[d at DCC] Fwd: Re: Your country needs you (or "Our MP is on the C-32 committee")
cdfrey at foursquare.net
Thu Dec 30 20:56:40 EST 2010
On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 09:46:51AM -0500, Ian! D. Allen wrote:
> Alas, in politics, "If you're explaining, you're losing":
> To change mass policies, you've got to come up with some short,
> inspirational message that doesn't need any explanation. It doesn't
> have to be right or based on facts; it just has to be dead simple.
I'm over a month late to this debate, but nobody has challenged the
basic logic of this argument, so I'll give it a try.
What use is winning if we're not right, or not based on fact? If we
win, and we're wrong, then we're no better than the one we're fighting
against. And if we win with a lie, how can anyone trust us to have their
interests at heart?
Basically, this argument, boiled down, is saying: "The Canadian people
are too dumb and lazy to be expected to handle the truth, and therefore
in order to do what is best for them, they need to be deceived into
voting for our policies."
This is arrogant. It smacks of being more interested in our own
policies than the good of the nation. Such an attitude is the exact
one we are trying to resist in the current situation.
Thank you Russell for not following such a path.
I have no problem with simple. In fact, if our arguments are too complex,
then it's a sign we haven't done our homework. But make the _truth_ as
simple as possible, and no simpler.
More information about the Discuss