Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site unmvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!lanl!unmvax!cliff
From: cliff@unmvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Re: The net's favorite form of argument -- reply to Sykora
Message-ID: <841@unmvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 17-May-85 09:19:42 EDT
Article-I.D.: unmvax.841
Posted: Fri May 17 09:19:42 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 19-May-85 06:41:49 EDT
References: <456@gargoyle.UChicago.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Lines: 25

> To repeat the main point of my article:  Showing that affirmative
> action is or is not racism, or that taxation is or is not theft
> according to this or that definition, does not by itself prove
> anything about the justice or injustice of these practices.  "Aff.
> action is racism," "taxation is theft," "profit is theft," "abortion
> is murder," etc. make good slogans but bad arguments, and those who
> use them as arguments only demonstrate that they can't tell the
> difference.  
> 
> Richard Carnes

"Taxation is theft." doesn't necessarily make a good slogan; especially
on this net.  I agree with Richard; even if it can be shown that xxx is
an instance of yyy via dictionary zzz, it won't even yield a retraction
by someone who said xxx is not yyy, *much less* help convince anyone
that xxx is wrong.  As for what constitutes a good slogan, check out
net.jokes for successful slogans that are ambiguous or are otherwise
unsuited to motivate the reader to think rationally.  Slogans are an
example of empty rhetoric.

I haven't posted much to net.politics lately; I have been involved in
an interesting set of court cases.  Perhaps when it is over I will post
my interpretation of the political ramifications of the event.

					--Cliff