Saying something stupid like...

TonyHannon Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 01:49:56 PM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

You know the feeling…you log onto LabourHome or another political website, see a new comment under a story you’ve written or posted on and read remarks that you completely disagree with.



You re-read in amazement what the person has written and not only do you disagree but the person can have no possible, logical foundation for their conclusion. You stretch to understand how someone, presumably an adult, can be so misinformed to air from their gut such a foolish statement. “How could they justify such a prejudice / re-writing of history / deliberate distortion of fact?” Then you remember they’re using a pseudonym like “RedasHell” or “BlueMoon” which suggests there is absolutely no accounting for their comments.

The interaction leaves the political discourse falling even further towards the preserve of the competing ignorant. Nobody can be won over by new argument. The truth doesn’t out and everyone gives up on the whole foul jamboree.

I mention this because I believe the whole democratic system hinges on an informed and rational electorate. It’ll never be perfect but we should always protect and strive to improve the level of political discourse. This is such an irritant to me that, I regret to say, I have on occasion called people and their comments stupid – admittedly, I lower the tone when I do that but I think it’s important not to treat as “opinion” someone deliberately being misleading.

What prompted this post is that, this morning, I discovered a new depth has been plumbed by our cousins and friends in America and I often worry this is where our (in the UK) political discourse is heading.

Karl Rove, the greatest beneficiary ever of an uninformed electorate, had this astonishing remark when asked if Hillary Clinton was using the Rove playbook to attack Senator Obama:

ROVE: Well it's not what I would have done. There are democrats who are troubled by some of the things that Obama says and why she has not made this an issue earlier, particularly framing it up as an issue that would be raised in the general election and what's his answer now has eluded me. For example, he very early on made the comment about true patriotism consists not of wearing a flag lapel pin but speaking out on the issues. You can be a true patriot and speak out on issues AND wear a flag lapel pin. He is sort of questioning the patriotism of people who might put on a flag lapel pin, but disagree with his opinion.

Can you imagine Jonathan Powell coming up with such an audacious remark on television and not being laughed out the door? Imagine such stupidity making up the majority of political discussion. We have our fair share of nutters on all sides of the political spectrum but we’re not as bad as the US surely [where even now 50% believe Saddam had something to do with the attacks on Sept. 11<sup>th</sup>]?  

What I’d be interested to hear from you is your views on how to we protect and improve the level of debate in the UK?


tags: , , , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Saying something stupid like... | 7 comments (7 topical)

Re: Saying something stupid like... (#1)

by madasafish on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 02:36:17 PM GMT

"We have our fair share of nutters on all sides of the political spectrum but we’re not as bad as the US surely [where even now 50% believe Saddam had something to do with the attacks on Sept. 11"

Well if you believe Labour exist to help the poor in society you are as deluded as that 50% of Americans you refer to.


Re: Saying something stupid like... (#2)

by TonyHannon on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 03:28:44 PM GMT

Thank you for you contribution "madasafish" which neatly serves to prove my point...


[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something stupid like... (#3)

by treborc on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 09:56:06 AM GMT

Well if New Labour are a socialist government , it changed since my day, we all go on about the low paid, why have we low paid workers, the majority of people working in the UK are low paid council workers most factory workers shop assistants even shop managers not highly paid. So tell me in 2008 why we have children living below the poverty line, forget what has been done it's not enough. Iraq is still a burning question why did we go into this war Afghanistan I understand, Iraq, no way.

62% of the population still need some form of benefits from credits to rent or council tax payments, while the rich 1% take home in excess and pay lower tax.

Thats some socialism you tax the poor to give to the rich


Re: Saying something stupid like... (#4)

by jkitleft on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:57:53 PM GMT

It is rediculous that Rove said this. But on another note, the theory connecting Saddam and 9/11. While I don't think there is a direct connection, there were certainly links between Saddam and Al-Qaeda. They were certainly on his side in trying to slaughter Kurds in northern Iraq. Saddam was sheltering Abu Nidal as a government employee. Saddam was a facsist with total control of Iraq. I think he knew that Zarqawi had got into the country, despite intelligence reports released. Muhammed Zaidan, who pushed Leon Klinghoffer, off his chair, of the boat, was sheltered by Saddam. Abdul Rahman Yasin was sheltered by Saddam, he was the man who attempted to destroy the World Trade Center in 1993.


Re: Saying something stupid like... (#5)

by rwendland on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 12:46:04 AM GMT

Your belief is contrary to the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency which stated (in 2006) it "continues to maintain there was no partnership between [Saddam and Al-Qaeda]", after it had examined 34 million pages of documentation taken from Iraq. (page 63 of this Senate Intelligence Committee report.) Rather authoratative don't you think?


[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something stupid like... (#6)

by jkitleft on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 06:27:54 PM GMT

Ok, I'll retract part of my statement.

Perhaps there were no direct links between Saddam, and Al-Qaeda. I know I am having it both ways, and I know that the only government with major influence from Al-Qaeda, was Afghanistan. Pakistan's government, to some extent, had a major influence from the Taliban, but Musharref capitulated (albeit, in my view, in a way that has proved strategically inept, as Pakistan CAN police their boarders with Afghanistan effectively).

However, the argument that a secular establishment ruled Iraq, is nonsense. I cannot sanely believe that Iraq was behind the events of September 11th, 2001. But I do know, that they were the only government to publically congratulate the attacks, and Iraq had harboured terrorists and gangsters from every major Islamist terrorist gang in the region. Of course all Middle Eastern countries have terrorists in them. But, harbouring, and/or employing these wanted men/women is something that is not universal.

The report says they cannot prove there was a link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda. It has not disproved it either. So, to an extent, the 9/11 commission and the 2006 US DIA intelligence report have a point. But, while not the schills of Al-Qaeda, there were terrorists being harboured, from major terrorist organisations.


[ Parent ]

Re: Saying something stupid like... (#7)

by rwendland on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 07:17:18 PM GMT

> Pakistan CAN police their boarders with Afghanistan effectively

The Pakistan/Afghan border (~1300 miles) is roughly the same length as the US/Mexican border (~1500 miles). If the US cannot stop Mexicans coming in with all its resources on flattish terrain, then there is zero chance Pakistan can police its Afghan border thru all those mountains!


[ Parent ]

Saying something stupid like... | 7 comments (7 topical)