Monday, February 20, 2012

Harper's well worn tactic of "association fallacy".

Image: An Euler diagram illustrating the association fallacy. Although A is within B and is also within C, not all of B is within C.

As Tina Bounds writes in today's Edmonton Journal below, this tactic of forcing legislation down Canadians throats by comparing anyone who opposes it as being "with the child pornographers" is actually a well worn tactic employed by the extremist and polarizing Harper government.

How important do you suppose the association fallacy that "income trusts cause tax leakage" and "nation of coupon clippers" was in absolving Harper from his broken election promise of "never taxing income trusts"?

Unfortunately our supposed vanguards of democracy, the Canadian media, lapped this nonsense up like honey, the losers that they are and the association fallacy that it was.

Backlash over Internet bill well-deserved


Re: "Tories willing to look at changes to law," The Journal, Feb. 16.

It's good that Bill C-30 is getting criticized by both the public and opposition parties. Despite attempts by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Public Safety Minister Vic Toews to persuade Canadians otherwise, this is bad legislation that should not be passed.

This new bill supposes that every single person who uses the Internet in Canada is a possible child pornographer, and that it's worth completely eroding the online privacy of 35 million people to catch the 219 Canadians convicted of child pornography charges in 2007, for instance.

While child pornography is a serious crime, with deep repercussions for the children unfortunate enough to be involved, it is an emotional diversion and was attached by the government late in the drafting process in hopes of silencing opposition. If the Conservative government were serious about protecting children from sexual predators, they would direct more financial support toward agencies aimed at ending sexual exploitation. Giving the government the power to track which silly kitten videos you watch on YouTube won't do a thing to protect kids in need.

Toews's comment that Canadians "can either stand with us or with the child pornographers" is nearly a textbook example of an association fallacy. That's an easy game to play. In George Orwell's 1984, the evil privacy-outlawing Big Brother had a bushy moustache, just like Toews's.

Tina Bounds, Edmonton
© Copyright (c) The Edmonton Journal


Dr Mike said...

"Toews's comment that Canadians "can either stand with us or with the child pornographers" is nearly a textbook example of an association fallacy."

An "Association fallacy" , love that term as it suits this gov`t`s methods to a "T".

It was how the gov`t framed the Long form census at it said innocent people could be "jailed" if they did not tell them how many bathrooms they had in their house.

Or when it might be necessary to "jail" innocent duck hunters & farmers that didn`t co-operate with the Long Gun Registry.

This gov`t is nothing more than a slice of "baloney" packaged as a jar of expensive "caviar"-------expiration date long since past.

Dr Mike Popovich

Bruce Benson said...

This government seems to be taking their marching orders from the Tea Party in the U.S. Yup, no sense of social justice, it's all my way or the highway, you are with us or you are with the predators, and on and on it goes. These assholes are in a continous state of mind that requires the smallest Knat to be crushed with a sledge hammer. Oh, and if that Knat is unreported, crush it with brand new billion dollar jails. If one Knat is an internet predator hiding amoung millions of lawful users, crush em all. If you want openness and accountability, forget it cause won't get it. How much money are those jets? You get the jist of it, right!