circumstances under which I am.  (This diary was kinda a last ditch effort to at least understand the point of the site so I could leave feeling like it was me who misunderstood what was going on here, and leave on good terms).

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
Oops! One more thing (0.00 / 0)
The point is, in my un-esteemed opinion anyway, a person who really believes in progress doesn't see it as optional.

The interesting thing is that progressives have chosen the word progressive (instead of liberal) to operate by - and yet are the people least interested in actual progress.

I've been trying to understand for some time now why Obama claiming the middle, acting, being defined as, and bringing the right into a "centrist" government that enacts a leftist agenda is a bad thing.  Seems to me that if the entire operation gets pulled to the left with the definition of center being what was once defined as left, then that's progress.  Isn't it?

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
There is nothing wrong with this. (0.00 / 0)
I've been trying to understand for some time now why Obama claiming the middle, acting, being defined as, and bringing the right into a "centrist" government that enacts a leftist agenda is a bad thing.  Seems to me that if the entire operation gets pulled to the left with the definition of center being what was once defined as left, then that's progress.  Isn't it?

Yes it is, its a good idea.

And there is no reason to either leave loudly or quietly, please stay and say things like that a lot. Those of us that want the actions done understand what this means.


--

The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky

[ Parent ]
Stoller and Bowers (4.00 / 1)
The site was founded by Stoller, Bowers, and Lux. Lux is in the transition team, so he's not likely to be heard from much. I generally find Stoller and Bowers to be more than accepting of differences of opinion. They tend to say what they think, but not to damn anyone who decides to disagree, unless of course the disagreement is couched in damning of Stoller or Bowers. They haven't, so far, defended the rancorous black-and-white debate that goes on in other diaries - nor have they condemned it.

From all of that, it would seem that the objective of the site is to be inclusive. Stoller and Bowers don't care to get involved in the more rancorous debates that happen, but they leave the site open to those who do want to get involved. I tend to come to read what Stoller and Bowers are thinking about, and then sometimes end up attempting to add some diversity of opinion to the comment thread for those front-pagers who seem to be positioning themselves as more the left-wing opposition rather than the progressive coalition partners to Obama. Bowers has pretty much blantantly stated that he considers himself part of the coalition, in spite of a fair amount of disagreement. Stoller seems also to consider himself part of the coalition. Remember - Open Left endorsed Obama in the primary, and Bowers put forward the idea of endorsing specifically as a way of being in the coalition.

THANK YOU! (0.00 / 0)
I wasn't here then, I don't think.  I showed up late.  But I will say that this phrase really cheers me:

...sometimes end up attempting to add some diversity of opinion to the comment thread for those front-pagers who seem to be positioning themselves as more the left-wing opposition rather than the progressive coalition partners to Obama.

Emphasis added.

Progressive coalition partners. :)  

QT

Visit the Obama Project


WindOnWater.net



[ Parent ]
none of the above (4.00 / 1)
OpenLeft is a community that manifests itself in conversation and online advocacy for what is generally viewed as politically "left" beliefs. Frontpagers help define the norms of and provide a catalyst for the conversation but they don't in any way claim to provide anyone on this site with a purpose. Communities don't have a purpose per se. And they evolve over time through the participation of its members. One of the norms of the conversation is that if people disagree with you they're going to say so. If you have certain views that you expect will often encounter dissent on this site, why not see it as an opportunity to perhaps change people's minds? Unless, of course, you feel that people at OpenLeft are generally closed-minded.  

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...
What Is Open Left? | 18 comments
USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS

Home | RSS/XML Feed | Register | Contact

  © OpenLeft 2007-2010, Powered by SoapBlox

Powered by: SoapBlox