Post is pinned.
It has become apparent to me that this statement needs some refreshing, so as to make it some of it EVEN PLAINER. I am copying the original post from January verbatim, sans the silly introductory sentence because I'm serious here, and my subsequent comment to the post from the end of May, also verbatim. Thereafter, I'm going to a few things I have already stated plain enough that even a five-year-old should be able to understand it. If you want to check the originals to see if I've altered things in any way, you can find them here:
The statement from January is itself an expanded (and slightly revised) version of an older post from December, which you can find here for further verification:

Giovanna X
Progressive Fire
Jan 15, 2017

[Silliness redacted.]

So, people, I've updated the "About this community" blurb for "Berners for Jill Stein"/"Progressive Fire" a few times since I was given charge of the community. Since a lot of you seldom come to the community page itself, preferring instead to read, plus, forward, and respond to new posts through your G+ notifications, I think it a good idea to post the current statement here in the hope that everyone will see it and read it. I'll be pinning this present post to the top of the community page, too (and this time I will remember to disable comments, I will, I will, I will ... because this statement is not up for public debate, ... so, ... if you want to talk about it or any part of it with me privately, then PM me).

Without further ado, then, the "About this community" blurb statement:

<< We are a community of concerned & politically active people who supported Senator Bernie Sanders (Vt.I) for the democratic nomination for President of the United States in 2016, & then supported Doctor Jill Stein & the Green Party for the general election. After the 2016 elections, we decided to broaden our focus to election races beyond the presidential race, & so no longer have any particular candidate in our community name, although a veiled allusion to Bernie Sanders, who galvanized us into a community in the first place, is still present in the name (his slogan "Feel the Bern" is hinted at by the word "Fire" in the name). The fire is Green in our community image, to allude to the view of many within the community (including the Moderation team) that the Democratic Party has become irredeemable & that the future of Progressive Leftism lies within the Green Party of the United States; however, this community is not officially affiliated with the GPUS or the G/GPUSA (Greens/Green Party of the USA). The name is in "Lady Liberty Green."

We were first named "Bernie Sanders for President 2016," then "Berners for Jill Stein," & now are "Progressive Fire."

Bear in mind that certain topics are likely to be unproductive & divisive. Examples include religion vs atheism and 2nd Amendment vs gun control. We're here to promote Progressive Left-libertarian ideals & candidates, not to engage in divisive & unproductive debates (unproductive because nobody is likely to change anyone else's mind on those issues). The legal doctrine of "Separation of Church and State" is of course an acceptable topic, bearing in mind what has been said about not going to the "religion vs atheism" debate.

To dox is to publish information related to personal identity from documented sources ("docs" or "dox") including legal name, home address, home telephone number, etc, which can be used to swat someone (call the police on them with a false report of crime or suspected crime occurring at their location), to physically & verbally harass someone, to terrorize, &c. It doesn't matter who it is or what they may have done, this community should not be used to dox anyone. Any posts which are examples of doxxing will be removed. If a community member consistently engages in doxxing, he or she will be removed from the community temporarily and may request readmission following the removal. If the same person doxxes again after readmission, he/she will be banned. It's not cool, it's not ethical, & in some cases it may be illegal.

This community is concerned with, among other things, political revolution. If you want to promote literal, physical, VIOLENT revolution, take it somewhere else, because it's a foolish notion which would result in many good people dead or in prison.

No spam, porn, or hate speech. This is your only warning; violators will be banned.

Finally, blocking or muting anyone on the Moderation team will earn a ban. >>

A little commentary from a previously pinned post ...

<< From the "About this community" blurb for "Progressive Fire":

<<< Bear in mind that certain topics are likely to be unproductive and divisive. Examples include religion vs atheism and 2nd Amendment vs gun control. We're here to promote Progressive Left-libertarian ideals and candidates, not to engage in divisive and unproductive debates (unproductive because nobody is likely to change anyone else's mind on those issues). The legal doctrine of "Separation of Church and State" is of course an acceptable topic, bearing in mind what has been said about not going to the "religion vs atheism" debate. >>>

This is a simple thing to do: respect the diversity of the community on this matter, because some are religious in one way or another, and some are not, and people who hold any of those positions are (and should be) welcome here, as long as they do not embrace the anti-Enlightenment type of views.

