The term 'Ratfucking' and how it applies to Obama and Democrats

[freshwest]

21. They come in as Concern Trolls, as if they care about our deepest issues, as cited plus my views:

Last edited Sun Mar 22, 2015, 02:30 AM - Edit history (1)

A concern troll is a false flag pseudonym created by a user whose actual point of view is opposed to the one that the user claims to hold. The concern troll posts in Web forums devoted to its declared point of view and attempts to sway the group's actions or opinions while claiming to share their goals, but with professed "concerns". The goal is to sow fear, uncertainty and doubt within the group.[37]

That is F.U.D., meaning 'fear, uncertainty and doubt.' It is the majority of posts at DU on any given day, on any subject that one might name. From hysteria to condemnation, it is always designed to depress the voting pool that comes to DU for information but end up feeling hopeless or betrayed. Often with fact free posting styles.

A lot of bombastic and profane posts cannot help but get a reader's attention and build up an emotional response. I look for a the lack of solutions in such posts, because those would require being educated in civics and practical matters of winning elections. The all or nothing, name calling and other methods are used to stifle people talking about issues that will change their lives.

It wastes the time and energy of those with real life problems looking for solutions. Some trolls also use JAQing, or the 'Just Asking Questions' method (despite the other meaning for the term, and it's sometimes referred to as JAQing off), that everyone either knows or can quickly google to find the answers or solutions.

If called on their alleged naivete, they call the target audience the questioner is being intolerant and making the group look bad. I used to respond to such JAQ with facts but they don't answer, just move to the next thread to disrupt. So I no longer answer them. Because they aren't looking for answers or solutions and if they do respond they're even more disruptive, roundly abuse the person giving them facts.

They want reaction and exhaustion. This process benefits only the 1%ers who want our time wasted so they can continue the status quo. Just like media that fails to cover stories that give people information to change things in their life.

That's how I've come to see such kind of discourse used here, idisruption to maintain the status quo and not allow people to freely discuss how to change things. Any thread that seeks solutions within the Democratic candidate or elected official realm from the membership is either not responded to, or gets a hail of comments dismissive of the Democrats in general, snark posts or nihilism.

A direct GOP use of Concern Trolling:

An example of this occurred in 2006 when Tad Furtado, a staffer for then-Congressman Charles Bass (R-NH), was caught posing as a "concerned" supporter of Bass' opponent, Democrat Paul Hodes, on several liberal New Hampshire blogs, using the pseudonyms "IndieNH" or "IndyNH". "IndyNH" expressed concern that Democrats might just be wasting their time or money on Hodes, because Bass was unbeatable.[38][39] Hodes eventually won the election.

How many posts like that have we been treated to on DU? Who is constantly saying that all our candidates suck, can never say that they have ever done one single thing right, and are most vehement in their hatred of them? And more importantly, degrade the height of our electoral success, our leaders in Washington?

These are not off the cuff. And I know no real life Democrats who value outrage over facts and getting the job done.

Although the term "concern troll" originated in discussions of online behavior, it now sees increasing use to describe similar behaviors that take place offline. For example, James Wolcott of Vanity Fair accused a conservative New York Daily News columnist of "concern troll" behavior in his efforts to downplay the Mark Foley scandal. Wolcott links what he calls concern trolls to what Saul Alinsky calls "Do-Nothings", giving a long quote from Alinsky on the Do-Nothings' method and effects:

These Do-Nothings profess a commitment to social change for ideals of justice, equality, and opportunity, and then abstain from and discourage all effective action for change. They are known by their brand, 'I agree with your ends but not your means'.[40]

They never present any real life means for change, do they?

The Hill published an op-ed piece by Markos Moulitsas of the liberal blog Daily Kos titled "Dems: Ignore 'Concern Trolls'".

The concern trolls in question were not Internet participants; they were Republicans offering public advice and warnings to the Democrats.

The author defines "concern trolling" as "offering a poisoned apple in the form of advice to political opponents that, if taken, would harm the recipient".[41]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29#Concern_troll

Impeach Obama, anyone? Fire Eric Holder? All based on biased news media reports we know are funded by right wing billionaires with a great interest in stopping our agenda? Use conspiracy and libertarian hate memes, which always defame Democrats? Refuse to support anyone but a 'pure' candidate they know there are no means to get elected, but who support other Democrats? Those details are brushed aside.

If no one hears a bell ringing, was any impact made, were any molecules shifted, was there any movement?

That's what it's intended to do. Not likely that anyone will hear any bells ringing above a calliope of dog whistles...