Saturday, October 07, 2006

A Counter Challenge


Olaf over at Prairie Wrangler which describes itself as blog by "Repentant freethinkers, with tips on how to rope rookies, blowhards and chumps from across the political spectrum..." usually keeps the rope handy for those on the left and progressive end of the political spectrum.

Repeating oft said arguments around the rights current bugaboos, Status of Women, abortion, etc. he is upset that
no-one talks to him. Well perhaps if he would take up an argument that actually posits some debate that would not be limited to stereotypical attacks on straw-men and charactures of the left he would get some response.

He like many others on the right make the falacious argument that we lefties and progressives are all in lock step. That we don't disagree, that our arguments are warmed over Michael Moore...none of them of course have heard of Chomsky, just kidding of course they have, they atttak him for being a rich guy...any ways it's a stereotype lefty they attack. So here is a real lefty challenge for Olaf.

Here is his opportunity. As he has been so kind as to link me as a Best Mouthpiece,I will challenge him to prove I am a lock step lefty on these issues;

1. Smoking

2. The Seal Hunt

3. Tax cuts

4. Wages for Housework

5. Free Trade

6. Kyoto




Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

2 comments:

Olaf said...

Eugene,

I definitely didn't say that everyone on the left or who considers themselves progressive are of the same opinion on every issue (and I didn't mean to imply it, if that's how it was taken). So, unfortunately, your challenge is in vain, because I agree that "progressives" can disagree, and often do.

That was actually kind of the point of my "challenge", was to say that not all conservatives think the same (in the same way that not all progressives do), and not all conservatives are obstinately devoted to a strict dogma. As such, I wanted those on the left or anyone who disagreed with my opinions on those matters, to teach me why they think the way they do. I figured I might learn something.

I was decrying the lack of inter-partisan dialogue and discourse, suggesting that if you just stick to your own "political kind" or those who you generally agree with, than you're being rigid and pig-headed. There is rarely a settled matter in politics, for the reason that there are good points to be made on both sides of most arguments. So to limit yourself to those opinions that confirm your biases is fruitless.

eugene plawiuk said...

Which is why I prefer to comment on other bloggers political positions left or right, I have criticised the pro-war progressives, PFW as I call them, in my own blog.

As I did with your post. I did leave a message on your blog and will sometimes, but a larger debate on issues sometimes takes a lengthier response.


As for teaching you anything, that is doubtful since your opinions are already set in how you debate a question. You posit a problem, you offer your opinion of others possible reasons, the left or progressives, and then you offer your solution, usually right out of the mouths of others on the mainstream right. Again many on the right suffer from generalizations of the left and progressives. Though I am glad you see that there are a diversity of opinions. So0mething missed i broad sweeping generalizations.

As I said if you really want a challenge try reading some 'right' wing libertarians like Murray Rothbard, or Lew Rockwell. And see the difference between their arguments and those of the mainstream right like Mark Steryn.

See my post on Flag Burning as an example.