[Campaignforrealdemocracy] Straw Man Times !

Robin Smith robinsmith3 at gmail.com
Mon Oct 24 20:01:53 UTC 2011 

Oops sorry. Fair enough.

Lets abolish house prices and taxation too.

On 24 October 2011 20:58,  <marknbarrett at googlemail.com> wrote:
> We are not talking state regulation! The original statement says 'independent regulation' and what I put forward says (direct) 'democratic control' (through sovereign assemblies)  which we  all know does not mean the state. Anyway I can see a God almighty bun fight ahead  heh heh !
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robin Smith <robinsmith3 at gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 20:56:45
> To: <marknbarrett at googlemail.com>
> Cc: Brian Mankin<Brian at mankin.me.uk>; strikersassembly<strikersassembly at googlegroups.com>; <trafalgar-square-assembly at googlegroups.com>; <oh15 at googlegroups.com>; <campaignforrealdemocracy at lists.aktivix.org>
> Subject: Re: [Campaignforrealdemocracy] Straw Man Times !
>
> Oh dear. State regulation guarantees corruption. Checkout the FSA
>
> On 24 October 2011 20:32,  <marknbarrett at googlemail.com> wrote:
>> Hi Brian thanks for the clarification about what is a Straw Man - I didn't realise :-)     ok - here's what I think the camp should say it's for, and act upon:  (1)  democratic control of the state and its power to regulate business locally, nationally and globally    (2) a new,  direct not representative model of democracy (3) solidarity with the Arab Spring  (4) real democracy now!   Is that clear enough? Looking forward to any comments -  Mark
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Brian Mankin <Brian at Mankin.me.uk>
>> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 16:46:56
>> To: Mark Barrett<marknbarrett at googlemail.com>
>> Cc: <oh15 at googlegroups.com>; strikersassembly<strikersassembly at googlegroups.com>; <campaignforrealdemocracy at lists.aktivix.org>; <trafalgar-square-assembly at googlegroups.com>
>> Subject: Re: [Campaignforrealdemocracy] Straw Man Times !
>>
>> Hello Mark,
>>
>> Actually a straw-man argument is a deliberately weak and misleading
>> representation of an opposing point of view.  The straw man argument is
>> presented so that it may easily challenged and defeated in an attempt
>> to slander and discredit the opposing position.
>>
>> Wikipedia describes the straw man thus:
>>> A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy
>>> based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position, twisting his
>>> words or by means of [false] assumptions.[1] To "attack a straw man"
>>> is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by
>>> replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent
>>> proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having
>>> actually refuted the original position.[1][2] Generally, the straw
>>> man is a highly exaggerated or over-simplified version of the
>>> opponent's original statement, which has been distorted to the point
>>> of absurdity. This exaggerated or distorted statement is thus easily
>>> argued against, but is a misrepresentation of the opponent's actual
>>> statement.
>>
>> Wikipedia also gives two examples.
>>
>> Example 1
>>>   Person A: We should liberalize the laws on beer.
>>>   Person B: No, any society with unrestricted access to intoxicants
>>>      loses its work ethic and goes only for immediate gratification.
>>
>>> The proposal was to relax laws on beer. Person B has exaggerated this
>>> to a position harder to defend, i.e., "unrestricted access to
>>> intoxicants".[1] It is a logical fallacy because Person A never made
>>> that claim. This example is also a slippery slope fallacy.
>>
>> Example 2
>>>   Person A: Our society should be taxed less.
>>>   Person B: It is unjust to promote a society that neglects the poor.
>>
>>> In this case, Person B has transformed Person A's position from "less
>>> taxation" to "neglecting the poor", which is easier for Person B to
>>> defeat.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
>>
>>
>> - - - - -
>> I really don't think that Libby Purves article qualifies as a
>> straw man.  I'm not even sure that she has presented any sort of
>> argument at all.  She just seems to be generally snarky about the
>> presence of the protestors, the collateral damage their presence may be
>> causing to people and institutions that are not the target of the
>> protests and the apparent lack of a unifying message.
