re: fighting fire with fire:
Certainly, it's possible to go overboard, with the use of emotional words. In either direction (too little, or too much heat).
<I am willing to call the ideas evil>
OK, then we really have no disagreement. If you don't like the particular word, UnAmerican, fine. I like it, mainly because it evokes McCarthyism, making the connection between current and past war-time efforts at suppressing freedom of expression. Personal choice.
Do you suppose I would go from calling them UnAmerican (or evil), to arresting them for subversion? No. That's what they would do to me, but I won't reciprocate. My core beliefs are the Enlightenment. I would always support their efforts to say whatever they please. But when they go from words to actions, and those actions result in thousands of deaths, then they have stepped over the line. One person's (or nation's) freedom ends, when they start ending other people's (or nation's) freedom. The NeoCon's actions need suppressing, because they are ending so many other people's and nation's freedoms. And they are quite open about their efforts to restrict the freedom of Others. I would use persuasion, not force, to kill their bad ideas.
<If your methods are wildly emotional, you will lose the debate.>
Agreed. We just disagree, that the word UnAmerican is "wildly emotional". I see that word, as evoking a particular historical period, a particular mistake in our nation's history, a mistake we are now repeating. |
