It's always been frustrating to me to hear supporters of a U.S. Administration dismiss criticism with nothing more than a perfunctory evaluation. I've become convinced that it is very easy for a leader's supporters to consider counter-arguments as somehow attacks on the President himself and therefore a sign of disloyalty. Paul Graham discusses how identity influences a debate and I'm inclined to agree with him.
What the fan-boys, which I'm wondering whether may be an appropriate term for the most extreme devotees, of an administration should understand is there are plenty of people who need to see the administration debate an issue; when they come out with a position and defend it as if it was perfect those people feel like they are being dictated too, cut off from the idea evaluation process. Do they expect the public to praise the announced policy as in, "Yea! We don't have to think anymore, the President will save us!"? There is something to be said for public debate, the collaboration towards a better idea.
Monday, February 09, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
The governor of South Carolina says we are moving close to a "savior-based economy." I think we've been there for at least 8 years. The Republicans shut the Democrats out of the collaboration process. Now Democrats are returning the favor.
I forgot to add the link to the story of the South Carolina governor's quote: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2009/02/08/sc-governor-were-moving-close-to-a-savior-based-economy/
I disagree. political cronyism has been around since the beginning so the idea that we're moving closer to a "savior-based economy" is stretching it a bit. If anything in the US is based on "savior" economics, it is Amtrack which has been on life-support for decades.
Don't you love how the Governor of South Carolina equivocated when asked whether he'd accept stimulus money?
Post a Comment