>>
>> Not having been to the protests, I can't comment on the first two
>> points.  But as to the third, I do share her apparent puzzlement.  I've
>> been reading these emails for some time now and I'm still not sure
>> precisely what you want or how it can be provided.
>>
>>
>> Brian,
>>
>> = = = = = = = = = =
>> On 24/10/11 11:53:27, Mark Barrett wrote:
>>> PS to be inclusive it is worth saying ( sorry should have with 1st
>>> post that
>>> "Straw Man argument" means crap argument, easy to knock down, looks
>>> strong
>>> but ain't) ;-)
>>>
>>> Also to note the headline above Purves article, "Enough of this
>>> Glastonbury
>>> Grievance" which i forgot to paste shows they are grubbing around
>>> looking
>>> for slurs, all the prejudices coming out such as ant-capitalists on
>>> benefits, hippies etc etc.
>>>
>>> We are winning so let's get our content clearer and win more!
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> On 24 October 2011 11:20, Mark Barrett <marknbarrett at googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > Hi again
>>> >
>>> > Here below is another critical article from the Times, although
>>> this
>>> time:
>>> > (a) they mention the statement and (b) there is a very good video
>>> on
>>> the
>>> > web-page.
>>> >
>>> > The 2-3 minute video is solely of activists in the camp talking
>>> (including
>>> > Robin Smith of these lists) mainly about capitalism or the system
>>> with no
>>> > editorial comment at all. The activists come across very well
>>> indeed. If we
>>> > up our game politically we can win the journalists over IMO.
>>> >
>>> > Unfortunately the video is behind the paywall, so I can't share it.
>>> > Although it's a pound for one month subscription at the moment in
>>> case
>>> > anyone can bear the idea of giving murdoch money.
>>> >
>>> > I have also pasted below today's news feature on the camp.
>>> Incidentally the
>>> > comments in the paper are ( and have been since the occupation
>>> began) more
>>> > broadly favourable towards the occupation which is perhaps why the
>>> video is
>>> > featured and the editorial today actually touches upon the camp's
>>> actual
>>> > political content, and process ( for the 1st time).
>>> >
>>> > Ciao for now
>>> >
>>> > Mark
>>> >
>>> > *The St Paul’s protesters have no specific aims; no realistic
>>> demands.
>>> > Occupy London should clear up and clear off
>>> > Libby Purves
>>> > *
>>> >
>>> > The trouble with being raised by the better sort of nuns is that
>>> you
>>> come
>>> > to expect not only high standards but almost crazily otherworldly
>>> ones from
>>> > anybody with a religious label round his or her neck. Examination
>>> of
>>> > conscience, confession of faults, loving your enemy, turning the
>>> other
>>> > cheek, offering up undeserved discomforts and humiliations for the
>>> Holy
>>> > Souls in Purgatory. All that.
>>> >
>>> > Even when you discard your own religious label you remain hard-
>>> wired
>>> to
>>> > expect them in those who haven’t. So, just as in a briefly South
>>> African
>>> > childhood I was scandalised by one school full of racist Ursuline
>>> nuns,
>>> > going on about “kaffirs” while wearing pectoral crosses, so I now
>>> spend a
>>> > lot of time cringing at murderous militant Islamists, mean-spirited
>>> hellfire
>>> > Evangelicals, Catholic paedophile cover-ups and the rest.
>>> >
>>> > When I was younger and even more naive, I remember my shock at
>>> finding out
>>> > the hard way what hawkish landlords the Church Commissioners were,
>>> that
>>> > religious publishers are not necessarily pleasant to deal with, and
>>> that the
>>> > BBC religion department can be as churlish as any other bit of the
>>> Corp. As
>>> > to those in Northern Ireland who glued “Catholic” and “Protestant”
>>> labels
>>> > over their un-Christian tribalism, the shame of it burns still.
>>> >
>>> > Go on, jeer, I deserve it for crimes against cynicism. Just blame
>>> those
>>> > kind, clever, humble self-sacrificing Sacred Heart nuns of my
>>> schooldays.
