You don't try to reason with anyone. You just call the corporations various names, from "the devil" to "drug dealers", to considering them to be fire burning down a house. You never develop any arguments, or give good reasons for your attacks. When you say anything about the corporations you never define what you mean by the terms. You say they enslave, you say they exploit, but you don't say what you mean by those words in this context. They don't literally enslave, and as for exploit, thats a rather vague term that can mean things that are in no way immoral or likely to produce negative results.
I could try developing your argument for you, but than you could just accuse me of attacking straw men when I argue against it, so I'll leave it to you, but please realize that coming up with more names to call corporations isn't developing an argument against them.
BTW - I'm not saying multinational corporations are saints, or that everything they do is good. But get rid of them completely or just kick them out of the third world and you will cause a lot of suffering. Now sometimes you might have to, or at least have a good legitimate reason to want to, do something that creates a lot of suffering, but in those cases the argument for the action had better be really solid. Calling corporations drug dealers, or calling your opponents in the debate extremists just doesn't cut it. And if being an extremist made your arguments wrong you do realize it would make your own arguments wrong. The points you are trying to make are very extreme. |
