Adventures in My Mind
 |
 |
 |
 |
Jun 26, 2005
The comparison that ends the conversation
Washington's penchant for using Nazi or Nazism as shorthand for all things bad, including their political opponents, has got to end. As mentioned in the article, these are smart people. Dick Durbin, Rick Santorum, Robert Byrd, Phil Gramm: smart men all. (Publisher's Note: Yes, I can credit these men as smart even though several are horse's asses.)
So why the reliance on a rhetorical trick as effective as "I know you are, but what am I?" Media attention, of course. The press, especially Fox News, has had a field day analyzing, interpretting, and generally skewering Dick Durbin's comparison of Guantanemo to Nazis, Stalinists, and Pol Pot. Even a lowly blogger like me can't resist talking about it a week on.
In a cramped and cluttered media landscape, attention is precious currency. So why waste it on such a lousy arguement? Where is the wisdom? Where is the thinking that attempts to bring a nuanced and well-reasoned criticism of the obviously deplorable conditions for many of the prisoners at Guantanemo.
Let's examine.
Here's what he said when reading allegations of prisoner abuse:If I read this to you and did not tell you it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime -- Pol Pot or others -- that had no concern for human beings.His premise is clear and precise: The United States and its military have no business treating people in such a manner.
It's an atethetical arguement. Set up a scenario that paints a picture of one thing and then explain that it was really the unexepected antithesis of that painted picture. In this case U.S. military and their agents and not Nazis, Soviets, or Pol Pot.
The use of Nazi, however, destroys its efficacy. It became the only word that was heard. He might as well have said, "Blah, blah, blah, Nazi, blah, blah, Soviet gulag, Pol Pot, blah, blah, blah." Durbin's thoughtful protest of how we are treating our prisoners in the name of freedom was completely drowned out because of the incindiary nature of his chosen words.
The same point could have been made like this:If I read this to you and did not tell you it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done brutal thugs and criminals enthrall to a mad or rogue authoritarian regime that had no concern for human beings.Maybe not as press worthy, but more effective for its lack of attack words.
Leibovich ends his essay with these words from Wikipedia on Godwin's Law, "There is a tradition in many Usenet newsgroups that once such a comparison is made, the thread is over, and whoever mentioned the Nazis has automatically lost whatever argument was in progress."
So instead of continuing a debate that the Bush administration is always sweeping under the rug, we are now debating Senator Durbin's motives, both personal and political, and not the subject of his arguement.
0 Comments | Link to this post posted by Teddy 10:39 AM