>>> > But it explains why I was rather pleased when the Rev Dr Giles
>>> Fraser, Canon
>>> > Chancellor of St Paul’s, was initially so welcoming to the “Occupy
>>> London”
>>> > campers in Paternoster Square. He seemed to me to display the
>>> correct amount
>>> > of saintly recklessness and neo-Franciscan welcome.
>>> >
>>> > Now Cathedral spokesmen are saying his “initial reaction” was not
>>> made in
>>> > consultation with the Dean and Chapter, and Dr Giddings of the
>>> General
>>> > Synod’s House of Laity speaks sorrowfully of “hindsight”. But a
>>> good
>>> few
>>> > Anglican voices are backing the original welcome, even though it is
>>> now
>>> > causing huge financial losses as the Cathedral closes, and may
>>> torpedo its
>>> > Advent and Christmas programme. All very well the campers scoffing
>>> “render
>>> > unto Caesar”, but in straitened times if the shop and café takings
>>> and
>>> > donations stop flowing, Caesar isn’t going to keep the heating on.
>>> >
>>> > So my main irritation is with the Occupy protesters themselves, and
>>> their
>>> > bombastic announcement that they may well stay beyond Christmas.
>>> That’s not
>>> > Christian, kind or reasonable. Unless, of course, the camp really
>>> has the
>>> > power to be a more effective agent for change than all the serious
>>> political
>>> > campaigners, community groups, and churches.
>>> >
>>> > So does it have that power? I have watched the encampment grow;
>>> listened to
>>> > all sides; noted the *Telegraph* poll saying more than 80 per cent
>>> think
>>> > the demonstrators should leave, and the *Guardian* one where 82 per
>>> cent
>>> > back them. I have trawled online for the views of occupiers in Wall
>>> Street,
>>> > Germany, Italy and Greece.
>>> >
>>> > Some are interesting and focused, particularly on the overweening
>>> power of
>>> > corporations and the kowtowing of governments to big money. Most
>>> are
>>> less
>>> > impressive. I especially like the German lad who arrived without a
>>> tent or
>>> > sleeping bag because “there are always spares”, and is relaxed
>>> about
>>> time
>>> > because though he lost his job a while ago, he’s on full pay until
>>> the end
>>> > of November. Who, and what system, does he think is paying him to
>>> sit in
>>> > someone else’s tent being righteous?
>>> >
>>> > I have read the UK group’s “manifesto”. It has nine points. It
>>> wants
>>> > “alternatives” to the current system, refuses to “pay for the
>>> banking
>>> > crisis”, does not accept any spending cuts, and wants an end to
>>> “global
>>> > injustice”, which it appears to say three times in slightly
>>> different ways.
>>> > It supports all other looming strikes and protests, and (in a brief
>>> happy
>>> > diversion into practicality) wants regulators to be “genuinely
>>> independent
>>> > of the industries they regulate”. Hear, hear.
>>> >
>>> > It concludes with point nine, “This is what democracy looks like.”
>>> >
>>> > But its “General Assembly” is not really what democracy looks like:
>>> or only
>>> > in tiny simple communities. In crowded, complicated nations
>>> democracy is
>>> > about graft and grunt, checks and balances, committee-work and the
>>> rule of
>>> > law, justice laboriously meted out, respect for individuals going
>>> about
>>> > their lawful business with no time to sit around in tents.
>>> >
>>> > The slogan “Capitalism is Crisis” has a nice ring to it, but it is
>>> neither
>>> > true nor clear. Capitalism is one of many imperfect systems. It has
>>> its
>>> > faults, which elections and clear manifestos exist to check.
>>> Socialism also
>>> > has its faults, and so does the kind of anarchism that sets up
>>> camps
>>> on
>>> > public property and demands more special treatment than its normal
>>> users.
>>> >
>>> > Capitalism, in the form of greedy and reckless banking, has
>>> certainly
>>> > contributed to the present need for public retrenchment and
>>> unwelcome cuts.
>>> > But so have each of us, in our way: in amassing household debt and
>>> making
>>> > massive consumer and lifestyle demands unearned by rising
>>> productivity. So
>>> > did the last Government with its reckless spending, waste, selling
>>> off gold
>>> > reserves, deregulation, careless immigration policy and unwise
>>> wars.
>>> So did
>>> > the Conservative Government before them, with its disregard for the
>>> national
>>> > industrial base, cavalier attitude to mass unemployment and worship
>>> of the
>>> > City.
>>> >
>>> > Plenty of things need fixing, but protests have lost their focus.
>>> The
>>> > Jarrow marchers, Aldermaston CND, Vietnam protesters and Greenham
>>> women all
>>> > had clear demands, and it was obvious to everyone what would have
>>> appeased
>>> > them. Even the student protesters against fees were reasonably
>>> well-focused:
>>> > it was a limited policy they were hoping to reverse. The trouble
>>> with UK
>>> > Uncut and the idealistic, self-righteous campers of Occupy London
>>> is
>>> that it
>>> > is impossible to think of any clear, feasible action by an elected
>>> > government that would satisfy and shift them.
>>> >
>>> > For it is, basically, a tented tantrum. A nylon-roofed, media-
>>> savvy,
>>> > Twitterati, festival-inspired, Glasto-generation sulk. I’m very
>>> glad
>>> that St
>>> > Paul’s was gracious towards it at first. But soon the campers
>>> should
>>> return
>>> > the favour by folding their tents and silently stealing away. And
>>> if
>>> they
>>> > really want public acclaim and sympathy, they won’t leave one
>>> single
>>> bit of
>>> > litter.
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/libbypurves/
>>> article3203723.ece
>>> >
>>> > *Protesters threaten to keep St Paul’s closed for Christmas*
>>> >
>>> >    - [image: St Pauls cathedral on Sunday morning as its doors
>>> remain
>>> >    closed to worshippers and tourists due to the Anti-Capitalism
>>> protest site
>>> >    outside their front doors.]
>>> >    1 of 6
>>> >    Protesters outside St Paul’s. The cathedral is losing £16,000 a
>>> day Times
>>> >    photographer, Matt Lloyd
>>> >    - [image: Activists start an overflow camp in Finsbury Square]
>>> >    2 of 6
>>> >    Activists have started an overflow camp in Finsbury Square Times
>>> >    photographer, Matt Lloyd
>>> >    - [image: Protesters hold a meeting on the steps of St Pauls’
>>> >    Cathedral]
>>> >    3 of 6
>>> >    Manadatory Credit: Photo by Ray Tang / Rex Features (1476798a)
>>> >    Protesters hold a meeting on the steps of St Pauls’ Cathedral
>>> Occupy The
>>> >    London Stock Exchange demonstration, London, Britain – 23 Oct
>>> 2011 St Paul’s
>>> >    Cathedral forced to close for the first time since the Second
>>> World War due
>>> >    to the presence of the Occupy The London Stock Exchange Camp Ray
>>> >    Tang/Rex Features
>>> >    -  4 of 6
>>> >    The City of London has appealed to them to move on peacefully
>>> Andy
>>> >    Rain/EPA
>>> >    - [image: Tents belonging to protestors taking part in the
>>> ‘Occupy
>>> >    London Stock Exchange’ demonstration remain in place in front of
>>> St Paul’s
>>> >    Cathedral]
>>> >    5 of 6
>>> >    Their tents fill up the plaza in front of St Paul's Oli
>>> Scarff/Getty
>>> >    Images
>>> >    - [image: Finsbury Square]
>>> >    6 of 6
>>> >    Anti-capitalist protesters have set up a second camp at Finsbury
>>> Square Carl
>>> >    Court/AFP/Getty Images
>>> >
>>> >  <http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3203440.ece#>
>>> > <http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3203440.ece#>
>>> >   * Ruth Gledhill<http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/profile/
>>> Ruth-Gledhill>
>>> > * Religion Correspondent
>>> >  Last updated October 24 2011 12:10AM
>>> >
>>> > St Paul’s Cathedral could be closed for three months as the
>>> anti-capitalist
>>> > Occupy London protest camp continued to grow in size, expanding
>>> into
>>> nearby
>>> > Finsbury Square.
