NH Liberty Reps Committing "Treason," Says Lawmaker

The person who made this video should be congratulated for capturing in so short a period of time the childishness, smugness, and perversity that is the foundation of statism, esp. welfare statism. In fact, the two people he recorded end up coming across as living caricatures. Here are a few of the obvious problem areas in their thinking that one encounters just by selecting segments of the video at random:

(1) Dissent Is Criminal (0:38): “That's treason.” The referrent of "that" is the disdain for the political process and ignoring the federal government.

(2) Hypocrisy (0:45): “Act lawfully. Act lawfully.” The guy (Chris?) who said this invokes the Constitution as holy writ, but did Americans act lawfully when seceeding from the UK? Or when replacing the UK's laws with their own law? Well, no.

(3) Might Makes Right (0:45): “Act lawfully. Act lawfully. Don't like the law, change the law.” But what does one do if outnumbered? Apparently you must console yourself with the implied assertion that right and wrong are a function of their popularity. Then you must submit.

(4) Self-Defense Is Criminal: See Might Makes Right.

(5) Ad Hominem Abuse (2:05): “When did we become so selfish?” Perhaps she should use only the first person singular, as she suggests by her following remarks.

(6) Guilt Trip (2:08): “I have a twenty-six year old son with Down's Syndrome.”

(7) Obligation To Serve (2:20): “Where is the sense of community?” Obviously, the female thinks herself entitled to the benefits of association with others and, if those benefits are not provided voluntarily to her on terms that approves, to use coercion and violence to get them.

(8) Innuendo (2:22): “Do you just not care about the commuity you live in?”

(9) Failure To Distinguish Negative Obligations From Positive Ones (2:22) : “Do you just not care about the commuity you live in?” The female thinks that either one cares about others, in which case one provides for their needs, or one does not care at all.

(10) Guilt Trip (2:24): “Do you not care about people with disabilities, people with mental disabilities, the sick.”

(11) Appeal to Irrelevant Personal Circumstances (2:29): “So what would happen if you had a child with a disability...”

(12) Guilt Trip (2:37): “I have my own small business. I'm struggling.” The poisonous do-gooder demonstrates her motives for demanding that others bear the burdens imposed on her by the viscissitudes of life.

(13) Deceitfulness (2:45): “If budgets are cut, what am I going to do? He [26 y.o. son with Down's] lives on his own independently. He pays taxes. He's paying rent. He frequents downtown establishments." Perhaps the guy, who may or may not be able to pull his own weight, is receiving benefits from the government, in which case he's not independent. If receiving benefits, the cost of living is driven up for almost everyone in two ways. First the compulsory redistribution bids up housing, food, etc. Given the borrow and spend mentality of government, the redistribution is likely to be financed with monetary inflation, which puts more upward pressure on prices. Second, the people who pay the taxes have their cost of living increased by those taxes.

Nevertheless, the guy gets to enjoy the benefits that others are coerced to provide, again under the rubric of caring. The mother gets to shirk most or all of the burdens of her own alleged caring attitude and to feel good about herself. And she gets to posture before others as a caring person. What a rat.

(14) Smear and Ridiculous Hyperbole (2:45): “So you want to take all of that [independence from his mother, paying taxes and rent, going downtown] away and have him isolated in his room.” As noted, he's possibly dependent, so what the mother really means is "I'd have to bear more of the costs of my own caring attitude. How dare you?!"

(15) Extotion is Fair (3:52): “When are we going to wake up in this state? And the only fair tax is an income tax.”

This video should be studied carefully by all those who wish to confront the despots, whose rhetorical tricks play like a scratched record. Given the obviousness of their bleeding heartedness, I can not now keep myself from wondering how Glen Allport's construal of love as a noncognitive, sentimental attitude toward others would not tend to reinforce the bad attitudes of people like the two caricatures. It should go without saying that sentimentality, touch-feelyness, etc. are not good for the use of reason, but it seems that some just don't want to think things through well enough to arrive at this conclusion.