Tags: democrats | fallacy | argument | counter intuitive

Liberals' Counter-Intuitive Arguments Often Lack Evidence

Liberals' Counter-Intuitive Arguments Often Lack Evidence

By Friday, 06 October 2017 12:31 PM Current | Bio | Archive

Some time ago in an interview, a quick-witted Democrat advocated releasing dangerous terrorists and closing Guantanamo prison, and the Democrat was pinned down and cornered. The refutation of his views had won. There could be no defense for freeing terrorists from prison, particularly when the interviewer pointed out the large percentage of released prisoners who return to the battlefield.

Of course there are many arguments to keep the terrorists locked up, but this fast talking Democrat ignored the reasons and introduced a counter intuitive-argument — a new dimension of the policy to consider: “The Guantanamo prison is a recruiting tool for terrorist groups. It is like a magnet that attracts many terrorist combatants.”

In other words, the Republicans, who support keeping the terrorists in Guantanamo, did not see the entire picture and failed to grasp the full consequences, sometimes referred to as “the unintended consequences.”

The counter-intuitive, unintended consequences argument is straight out of the Democratic playbook. When the facts do not support the left, they typically (when they don’t change the subject or say the Republicans do it too), reach for the counter-intuitive argument.

The Democrats use little evidence when they assert counter-intuitive consequences to defend their illogical views. In the case of Guantanamo they have scarcely a shred of evidence to prove it is an important recruiting tool.

Another example of the counter-intuitive argument stresses the belief that Americans have bossed the world around, creating enemies. The Democrats contend: “If only the United States showed its good will toward enemies, peace would follow and the enemies would become friends.”

Unfortunately for the Democrats, occasionally they put their liberal ideas to the test. So once in office, Hillary and Obama unilaterally began to disarm. They removed the missiles from Eastern Europe in hopes of making friends with the Russians. In return for such actions, the Russians invaded and seized part of the Ukraine!

Then there is the case of North Korea. For 25 years, including Jimmy Carter’s peaceful treaty efforts, the U.S. attempted to use diplomacy. In return, North Korea broke promises, lied, and violated United Nations resolutions. Now we come to Iran. Obama was certain, a huge olive branch would solve the issues with Iran. Obama, with illegal actions, made an agreement with Iran (not a treaty because it never would have passed the Senate). Iran agreed to stop working toward nuclear bombs for ten years. In a clandestine midnight flight, Obama sent millions of dollars in unmarked bills to Iran. Many experts now say Iran is buying from North Korea nuclear weapons with the dollars given them by the United States.

While the Democrats are quick to use the possibility of counter-intuitive outcomes to win a debate, they are incapable of grasping the folly of their policies that produce real devastating counter-intuitive consequences.

For example, the Democrats persist in a policy of welfare that supports behavior that results in one-parent families and increased unemployment. The empirical evidence over fifty years shows that in the aggregate, the welfare programs, as constructed, are making the problems worse. Yet the Democrats will not admit the facts, but rather they will find an anecdotal case of a single mother in need, squeezing every emotion out of one instance to argue for a policy that applies to millions of people. The Democrats fail to consider the counter-intuitive consequences for what on the surface appears to be the compassionate and proper thing to do.

Government’s direct help to a person in need is an easy policy to sell to the voters. The devastating counter-intuitive consequences of such policy to the society is more difficult to explain, but the facts support that the welfare system has failed.

A second example of Democratic failure to grasp counter-intuitive consequences is with taxing the upper class. The available evidence shows that a tax cut for the wealthy increases employment and incomes of most Americans. The increases in American prosperity occurs because of counter-intuitive consequences. The decreased tax dollars, left with the people, are not directly transferred to other people, but cause new and expanded business to develop that in turn result in jobs and higher wages.

Obama and the Democrats’ failure when in office to interpret properly counter-intuitive consequence resulted in massive policy failures, demonstrating to the nation the left policies did not work. The palpable failure of Obama and leftists makes it difficult to attract voters.

For Democrats, since their power and politics is based on big government, these programs are difficult to give up.

It is time for America to realize the Democrats do not have the proper solutions for policies, and the Democratic arguments in support of policies are incorrect and lead to disastrous outcomes.

John Havick has a Ph.D. in political science. He was a professor at Georgia Institute of Technology for many years, authored several books and a number of articles, including the widely cited "The Impact of the Internet on a Television-Based Society." His work has appeared in The New York Times, and his recent book, "The Ghosts of NASCAR: The Harlan Boys and the First Daytona 500," is available at ghostsofnascar.com. For more of his reports, Go Here Now.

© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

The counter-intuitive, unintended consequences argument is straight out of the Democratic playbook. When the facts do not support the left, they typically (when they don’t change the subject or say the Republicans do it too), reach for the counter-intuitive argument.
democrats, fallacy, argument, counter intuitive
Friday, 06 October 2017 12:31 PM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved