Slippery Slopes: Not Just for Libertarian Paranoia any more

About two weeks ago I got into it with Jason on Delawareliberal over (of all things) opera.

What's interesting is the comment Jason made in critiquing one of my argument:

The logical fallacy that Libertarians like most, above all logical fallacies is that slippery slope argument.

I pointed out in rebuttal:

Not all slippery slope arguments are invalid–you guys use them all the time about Republicans when it suits your purposes, so get real.

And Dana Garrett agreed with me:

“Not all slippery slope arguments are invalid”

Now there is a truth few know. Any chance you could teach it to Al Mascitti? If you tell him the predictable consequence of some action (that he likes, of course), his knee twitches and out comes the “You are committing the slippery slope fallacy.”

Here’s the scoop on it folks:

“If A happens, then by a gradual series of small steps through B, C,…, X, Y, eventually Z will happen, too. Z should not happen. Therefore, A should not happen, either.”

The whole bit disappeared from my mind (things often do; it's cluttered and things get lost) until I was cruising the website of George Lakoff's Progressive think-tank, the Rockbridge Institute, and found an article on Strategic Initiatives. Here's the lead-in:

There are many types of Strategic Initiatives. The most far-reaching type is a Multiple Issue Strategic Initiative but another important one is a Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative. Both introduce wedge issues to divide opponents and make it easier to accomplish ambitious, long-term goals.

More specifically,

A Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative is so called because the first step is intended to be only part of what you want, but is a step that opens the door to further steps on the way to your ultimate goal. This works by making the first step on the slippery slope so attractive or palatable that traditional opponents have a hard time countering it.

For instance, the issue and ideas behind a Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative are presented in such a way that you put your opponents on the defensive, placing them in a difficult spot, and making it more likely that you will succeed. Critically, the first step puts a new frame in place. Once the first step is accomplished, the next step is easier because the new frame can be elaborated once it is in place. Using the same reasoning, you continue down the slope step by step, gaining momentum toward your final goal.

An important feature of both a Multiple Issue and a Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative is that they divide your opponents by operating as wedge issues—each drives a wedge between members of your opponent's usual coalitions.

The article cites bans on partial birth abortion as a successful Conservative Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative and clean air/clean water initiatives as similar potential strategies on the Progressive side.

In fact, the article argues,

What Can Progressives Do? Craft Our Own Slippery Slope and Wedge Issues.

There follow detailed instructions for creating and carrying through such initiatives.

So I guess it's not a matter of Libertarian paranoia.

Comment Rescue (?) and child-related gun violence in Delaware

In my post about the idiotic over-reaction to a New Jersey 10-year-old posing with his new squirrel rifle , Dana Garrett left me this response: One waits, apparently in vain, for you to post the annual rates of children who either shoot themselves or someone else with a gun. But then you Libertarians are notoriously ambivalent to and silent about data and facts and would rather talk abstract principles and fear monger (like the government will confiscate your guns). It doesn't require any degree of subtlety to see why you are data and fact adverse. The facts indicate we have a crisis with gun violence and accidents in the USA, and Libertarians offer nothing credible to address it. Lives, even the lives of children, get sacrificed to the fetishism of liberty. That's intellectual cowardice. OK, Dana, let's talk facts. According to the Children's Defense Fund , which is itself only querying the CDCP data base, fewer than 10 children/teens were killed per year in Delaw

The Obligatory Libertarian Tax Day Post

The most disturbing factoid that I learned on Tax Day was that the average American must now spend a full twenty-four hours filling out tax forms. That's three work days. Or, think of it this way: if you had to put in two hours per night after dinner to finish your taxes, that's two weeks (with Sundays off). I saw a talking head economics professor on some Philly TV channel pontificating about how Americans procrastinate. He was laughing. The IRS guy they interviewed actually said, "Tick, tick, tick." You have to wonder if Governor Ruth Ann Minner and her cohorts put in twenty-four hours pondering whether or not to give Kraft Foods $708,000 of our State taxes while demanding that school districts return $8-10 million each?

New Warfare: I started my posts with a discussion.....

.....on Unrestricted warfare . The US Air force Institute for National Security Studies have developed a reasonable systems approach to deter non-state violent actors who they label as NSVA's. It is an exceptionally important report if we want to deter violent extremism and other potential violent actors that could threaten this nation and its security. It is THE report our political officials should be listening to to shape policy so that we do not become excessive in using force against those who do not agree with policy and dispute it with reason and normal non-violent civil disobedience. This report, should be carefully read by everyone really concerned with protecting civil liberties while deterring violent terrorism and I recommend if you are a professional you send your recommendations via e-mail at the link above so that either 1.) additional safeguards to civil liberties are included, or 2.) additional viable strategies can be used. Finally, one can only hope that politici

Search This Blog