Low Information Voter Thoughts
• Why stop at Gun Free Zones? We should also create Crime Free Zones.
• I voted for Change, so how come things are still the same?
• We have weekends off, thanks to unions. If enough people join unions, we can get the other five days off.
• My body is my business, but so is what other people earn.
• Why read the Constitution when you can watch the Daily Show?
• Voting "D" = free stuff. Voting "R"= bummer, I'll have to work.
• Someday I'll live in my OWN basement.
• If we can just get the the top 1% to pay a 10% more, we'll rapidly pay off a debt larger than our yearly GNP
• Everything I learned in school is on the back of this car.
B.R.:It makes me sad that I have to actually tell you this: your list is not of Low Information Voter Thoughts. This is a list of Rich's Assumptions About Low Information Left-Leaning Voter Thoughts. C'mon, man.
Me: You do understand parody, don't you?
B.R.: Yes. I also understand confirmation bias, internal feedback loops, and the tendency to become more and more shut off from the perspectives of others. If you're going to insult people on Facebook, I'd recommend being more intelligent about it. I could tear apart every item on your list and construct one of my own, but we'd only be arguing about misinterpretations and exaggerations. It's my duty as your friend to tell you when you're moving the conversation backwards.
Me: Who did I insult? And I welcome your efforts to tear apart what I wrote. Feel free to correct me.
B.R.: Forget it - your list kicked up a ton of frustration for me, and I don't want to toss mud back and forth. We can thin out the legitimate arguments from the senseless exaggerations some other time. I just don't think you have a very informed grasp of how liberals think or talk, based on this list.
Me: C'mon. Don't toss out a pejorative then walk away.
B.R.: I think what you're doing is taking a point of view you don't like, then reducing its validity by either exaggeration the point of view itself or taking it to some far extreme. Then what you have is a list of things that nobody actually thinks. Now, I see the fun in that kind "parody", as you put it. The frustration for me is that your posts or comments over time lead me to believe you actually think that most liberals in general are this stupid and naive. Like I said, I could do the same thing, making valid conservative points of view look ridiculous and overblown. But it wouldn't do anyone any good. Not me, not my liberal friends, and certainly not any conservative. So why do it?
• Why stop at Gun Free Zones? We should also create Crime Free Zones.
-The idea of Gun Free Zones is as much a naive assumption as any recently-proposed solution to curb gun violence, including those solutions proposed by conservative leaders, fundamental Christian leaders, and the NRA.
• I voted for Change, so how come things are still the same?
-First of all, things are certainly not the same. Second, I've heard this complaint before, that Obama said he'd change everything and then he didn't, but a) he's changed a lot, and b) Barack Obama is by no means the first or worst offender of making campaign promises he can't live up to.
• We have weekends off, thanks to unions. If enough people join unions, we can get the other five days off.
-Who has ever thought or said this? I know that liberals and conservatives are having COMPLETELY different conversations about unions and their benefits/consequences, but seriously, are you under the impression that union supporters just want to never work? If so, you've been fooled.
• My body is my business, but so is what other people earn.
-Everyone has a different understanding of what the government should and should not be able to do, know, and control. To suggest that liberals are any more hypocritical in their understandings that conservatives is a sign that you have a pretty big blind spot.
• Why read the Constitution when you can watch the Daily Show?
-I'm not even sure what you're suggesting here. More people should read the constitution, but that doesn't have anything to do with The Daily Show. Do you think that the viewers of The Daily Show just arbitrarily agree with everything Jon Stewart says? Or are you saying that The Daily Show has a track record of supporting causes that go against the constitution?
• Voting "D" = free stuff. Voting "R"= bummer, I'll have to work.
-Sensationalist nonsense. Finances play into people's voting decisions, and it goes both ways. Democrats typically support public program funding. Republicans typically support lower taxes. They both have benefits and consequences. By boiling down the decision to vote for public programs into a greedy selfish motive to get more "free stuff" is showing a lot of ignorance. Millions of Americans are suffering financially, much worse than you or I. Some of them vote D and some vote R, but all of them are voting to better their own financial situation, and neither of them deserves to be treated like an idiot for it.
