Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Like Tommy De Seno, The Logo finds himself in a lot of political skirmishes with those on the Pretty Far Left. They often take this form:
Young woman with clipboard, wearing Greenpeace t-shirt and standing outside Apple Store (Activist): Hello, sir. Do you have a few minutes for the environment?
The Logo: Sorry, I don't think I'm a good target for you.
Activist: Oh! That's too bad. May I ask why?
Logo: Well, I disagree with a lot of your positions.
Activist: Which ones in particular?
Logo: You don't support nuclear power, unless I've missed something. And weren't you involved in that plastic shopping bag ban?
Activist: Plastic bags consume huge amounts of oil, and they make up a big part of the giant trash whirlpool off Hawaii.
Logo: I thought it was something about killing seabirds.
Activist: That's right. Seals think they're jellyfish, and seabirds get tangled in them.
Logo: But I think the numbers Greenpeace used were based on false information.
Activist: Like what?
Logo: I'm not sure... I read it somewhere.
Activist: Well, it's hard to ignore that giant garbage dump in the middle of the ocean. Can I sign you up for a donation?
Logo: No, I'm pretty sure that there's some misinformation going on with that, and you'd have to change your views on nuclear power... [slinks away, muttering to self.]
That's how these things often go. She's armed with talking points, and I'm unprepared to really challenge her. What I'd have liked to have said was more like this:
...
Activist: Which ones in particular?
Logo (consulting iPhone): Your support of pacifism and your opposition to nuclear power, for starters. And you've been spreading disinformation to further your political goals.
Activist: Disinformation?
Logo: On your website's page about plastic bags, you state that "up to 1 million seabirds and 100,000 marine mammals and turtles die each year as a result of plastic debris."
Activist: That's right.
Logo: Those numbers are based on a 1987 Canadian study that estimated that 100,000 marine mammals are killed each year by discarded fishing nets. In 2002, an Australian report misstated this as plastic bags, an error that was corrected in 2006. Why's Greenpeace still passing along this bad data, and basing legislation on it?
Activist: I don't know. What's your source?
Logo: The Times of London, March 8, 2008. Would you like to see the URL?
Activist: No, that's OK.
Logo: And then there's the matter of Greenpeace's co-founder, Patrick Moore. He wrote that he quit the organization because "Greenpeace has evolved into an organization of extremism and politically motivated agendas." This was in the Wall Street Journal in 2008. Do you want the URL to that?
Activist: Not really. Look, I need to be moving on. Have a nice day.
Logo: You too!
The Logo recognizes that we're not going to convert the Greenpeace activist (as Franco notes below, there are fundamental differences at work here), but we should want to plant a seed of self-doubt. And more important, we need to be persuasive to relatively apolitical observers: the mom waiting at the crosswalk near the exchange above; the relatives at the family barbecue overhearing an exchange between you and your left-wing uncle; the neighbor who asks your honest opinion about global warming.
What this requires is a concise, compelling and credible encapsulation of our political positions. In other words, an elevator pitch. Each encapsulation should be accessible from a handheld, and it should leverage the power of a community for its creation and maintenance.
You probably see where we're going with this.
Deferring further elaboration to future posts, it makes sense to start with some pilot efforts. We can work on them together, figure out the most effective format, and use the results as templates for what we hope will be a wide range of positions (some positions will be at odds, because conservatives don't hold uniform views -- that's OK).
But first: what are some arguments you'd like to win?
- Comment (62)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments:
May '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
What arguments would I like to see win?
Sep '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
What's the talking point for this one?
"Most smart people are liberals."
Dec '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
The Seventh-Day Adventist Church is prove of how resistant people can be to externally-sourced seeds of self-doubt. It is the descendant of a millennial cult whose founder predicted the end of the world on a date and time specific in the 19th century. When the hour of doom passed with no ill effects, he checked his calculations, found he'd been off, and asked his followers to recruit more members for the REAL end of the world prayer party. Each time the prediction failed, some of the cultists took it as proof not of the founder's ignorance but of their own lack of faith: rather than seeds of doubt, reality actually fertilized their conviction.
