Arguing politics with right wingers is like arguing with creationists

Everything they say is based on beliefs, not evidence.  They seem to have no interest in an honest discussion of the facts.  Instead they hang on to their naive ideologies like "Freedom" and "govt is incapable and corrupt".  I hate taxes as much as the next guy, but sometimes the best solution is a public solution.

 

For right wingers, the only solution is a capitalistic solution - everything else is "socialist".

 

Does anyone have any ideas or suggestions on tactics that might get these people to open thier minds just a little bit?

Views: 404

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

I've definitely seen that amongst the hardcore Libertarians, yeah. We've got a few in my local Atheist group who won't allow anything beyond pure, ultimate freedom.

All taxation is theft, and the government should not be allowed to levy taxes. Public schools should be closed in favor of private institutions, who should be allowed to teach whatever they want. Every private citizen should be allowed to own weapons of war, like grenade launchers and cruise missiles. Pure laissez-faire economics is the only system that should be allowed ... so apparently antitrust laws are evil and corporate monopolies are good.

I'm not even exaggerating. they've made every one of those arguments and won't back off an inch. They're fucking insane. It's like they're so blinded by their ideology that they can't see the horrors that their ideals will unleash.
Thank you Ayn Rand!! :)
Can't help you there. There's a wide range of Libertarians, but most of them are nutjobs. There might be one or two of the fringe ideologies that deal with the issues inherent to the main platform, but I haven't had those explained to me.
Well, sure the Ayn Randians are insane, but I generally place them on the right of the political spectrum, support for liberal sex and drug policies notwithstanding. Libertarians are just Republicans that like to stay home from church so they can fuck and get high. It's the permanently adolescent version of right-wingnuttery: "You're not the boss of me!" Of course, they fail to notice that extreme individualism is easy prey for organized authoritarianism, the grown-up version of right-wingnuttery, also known as fascism.

Which is why libertarianism put in practice always devolves immediately into feudalism, and if one warlord gets powerful enough, fascism. Your local warlord (or corporate overlord) will simply force you to swear allegiance or leave you out in the cold to starve (or worse).

Which is why there are no libertarian intellectuals. (Hint: Ayn Rand was the smartest one, and she was an idiot.) They can't count. Gangs are always more powerful than individuals, because they consist of more than one person. Individuals must pool their power in order to get what they want and protect them from predators. This means government is required, and not inherently evil. We know from experience that self-government is better than authoritarian forms. The rest is details, none of which support libertarianism in the slightest.
I view Objectivism/Libertarianism as sort of like Communism, in that they were both conceived by intellectuals with no experience in actual government. They're based on pretty little ideals which had never been tested in the real world, before they were thrust on some unsuspecting country.

Well, that's not entirely true. We had a system similar to Libertarianism, in the late 1800's. It lead to the corporate oligarchy, company-store scam, and abuse of workers. The Libertarians apparently want to take us back to the age of the robber barons.
Actually Bill, that's sort of the endpoint of pure market fundamentalism, too. Pile up enough cash so you never have to work again (though some folks get addicted to ruthless accumulation for its own sake). Of course, it's not entirely clear that the point of Marxism is for the working class to not have to work. Your source sounds a bit confused on the issue.
I'm trying to figure out whether this high-profile gigolo (who became a billionaire thanks to the largesses of an hyperwealthy heiress) is a socialist or capitalist. Maybe a rare - and successful - breed of both. Or a Robin Hoodist.
I have no suggestions on tactics. In my experience, it is borderline impossible to breach the walls of nationalism and gun-clinging government fear that american right-wingers typically express.

Right-wingers in my country are practically Trotsky by comparision to American right-wingers.

Still, without Fox news I wouldn't laugh half as hard half as often!

I can't even think "Fair and balanced" without getting a case of the horrified giggles.
I have been on a mission to attack the "framing" of their arguments. Health care has been framed as "govt takeover" of 1/5th of the economy, and an infringement on our freedoms.

I have been trying to frame the argument differently. It is a question of morality and fiscal conservativism.

The moral frame:
"Why do you think we should let people die due to lack of an ability to pay? No other industrialized country does this"

The fiscal frame:
"Don't you care about the future economic viability of our country? Why do you want to increase our debt even more? You know that US health care costs are the highest in the world - by far, why dont' you want to control costs so we can get our budget under control?"

The results are pending.
LarryL, If you want a detailed story of how they capture the "framing" of issues just read Merchants of Doubt and see how organized, structured, funded and extensive their operation is. "They" are the right-wing, free-market, religious nuts who use the think tanks and corporate wealth to bully the press (when they don't control it or go outside Murdock's businesses) to control the message the public hears, buy off the "experts", and avoid paying taxes. It's incredibly effective. For them, healthcare is just another profitable business. They don't care how many people die due to lack of access or how many people go bankrupt trying to pay for care. It's just another way to make money. Only the insurance companies make the fortune-- it doesn't even really go to the healthcare providers as much as insurance executives... pretty pathetic.
I listened to a podcast interview with Oreskes on "Merchants". Yes, it is effective - I see the impact of this type of deception everyday in those around me. It is also alarming and very difficult to fight against. Google "How facts backfire" to get an idea of what we are up againt.
"Men must be taught as if you taught them not,
and things unknown proposed as things forgot."

- Alexander Pope

RSS

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service