• Someday I'll live in my OWN basement.
-What?
• If we can just get the the top 1% to pay a 10% more, we'll rapidly pay off a debt larger than our yearly GNP
-Who's out there saying that letting the Bush Tax Cuts expire for the ultra-rich is the only solution to paying off debt? I've never heard anyone say that raising taxes for the rich will, on its own, solve our financial crisis. Money is money, and every solution helps.
• Everything I learned in school is on the back of this car.
-Is there something wrong with bumper stickers? Do liberals have more bumper stickers than conservatives? Are all political perspectives taught to us in school?
Me: I think you're a little sensitive here. I was caricaturing "low information voters," not you.
Your first two responses are variations on the theme of "well, they do it too." Pointing to someone else doing the same thing does nothing. In addition, you do understand that change doesn't necessarily mean things are different, right?
Regarding unions, when they brag about their achievements, always in the list is shorter workweek, more breaks, longer vacations, more sick leave and personal days. And now we have the Left arguing for earlier retirement http://www.thomhartmann.com/blog/2009/08/cash-geezers-lower-retirement-age-55-now So, it is quite fitting to take the issue to its extreme conclusions.
Me: Regarding govt control of your body, I note that you did nothing more than point out that "they do it too."
Regarding the daily show, I take it you have not seen the polls as to how many people regard Stewart as their sole source of news.
Regarding free stuff, you are shifting the debate. I said nothing about people suffering.
Regarding the rich and taxes, you claim that no one is suggesting that raising taxes on the rich will solve the problem. That is news to me. Tell me, what other things is the administration recommending?
Did I say there was something wrong with bumper stickers, or did I say something about what people believe? Did I say that all political perspectives are taught to us in school? I know you must have read what I wrote. I have debates with people on the left, and I read letters to the editor, editorials by local and national writers, and left-leaning blogs. What I frequently see is bumper-sticker arguments presented as self evident truth. And when there is a car covered with bumper stickers, chances are that it is a leftist at the wheel.
B.R.: Okay. Thanks for your responses.
B.R.: Can you tell me why you made this post?
Me: To exaggerate the positions of the left to the point of ridiculousness.
Me: I ask that you tolerate my point of view, even when I'm over the top.
B.R.: I'm very tolerant, even when I'm very confused.
B.R.: Also, this has exposed once again an important difference between us: you don't think it matters to point out "they do it too". I do. If you are mocking or denouncing the left for doing something that the right does too, it nullifies your argument. If I ever blame conservatives for doing something, and you notice that liberals do that too, I challenge you to call me on it. I don't want to be hypocritical with my accusations.
Me: Yes, it does matter that the other side does it. However, what I am pointing out is it's not a rejoinder and does nothing to advance your argument. Nor does it invalidate my argument. When I criticize a point of view, it is irrelevant that other points of view engage in similar behavior.
If I ever try to excuse conservative behavior by saying that liberals do it too, you can call me on it.
B.R.: What if my argument is that your argument is invalid? If your point is that liberals have stupid ideas about reducing gun violence, then it DOES matter that conservatives have stupid ideas about gun violence too. However, if your point is that the specific idea of Gun Free Zones is stupid, then it wouldn't do any good for me to retort that "armed guards in every school" is also stupid. Is that the distinction?
A.F.: There are plenty of low information voters out there. Did you watch some of the interviews of average citizens during the recent election season? It was downright discouraging. Frankly Rich, I think your list here is kind. Remember the women who loved Obama because he "bought her this cellphone??" Or Jamie Foxx who recently called Obama "Our Lord & Savior"?? It's discouraging.
B.R.: Here's a perfect example of my point. There are low information voters on both sides of the aisle. How is it fair or beneficial to only focus on the blue morons when there's likely just as many red morons?
Me: In an informal or formal debate situation, your job is to take the elements of the other person's argument and refute them. Pointing out that someone else does the very same thing does nothing to refute the argument. It simply deflects the argument to another topic. So, deal with the argument first, then it you like, point out the hypocrisy. Those are two unrelated transactions.
If my argument is invalid, show me systematically why.
B.R.: Noted.
No comments:
Post a Comment