Jul '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Logo, I've been going to Hawaii for 35 years. Beaches that were once pristine, with only an occasional glass Japanese fishing-net float or nautical driftwood are now completely fouled by plastic detritus, mostly tiny bits that are impossible to clean up.
May '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Dan Holmes: What's the talking point for this one?
"Most smart people are liberals." · Feb 13 at 1:50pm
"anyone with half a brain wouldn't make such an incendiary comment to an intelligent conservative like myself. But then I suppose your own statement is proof of it's fallacy, eh?"
May '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Nick Stuart: What arguments would I like to see win? · Feb 13 at 1:46pm
Maybe we shouldn't try to tackle something so divisive (bada-bing).
How about:
Dec '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
I think this is a brilliant idea. It could function like Wikipedia (a convenient source of information) except filled with "credible" information.
I'm always a little leery of the potential consequences of group consensus. But the fact of the matter is that conservatives have a messaging problem and they lack the media and academic institutional reinforcement of their viewpoint that liberals enjoy.
My quarrel of choice: Ideals of limited government and self-reliance demonstrate conservative's value of humanity, not lack of compassion.
Edited on February 13, 2011 at 11:45pmJun '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
My take:
Activist: "May I talk to you for a moment about the environment."
Me: "Sorry, I'm not a member of that religion."
Nov '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
I think the most difficult aspect of this is that you aren't usually going to win on facts, because any fact you present will be brushed aside as "a special case". What seems to work best is to develop arguments based on their assumptions and beliefs, and then show the inconsistency of their proposals within their own belief systems.
Jan '11
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Some arguments I'd like to win:
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Good point, Kenneth. The Logo misstated the nature of his objection, as he hasn't seen any dispute over the existence of the big floating garbage eddy. And it does indeed consist partly of plastic bags and bottles -- although it's not clear how much of this can be attributed to municipalities that don't dump garbage into the waters.
The misinformation objection is over Greenpeace's attempt to justify a ban based on dead sea animals.
Edited on February 14, 2011 at 12:51amRe: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
By the way: great topics, everyone.
Please keep them coming. We'll probably pick about 5 to start out with, and get to others in a second wave.
Jan '11
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
What is a giant "R" doing at an Apple store?
Imagine if you had a tool that could come up with arguments for you. Presumably, the other side would have that as well. Next time we have an argument, we'll just sync our phones, and have a Political Pokemon battle.
Borkachu, I choose you!
Wise-Latinizard, quick attack!
And what would I like to win? I'd like to convince someone that I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me.
Jul '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
Which arguments do I want to win?
All of them, of course.
But! Often establishing credibility is more important than whipping the Leftists. It's foolish to be unwilling to make tactical concessions in aid of strategic victories.
May '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
I figure that this is a private property issue. What percentage of those beaches lathered in garbage are privately owned and operated? I'll wager zero.
Dec '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
I really want to win the social justice argument in the Catholic church (and other denominations, I suspect). What passes these days for the "social justice" movement in the church is really stealth liberation theology. Marxism dressed up in "Christian" clothes. The adherents are utterly unwilling to admit that they're socialists. That they have a religious faith in the top-down imposition of social order and personal virtue, rather than a true faith in Christ to change people's hearts and therefore build social order from the bottom up. The spiritual blindness of these people is such that I'm not sure there are any arguments which would win. I'd be thrilled to find out otherwise.
Oct '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
My answer would be that I'm not just conservative. I'm also pro-capitalist. Apple makes the best products for what I like to do with a computer - photoshop and design projects. If conservatism stands for anything, it should stand for merit.
In response to the topic at hand, countering the class warfare arguments of the left is most important. If we can't stop their tide on the economic policy issues, everything else is just a food fight.
Jan '11
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
AngloCon
I meant that quite literally. :)
Jul '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
"Less filling...... "
Edited on February 14, 2011 at 3:25amJul '10
Re: Which Arguments Do You Really Want to Win?
The problem with the example above is that the Greenpeace type is impervious to evidence and facts, as Lord Monkton found out at the grand Global Warming gathering in Norway.