John Thornton:
> When the far right label behaviours and opinions they don't like as "treasonous" and constantly refer to people they disagree with of as "traitors" does it help their cause or hurt it? None of the accused individuals are guilty of being traitors. None of the behaviours labeled as such in the last few years by right-wing pundits are even close to treason.
>
> > While I don't personally like the Hitler analogies I cannot say that it is ineffective in arousing people. Rational arguments will not always be effective. To quote Swift, "You cannot reason a man out of something he was never reasoned into." Not everyone holds the beliefs they subscribe to after long internal debates on the strength and/or weakness of it.<
> right. But do you think it would be a good thing to set up a
> newspaper, in the style of the old Kansas-based socialist one, but
> named APPEAL TO UNREASON? do we really want a movement based on
> demagoguery? don't we want a movement that has a generally scientific
> viewpoint rather than one where irrationality is encouraged?
it's bad form to respond to one's own posts, but I have an additional point: I don't expect rational argumentation to be a big part of the growth of the needed mass anti-system movement. Rather, it's the events of the day, especially those that hit people personally, that will help spark that movement (or rather, might do so). But I want the left to be appealing to reason because we (or most of us) want to set up a more rational society. Appeals to unreason -- calling people "traitor," "fascist," etc. when it doesn't make sense to do so -- helps to create a (new) irrational society.
-- Jim Devine "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.