flink@umcp-cs.UUCP (Paul Torek) (08/22/84)
Stated differently, don't call it "Nazi-like" just because you don't
like it.
Dick Dunn {hao,ucbvax,allegra}!nbires!rcd (303)444-5710 x3086
Right on. I'm tired of the old guilt-by-association non-argument. "The
Nazis believed xyz, therefore xyz is wrong" is a non-sequitur. Even the
worst scums of the earth are sometimes right.
Rather than find one thing your opponents have in common with the Nazis, and
then proceeding with the insane extrapolation that therefore they have
everything in common with them, how about actually describing your opponents
directly? If they're such lowlifes, it will be clear from the description.
Better yet, address your opponents' arguments BEFORE impugning their
character or motives. Otherwise I promise to ignore you.
--The aspiring iconoclast,
Paul Torek, umcp-cs!flinkmngrve@gatech.UUCP (08/24/84)
[hum bee bugagee... ding dang dong... Whoop Whoop Whoop... YEEEEOOOOOWWWWW!!!]
Yes, I agree that that is a correct approach to the issue. You have not
claimed that association to NAZIs is bad, and association to other groops
is less used or more cogent or more significant or could be so etc. and is
therefore good, you have given a reason for not using comparisons at all.
I think you lose a little bit of the ability to extrapolate without good
comparisons, but you are entitled to your viewpoint.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Paid in part by a grant from Simpsons Individually Wrapped Stringettes.
--
Which came first, the eye or the I? Marc Goodman
CSNet: mngrve @ GaTech ARPA: mngrve.GaTech @ CSNet-Relay
uucp: ...!{akgua,allegra,rlgvax,sb1,unmvax,ut-ngp,ut-sally}!gatech!mngrve