We were talking about the role of the American media in promoting wars and conflicts that the US engages in.
After about 5 minutes of discussion and almost ending with the general consensus that the media is truly free to say what they wish in this country (someone said, “..Hey look at Fox News for example”). I raised my hand and stated “that since both the TV channels/airwaves are nationalized, the media isn’t free at all. The FCC could practically whisk away the respective channels license if they actually wanted too and this is why we ultimately always find the major stations siding with the establishment”. Basically, it seems as if the perspective I introduced sparked a whole other argument in which most people ended up siding with me. Someone even said something to the likes of since General Electric ( they own MSNBC) is so intertwined with government affairs, they are unreliable for information.
Anyone else have any similar experiences, where you were able to have people agree en masse (with a libertarian argument) without people even realizing what they were suddenly in favor of? I for one think it is very interesting to see members of our youth being pushed in a libertarian direction so easily (including myself too of course)!
In my political science class, there was once a question on a quiz that asked, “which of the following is a neo-con organization?” Answer: The Cato Institute. Lolz.
I remember when we had a discussion and the CATO institute was brought up. It was typical liberal bashing that libertarians where extreme right wings and Neo-Cons. Ironically, I went straight to their website and their daily critique was praise for Obama wanting to leave Iraq (so much for the Neo-Con argument). Then, I quickly found an article on how Bush’s foreign affairs policies have just prolonged wars and weren’t good for the economy (so much for the far right argument). Of course, the liberals couldn’t defend their stand and they simply stated that CATO institute was just lost and didn’t understand whether they were in support for Democrats or Republicans. I asked everyone in the room whether they understood The Nolan Chart and not one person said yes. At that point I just shut up.
IDK, for me just about anything political in school. Being taught that WWII brought us out of the great depression, but that somhow the new deal spending brought us out of the great depression, crapload of double think too.
I thought it was really neat when once in a debate my friend told me that, thanks to government intervention there were no longer any monopolies… And then 5 minutes later literally without even taking it back or saying anything he claimed that walmart was a monopoly… Especially stupid because there totally aren’t like 50 store chains nationwide exactly like it.
Bravo! The nice thing about the truth is there are a million paths to it. You can redirect people’s suspicion of big business toward a suspicion of the State quite easily, because they are trapped in the dem-repub/left-right paradigm and expect you to either be against big business (crony capitalists) or against government, but never both.
It’d be nice to have a list of ways to use people’s political blindness to get them to see, as you did here.
Once in a sociology class I had some people agree with me about the legalization of drugs.Recently I heard a guy in my class articulate a position on euthanasia emphasing choice, right to control your own body and that it’s not a matter for the government.I was extremely impressed.
Someone in class once argued for the legalization of marijuana, not because man should be free to consume mrijuana, but because it would give the state more tax revenue.
I cry every time I hear that. I get so excited when they talk about legalization. And then they explain that the government could get a bunch more money. Its an emotional roller coaster!
The other day my European history teacher actually said that minimum wage doesn’t work… I was really excited [:D]
Although he basically only put it down to inflation and he didn’t talk about how a natural increase in productivity does work and the effect upon unemployment… But its a start.
I once tried to argue against compulsory public schooling in a compulsory public school, only to find out from students and the teacher that without it, kids would still be working in the coal mines. [:(]
I did the same thing once in a debate that shook my faith in humanity except it became against the existence of government in general. My opponent decided that the reason that public school was necessary was that those coming out of it were “enlightened” and that government was justified because there was a scoreboard in our gym that apparently wouldn’t have been there without government. I agreed with him… So apparently he won… Yea, it really was that dumb.
In these kinds of debates, the libertarian is at a disadvantage because his arguments can be reduced ad absurdum without really being absurd. E.g., someone may ask “Oh, so you want ‘every man for himself’?” and your argument is gone. It’s not necessary to prove why “some men coerced for other men” is a better concept, it is just assumed to be true.