You'll see me talk about "ignorance, prejudice, irrationality, and superstition" a lot, which exposes my fondness for the philosophes (sic) of the Enlightenment, whose ideals were highly valued by those who founded this nation, whence many of the provisions in the Bill of Rights, among which are the freedom of exercise and the non-establishment clauses in the First Amendment.

I don't give a fuck if someone here is a Christian, a Jew, a Muslim, an Odinist, an Ásatrúar, a Sinnsearachdaidh, a Celtic Reconstructionist, a Neo-Druid, a Wiccan, a Hindu, an Atheist, an Agnostic, a Buddhist, a Sikh, a Daoist, etc, as long as they embrace these Enlightenment values and are Progressive and Leftist, and do not try to use this community as a soapbox for their views on religious questions. If you want to preach Atheism, Christianity, or any other religion or sacred tradition (and yes, Atheism is a religion, at least for some, particularly those who feel the need to preach it to others, whether those Atheists like that characterization or not), there are G+ communities where you can do that; this is not one of them.

Thank you. >>

Thank you for your attentiveness to this statement, and please govern yourselves accordingly.

Giovanna X


"The Left" has authoritarian and libertarian elements. Those who have been engaging in violence in order to deny others their right to free speech [and here I do not intend our First Amendment right to freedom of speech, which merely affirms the right to speak without government censorship, and which nevertheless has limits as established in Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 (1919) and Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), but our human right to say (and believe) any damned fool thing we like without fear of a mob doing us bodily harm], those people who have been engaging in violence in order to deny others this right, I say, are NOT Left-libertarians, and therefore, they are not Progressives, whatever they may claim to be. "Anarcho-Communists" who have supported this violence, or taken part in the same, are by no stretch of the imagination Anarchists, nor libertarian (in the sense of civil libertarian), but, on the contrary, they are authoritarian, albeit preferring the mob to the state.

We here in this community are Progressive Left-libertarian (again, in the sense of civil libertarian, and NOT in the sense of any connection with or to the so-called "Libertarian" Party), and we reject authoritarianism, be it Radical, Liberal, Moderate, Conservative, Ultraconservative, or Reactionary in its social perspectives, and be it Left, Center, or Right in its economic perspectives. We affirm Constitutional Rights, Civil Liberties, and Human Rights, and reject any self-righteous busybodyism and hooliganism inspired by such authoritarian perspectives and attitudes.

Notwithstanding the statement in this addendum, the COMMUNITY rules pertaining to what is permitted here in this community remain in effect. This addendum is made to address the violence of such groups as the so-called "Antifa" movement in the United States, which has been engaging in violence against those who disagree with them (and those whom they merely suspect of disagreeing with them) on social, political, and economic matters.

Alright then. Now for the present statement clarifying some of what has already been stated in the past.

Now dig this. I have been far too nice about this heretofore, and allowed multiple chances to comply with the rules of this community. I'm tired of having to treat some of you like children who can't remember instructions and give warning after warning after warning before I finally take some action.

Therefore, be advised:

1. This is not a partisan community; however, members of the Republican Party or the Libertarian Party (or any other party with a similar Socially Reactionary and/or Economically Right Wing perspective, including the fucking Democratic Party) will find little here with which they will agree, and are, frankly, not welcome here. "Justice Democrats" is a lie. Do not fall for it. You will not force reform. The Democratic Party is lost. If you are a Progressive Left-libertarian and are still a member of the Democratic Party, leave it; it's not going to suddenly see the light and recognize the error of its ways; it's totally corrupt and bought by the corporate oligarchy. There are among us supporters/members of the Green Party of the United States, the Democratic Socialists of America, the Working Families Party, and assorted other Progressive Left-libertarian political parties. "If you go carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao" or Joseph Stalin as some sort of hero, you're in the wrong place; we are not authoritarians and we are not State Capitalists. Bans will be given if necessary to keep the peace of the community. This is not a debate society, nor a soapbox for efforts to "show us the error of our ways." We are adults and most of us are rather well-informed, and the purpose of this community includes encouraging understanding and education on the part of its Members and the Moderation Team. We are here to share information, not to fight. I'm very lenient, but there are limits to what I will tolerate. The same goes for the Moderation Team.