>>> >
>>> > The protest puts at risk Remembrance Sunday and the Lord Mayor’s
>>> Show next
>>> > month and services in the run-up to Christmas.
>>> >
>>> > The protesters showed no signs of abandoning their “mission”,
>>> remaining
>>> > unmoved by the pleas of Dr Marjory Foyle, 89, who spent more than
>>> 30
>>> years
>>> > as a missionary doctor in Nepal. She wept as she told the
>>> protesters
>>> that
>>> > they were wrong. Speaking in front of the camp of 200 people, she
>>> described
>>> > going to see St Paul’s during the Blitz, the last time the building
>>> was shut
>>> > down, and then for only four days. “Every building bar St Paul’s
>>> was
>>> erased
>>> > and I said to myself the hand of God is on St Paul’s.”
>>> >
>>> > Matthew Richardson, councillor for the ward neighbouring St Paul’s,
>>> said
>>> > that lawyers had advised the City of London Corporation that it
>>> could take
>>> > at least three months to move the protesters on. He understood that
>>> the
>>> > cathedral would remain closed as long as there were health and
>>> safety
>>> > issues.
>>> >
>>> > The City of London authorities warned that the protesters, now into
>>> the
>>> > second week of their encampment, risk damaging the “integrity” of
>>> their
>>> > movement if they stayed longer.
>>> >
>>> > The legal situation is similar to that at Parliament Square. If the
>>> > protesters do not decide to move voluntarily, City Corporation
>>> lawyers may
>>> > face months of legal battles to get them out. Stuart Fraser,
>>> chairman of the
>>> > City of London Corporation policy and resources committee, said:
>>> “The City
>>> > will accommodate lawful protest but this should not accommodate a
>>> long-term
>>> > campsite that blocks the highway.”
>>> >
>>> > However, Islington Council, owners of Finsbury Square where the
>>> second camp
>>> > is located, seemed more sympathetic. Councillor Catherine West,
>>> leader of
>>> > the council, said: “We support the right to peaceful protest,
>>> balanced with
>>> > the needs of our community.”
>>> >
>>> > There were no public services at St Paul’s yesterday, nor will
>>> there
>>> be any
>>> > for the foreseeable future but the Dean and Chapter are continuing
>>> to say
>>> > morning and evening prayer in the cathedral. People who turned up
>>> for
>>> > services yesterday were directed to nearby St Vedast Foster Lane.
>>> Some
>>> > worshippers held an impromptu evensong on the cathedral’s steps.
>>> >
>>> > St Paul’s is losing about £16,000 a day because of the decision to
>>> close
>>> > its doors, 80 per cent of its running costs.
>>> >
>>> > Organisers of the occupation announced the first edition of a
>>> newspaper to
>>> > be printed on Wednesday, *The Occupied Times of London*. The Museum
>>> of
>>> > London has asked for the first of the 1,000 copies to be printed
>>> >
>>> > http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3203440.ece
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Apathy is Dead !
>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/solarider/5254770064/#/photos/
>>> solarider/5254770064/lightbox/
>>>
>>
>> ------quoted attachment------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Campaignforrealdemocracy mailing list
>>> Campaignforrealdemocracy at lists.aktivix.org
>>> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/campaignforrealdemocracy
>>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Campaignforrealdemocracy mailing list
>> Campaignforrealdemocracy at lists.aktivix.org
>> https://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/campaignforrealdemocracy
>>
>
>
>
> --
>
> The Robin Smith Institute. Good News! A roadmap to The Free State
>
> The SFR Group. Practical steps towards real reform
>



-- 

The Robin Smith Institute. Good News! A roadmap to The Free State

The SFR Group. Practical steps towards real reform

More information about the Campaignforrealdemocracy mailing list