Scary, really scary those who regard themselves as staunch defenders of an open society have to resort to such fundamentalist methods..
We made some remarks at the end of a pretty dodgy article (and really were mild, we could have torn the thing apart but it was hardly worth our time), look at the responses..
That’s got to be the dumbest post I’ve ever seen on this forum, maybe the whole internet. We’re all more stupid for having read it.
Do you work for the Fed? Are you a Fed economist, with a PHD?
You are a waste of time. Too bad this will show up underneath your post – so innocent people will not be warned to avoid this drivel – and the subsequent mind-numbing effects.
What exactly are the ‘long-term returns’ and ‘numerous external benefits’ of having a huge number of high school graduates that can’t read a newspaper and whose math is limited to how many grams in an ounce and how many ounces in a quarter-pound (but can’t even get a cashier job because they can’t make change)?
2) Invoking an absolute truth instead
Why bother arguing with data, facts and arguments when one is privy to the absolute truth. The OldTrooper just refers us to some canonical work. It’s absolute truth is self-evident and doesn’t need demonstrating. How, even if Hayek constitutes some form of absolute truth, how would OldTrooper (or anyone else) be able to ascertain this?
Under the present economic circumstances we could be considered mild Keynesianists (certainly no socialists) but we certainly do not argue his work is the source of all wisdom, let alone the sole source of it. In the Soviet Union, many debates used to be settled y reference to some canonical work (Marx, Lenin, Stalin..). Fundamentalist Islam (or other religions) do the same.
3) Demonization of heretics
From just a few innocuous comments, we’re turned into “brainwashed, religious believers of some theories we studies in our youth.” It doesn’t even need to be established that we’re actually followers of these theories (which most certainly we’re not).
So we’re branded socialist by some guy who doesn’t respond to rational debate, referencing us to some absolute truth, without there being a shred of evidence of us being socialists.
Now change “Hayek” (his form of absolute truth) for (“Das Kapital”), who turns out to be the socialist (at least in methods?
This would be laughable if not for the fact that we’ve experienced this kind of exchanges quite frequently. American fundamentalism is definitely on the rise. It’s scary to see those who consider themselves to be staunch defenders of free societies resorting to such fundamentalist methods…