The art of debate
Welcome back! Did you get your WIDGETIZER yet? Download Widget Magic.
It’s a challenging task to read the newspapers in the morning. When opposing views are quoted from some political players, you start to question their sanity. Or, being more indulgent, their debating skills.
Take this example.
A fact: our farmers have to sell their grain to the Canadian Wheat Board. (Good or bad - that’s not the issue here.)
One of the party leaders - Harper - said his government would allow grain farmers to opt out. Opt out for me means the farmers can decide by and for themselves which option is the best for them. I am not a farmer, I don’t know enough about the farming, therefore I have no opinion about this.
Now one of the reactions was from the chairman of the board of directors from CWB who allegedly “condemns” Harper’s plan. It goes like this: “This should not be an issue decided [...] by party politics in Canada. This is clearly an issue for Prairie farmers, who have a right to choose the marketing system that suits them best.”
Why would the chairman “condemn” a plan that would do exactly what he says? Give a right to choose. Unless he’s afraid the choice would mean he’s out of his job…
I can understand that fear. Just try to debate about it more elegantly.
The signum of politicians is that the can talk without engaging the brains - sometimes they do :-)