2. If you start preaching Atheism or Religion here, no matter what religion or flavor thereof it may be, I WILL WARN YOU ONCE TO STOP, AND IF YOU PERSIST OR REPEAT SUCH BEHAVIOR, I WILL BAN YOU.

3. If you start talking about "gun control" here, regardless of what side of the issue you take, I WILL WARN YOU ONCE TO STOP, AND IF YOU PERSIST OR REPEAT SUCH BEHAVIOR, I WILL BAN YOU.

4. If you start advocating for literal, physical, violent revolution here, I WILL WARN YOU ONCE TO STOP, AND IF YOU PERSIST OR REPEAT SUCH BEHAVIOR, I WILL BAN YOU.

5. "When you talk about destruction, dontcha know that you can count me out?" If you in fact start advocating literal violence as any sort of "political strategy," such as praising violent, masked thugs who are supposedly "fighting Nazis," or accusing others who point out that they are violent thugs playing into the hands of those who WANT a fucking police state, I WILL WARN YOU ONCE TO STOP, AND IF YOU PERSIST OR REPEAT SUCH BEHAVIOR, I WILL BAN YOU.

I've had enough of this shit. This is NOT the place to preach violence. If you want to do that, you're in the wrong community, and you should do the honorable thing and GTFO, because I am not issuing idle threats here; I WILL ban you. No skin off my ass.

Grow the fuck up and stop playing at being the "French Resistance" or "Antifa." You're not, because this isn't fucking World War II, and the fucking tiny minority of Neo-Nazis and their hateful ilk are NOT in power, regardless of the idiotic and dangerous propaganda of the Democratic Party and the MSM.

So it has been written. So let it be done.

You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it's evolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world

But when you talk about destruction
Dontcha know that you can count me out

Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright, alright

You say you got a real solution
Well, you know
We'd all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well, you know
We're all doing what we can

But if you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait

Don't you know it's gonna be alright
Alright, alright, alright, alright ...

You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You'd better free your mind instead

But if you go carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow

Don't you know know it's gonna be alright
Alright, alright

Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Alright, alright
Commenting is disabled for this post.

Post has shared content

Post has shared content
Lee says it's for 'ratings' and 'sensationalism sells'. I think he's being wayyy too naive here - just look at the various 'hit jobs' the media has COORDINATED over history - from marginalization of Bernie Sanders, to Ron Paul, to parading the Iraq War, marginalizing Jerry Brown back in the day going all the way back to Vietnam... the list is endless

No Lee, it's bigger than 'just for ratings'. There's is a proven history of coordinated 'ulterior motives' and agendas.

Post has attachment

Post has shared content
This guy is running for US Rep in one of Massachusetts' districts as a Democrat. I've linked to his campaign page before, have had a few brief private conversations with him on Twitter, solid guy. I don't agree with everything on his platform, but I would support him if I lived in his district, where no Green is running for the office.

Post has shared content

Post has shared content

Post has attachment
Establishment Democrats Taking Wrong Lessons From Indictments Of Russian Agents

The announcement of the indictment of twelve Russian agents by Robert Mueller yesterday changes little with regards to what was already known, but establishment Democrats are taking all the wrong lessons, and making claims which they never would have made if not for the perceived political benefits. Finding ways to justify the fact that Hillary Clinton was unable to beat a candidate as dreadful as Donald Trump has become top priority.

Establishment Democrats seem oblivious to the fact that an indictment is not proof. No evidence accompanied the indictments and, as it is unlikely that the Russians will ever appear in court, it is possible that no evidence of these accusations will ever be presented. This provides no further proof than the retracted (but still repeated) claim of seventeen intelligence agencies agreeing that Russia hacked the DNC.

I have remained an agnostic as to whether the email was released by a hack or by a leak, and question if we will ever know for certain considering how the DNC refused to allow the FBI to investigate their servers. My personal opinion has been that a hack was the more likely explanation, but this is not definite. While I personally have never taken the Seth Rich theory seriously, there is nothing new here to disprove the view of those who do believe this.

