Oh come on, Dennis. Moore's final message is that we should oppose war b/c it's used to maintain an oppressive and exploitive social order. Therefore, it is obvious that, instead of using the film to organize around the antiwar theme, we should spend our time using the film to bludgeon OTHER lefties who plan to waste 15 minutes voting, but who aren't voting Nader. It's useful for sliming anyone who doesn't demand a different film as a --gasp!-- closet Democrat! It doesn't matter how many times you say you're not. It doesn't matter what you do otherwise. If you dare hint at voting for Kerry this election, you are insufficiently radical. You fail.
Come'n Dennis, isn't that what films like this are for?
At 03:05 PM 7/10/2004, Wilson Barber wrote:
> > It's not McCarthy-like to point out what is, in
> > effect, an ad hominem
> > attack on Moore's approach to the Bush-Saudi
> > connection.
>
>.. And that's my point. Those that have pointed out
>weaknesses in more presentation has been labeled by
>several member of this list as "too left". That's
>exactly the tactics of the "far right". I would think
>that on this list that debate would be elevated above
>such fallacious argumentation.
>
>WB
Marx called 'em 'crude socialists'. In other words, critiquing fellow travelers isn't necessarily McCarthyist and has a long, honorable tradition. We are arguing over the way leftists ought to engage what Marx called the "struggles and wishes of the age." It's a debate _among_ people who share the same broad principles but disagree, in this case, how to reach the broader public wrt the Iraq war and, what is Yoshie's real issue, whether to vote for Nader or Kerry--a position which Yoshie finds insufficiently left. That is, those of us who vote Kerry are insufficiently leftist because we're throwing in with the democrats.
People are referring to an ultraleftist tendency to engage in external critique, rather than immanent critique. E.g., The sparts or Red Orange crowd that would show up to anything vaguely leftist and denounce it for being insufficiently leftist.
here's a clue: simply calling something a logical fallacy, without demonostrating it as such, and of course, without recognizing the potential for abusing it (fallacy fallacy) is a waste of time.
At 03:15 PM 7/10/2004, Wilson Barber wrote:
> > No I don't forget that and this ploy is idiotic, as
> > idiotic as expecting a
> > film to deal with 10 major ideas when the best
> > you're going to deal with in
> > 2 hrs. is maybe ONE.
>
>Your argument is fallacious
>[1] "idiotic"
> a) Appeal to Ridicule
> b) Appeal to Popularity
> c) Ad Hominem Abusive
> d) Appeal to Emotion
>
>[2] "expecting a film to deal with 10 major ideas when
>the best you're going to deal with in 2 hrs."
> a) False Dilemma
> b) Red Herring
> c) Slippery Slope
>
>[3] "You didn't answer my other question. Are you
>accusing people of red-baiting?"
> a) Red Herring
> b) Poisoning the Well
>
>Just to name a few...
"We're in a fucking stagmire."
--Little Carmine, 'The Sopranos'