May I suggest that part of this strife scenario is the human need to BELONG? [View All]

[bobbolink]

I have seen this at DU for a long time, now, and it affects so many different aspects, from what I can see.

An issue gains popularity, and that draws crowds, as everyone wants to "belong". It is a human NEED--we instinctively know that we cannot make it alone, and NEED the tribe in order to survive.

So, the war becomes an issue, people flock to it out of a sense of outrage, and it becomes powerful and sexy. There is then also the comfort of belonging to a like-minded group.

Because of some well-liked advocates, voting machines became a very popular issue here, and attracted many of us because of the justice aspect of the whole issue. Then it became sexy and powerful.... it was another group it was comforting to be part of.

The same can be said for gay rights and a few other issues, and now the candidates groups. There is power and comfort just in the belonging. There is nothing wrong with that--I'll repeat again, it's a HUMAN NEED to belong.

In fact, I doubt there will even be a response to this idea.

It isn't "sexy", and doesn't make us feel included and popular.

What is sad is that there are other worthy groups that don't make it because it doesn't become popular and sexy. They are just as important, but they never seem to rank in interest. You know, of course, that I'm going to say that poverty is one of those important but neglected issues. It just isn't sexy. There is no comfort and no power in being an advocate of poverty issues. To the contrary...... it is very likely to cause considerable DISCOMFORT and isolation to stand up for poverty.

Nobody seems to be able to articulate WHY poverty doesn't rank... all the reasons given have holes large enough to drive a tank through.

The belonging and forming of "tribes" isn't a problem, as I see it... it's a normal human NEED.

What I see as the problem is the denigration of others in other tribes, and the lack of willingness to assign importance to issues that aren't on the national radar, ignoring and isolating those who care and are affected by the issue, and, finally, an unwillingness to look at the "shadow" side of one's own stand, and the "shadow" side of the stand of a given candidate.

Until we are all willing to look at our shadow, and recognize in that how interconnected we truly are, all these wars will continue--both with us and the globe. That's a basic tenet of the peace movement, but it doesn't seem to catch on.

That stabbing and isolating and popularity contests goes on within the party--it isn't limited to the RW. It goes on in ALL the candidate groups, and it goes on within the Edwardians themselves. Having been a target of that, I can say that the need to look at the shadow exists in the Edwardians just as much as it does with the Obamans.

I'm not pinning any hopes any longer that that process will happen, or that ANY of these groups, and that includes this one, will stand back and look at the need to belong, and recognize how they/we all isolate and reject others in order to have our own clubs where we feel important and needed and BELONGING.