For the sake of further discussion here, I will assume that the claims in Mueller’s indictment are true, again noting that this is not proven. Assuming that the accusations are true, establishment Democrats are still naively living in a pre-Gary Powers world, ignoring the realities of the situation.

Francis Gary Powers was an American spy who was shot down over the Soviet Union in 1960 while engaging in espionage. The United States claimed that he was studying weather patterns for NASA, but it was ultimately made clear that he was a spy. The United States was forced to admit that it had been conducting such spy missions over the Soviet Union for several years, ending any pretense that the United States did not engage in such actions. It was no longer possible to see the United States as purely the victim of Russian espionage, but Democrats have suddenly returned to this mindset.

Such espionage is commonplace, and is rather benign compared to the practice of influencing elections in other countries–along with the outright overthrowing of foreign governments. Despite a long history of the United States meddling in the elections in other countries, establishment Democrats act as if the hack of email from the DNC and Hillary Clinton is somehow a unique attack on the United States, with many even comparing it to an act of war. Russia has meddled in American politics for decades, just as the United States has meddled in Russia, and both have meddled in many other countries. Russia did not suddenly attack the United States for the first time to attempt to stop Hillary Clinton–although that might be understandable considering Clinton’s history of belligerence towards Russia, and her propensity to support war.

While establishment Democrats have increasingly been following the neocon line on Russia, believing claims from the same people who sold the country on going to war over nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, avoiding unnecessary war should be a high priority. Instead many Democrats opposed the recent talks with North Korea, and are now using this as an argument to cancel the talks between Trump and Putin.

There are valid reasons to question these talks, but in a time of escalating tensions with a nuclear power, there is far more compelling reason to continue with summits, including potential talks on nuclear weapons. Trump’s plan to meet with Putin alone is of concern, I think it is far more likely that if Trump has any secretive goals it is more to promote a future Trump Tower Moscow than to engage in any electoral conspiracies. To date there is no evidence of any real collusion occurring, even if the Trump Tower meeting did show a willingness to obtain information from Russia if it existed. While Mueller may or may not present evidence of this in the future, there certainly has been no evidence while establishment Democrats have been trying to pass this off as fact.

While I do not condone the hacking of any Americans by the Russian government, if this was foreign meddling in an election, it was probably the most benign meddling in the history of election meddling. The released email provided the American people with truthful and accurate information which exposed corruption and dishonesty by top politicians in this country.

It certainly makes no sense for Clinton apologists to use the hacked email as an excuse for Clinton losing. If Clinton and the Democratic Party lost because of the American people finding out the truth about their corruption, the blame for the loss falls on the politicians exposed, not those who exposed them. To argue that the email posted by Wikileaks caused Clinton to lose only means that I was right (and Clinton supporters wrong) during all those months I was writing that Clinton should not be the Democratic nominee.

The fact remains that, while Mueller has shown evidence of money laundering and other financial crimes, along with crimes by some Russians, there has been no evidence of any actions which altered the election results. There is no evidence that the voting systems were hacked or that a single vote was changed, despite erroneous reports from Clinton supporters on MSNBC. The evidence obtained in the Congressional hearings showed that Russian ads and other activities on social media were a minuscule amount of traffic, unlikely to affect the vote.

The actual threat to American democracy comes from the Democratic and Republican Parties. This includes attempt at disenfranchisement of voters by Republicans, and the efforts exposed by the Democratic Party to rig the 2016 nomination and keep out progressive viewpoints. I find the actions by the Democrats especially offensive when the Democratic establishment simultaneously works to restrict the ability of third parties to run, and for those with different viewpoints to effectively run within the Democratic Party. Instead of supporting democratic values and allowing for different viewpoints, many Democrats totally reject opposing views, holding a false belief that differences in opinion with them are based upon falling for Russian propaganda.

To the degree that Russia might be engaging in activities to meddle in our elections, the proper responses are clear. We need to enhance election security, including maintaining a paper trail. If the DNC and other Democrats fell for the hacking attempts described in the indictment, further education is needed to limit this risk in the future.

There are also wrong ways to react. This includes arguing against diplomacy and increasing the risk of war, along with the McCarthyism and support for censorship of opposing viewpoints coming from some Democrats.

See full post for links:

Post has attachment

Post has shared content
Wait while more posts are being loaded