It always works the same way.
The President or one of his Party Under-leaders makes a claim. The moment anyone disagrees with them, we are presented a reason to discount them.
Think about what they do.
Let’s look at the logical fallacy in action. The President and all the pundits on the right use the talking point of the day. Mr. X wishes to offer a counter point. It goes something like this:
-Mr. X strongly disagrees with our position
ergo
-Mr. X is a member of the political opposition
ergo
-Mr. X’s counter position is rooted in bias
ergo
-Mr. X’s claims are to be dismissed as untrustworthy and suspect
ergo
-Unlike Mr. X, our unbiased motivation is the welfare and security of the American people
ergo
-Mr. X’s bias rooted claims must run directly counter to the welfare and security of the American people
So, if you disagree with them, you're trying to hurt America. The most recent example is Cindy Sheehan.
Yet, in today’s world the media lets this logical fallacy continue to be the narrative structure for all political reporting.
As the public’s proxy to power, should someone in the media tackle this head on? Shouldn’t someone take it on as their responsibility to lay this out exactly as I have and blow the bullshit whistle?
Perhaps there has been a true paradigm shift. Perhaps it is my responsibility to say so.
The fundamental problem that we on the left face is allowing ourselves to get bogged down in the anecdotal versions of the same fight over and over again. We make our case about the war and Social Security and Medicare and Voting Rights….
We should be constantly tying these narratives together. We should be constantly reminding the public that this is the same fallacy dressed up in a new suit.
So now I have.
What say you dear readers?
-The Oklahoma Hippy
No comments:
Post a Comment