Tired of the "Straw Man" Socialists (aka Enough with the Socialist Classroom Posts)

A Straw Man argument is when somebody falsely restates another’s argument and then attacks the other person for a position they don't actually have.

I've seen the post about “Classroom Socialism” so often it makes me weep for our country. Why? Firstly, the original author doesn't understand the distinction between basic concepts of socialism vs. communism. The title is Classroom Socialism but then goes on to describe on experiment based on Marxist Communism.  

Secondly, its likely the intended purpose is to “warn” us about the direction our country is headed in. I suppose that it’s possible that someone just decided, apropos of nothing, to author an economics lessons on the dangers of communism (and then label it socialism). But that seems unlikely.

Where were these people in the 30 years after WWII? (ok, besides the John Birch Society)

* We had much higher marginal and effective tax rates on the wealthy and corporations.

* We had stronger unions and labor laws.

* The government spent nearly twice, in terms of % of GDP, on investments in our country, i.e. education, job training, science & technology, research, physical infrastructure, etc..

* The government, when excluding health care costs, spent more on safety net programs, again as a % of GDP.

* We didn’t have members of our government (at least not many) demonizing teachers, police officers, firefighters, and other civil servants as overpaid and lazy.

* Individuals and corporations didn’t have the ability to give unlimited amounts of anonymous money to political campaigns.

No rational people, and I’m excluding the denounced-as-crazy-even-by-conservatives-of-the-day-JBS from rational people, seemed to be warning us of the dangers of the socialist dystopia that we were living in back then. But maybe that’s because even though the wealth of the top 1% was growing far faster than inflation, the income/wealth of the bottom 90% was doing so as well. So you’ll excuse me if I ignore the straw man on my way to support of policies that are at most a mild restoration of the “socialism” we suffered through during the 30 years after WWII.

I didn’t link the post. You can’t throw a dead cat on Facebook without hitting somebody that has it on their wall. So if you don’t know what I’m talking about just search Facebook or Google for “Classroom Socialism” and you’ll find it.

Hobby Lobby's Religious Freedom Stops at It's Employees' Nose

Hobby Lobby* isn’t being fined because they are pro-life. They are being fined because their management believes they have the right to pick and choose what aspects of health coverage their employees are allowed to receive simply based on their moral perception of how their employees might obtain services based on that coverage. This would be no different than a pencil store run by Jehovah’s Witnesses that refuses to provide coverage that includes surgical benefits strictly and solely because they don’t believe in transfusions that are necessary to perform surgery. Or an employer that has had bad experiences in a Catholic hospital** refusing to offer plans (potentially even ones that are more cost/benefit effective) that cover Catholic hospitals and doctors solely on the basis of his bias. Can you imagine the howls about religious persecution?

The whole “pro-life” aspect is dubious. It is an “anti-contraception” issue. The management of Hobby Lobby happens to believe that what the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention declares to be “one of the most significant public health achievements of the 20th century” is something they don’t believe in. Bully for them. I strongly support their right to maintain and live that belief. But their freedom to swing their fist stops at my (or their employee’s) nose.

The argument that they are being forced to fund choices that are against their beliefs is a logical fallacy on multiple levels.

One: See the first paragraph.

Two: I believe the compensation package of Hobby Lobby employees consists of some level of currency payment in addition to potential health care benefits. If you we’re to assume that employers can provide selective coverage solely based on the employers moral beliefs then you would also have to submit they have the right to dictate how employees could or could not spend the cash portion of their earned compensation. Even absent any factors that would affect job performance. After all if their objection is based on the idea that money they supply is indirectly being used for purposes they find objectionable, the same would apply to services provided in exchange for money obtained through a paycheck.

Third: It’s not necessarily a cost issue. From an actuarial standpoint, families that have low-barrier access to contraception are often, but not always, less costly to insure.

Fourth: They don’t seem to have any problem covering vasectomies, which is just another form of contraception except that it affects men and not women.

There is persecution involved here. It’s just that it is the manufactured outrage of Persecution Politics***.

Step 1: Invoke the slippery slope. If the government can “force” Hobby Lobby to “pay for” contraception then the next step is to start dragging good Christians from their homes and off to the concentration camps.

Step 2: Introduce a secret plot. Suggest that there is connection between some secret plot by faceless people to destroy religion in America and connect it to the slippery slope.

Step 3: Add the language of persecution and the zero sum game. In this pitched battle every victory by the evil secularists erodes the rights of every righteous Christian whom they despise. Every perceived slight against Hobby Lobby or O’Brien Industrial Holdings must then by this logic be fiercely opposed by people of conscious.

Boycott Hobby Lobby, if you like, because you disagree with the beliefs of their management. I find it silly and unproductive, but that’s your right. You want to go out of your way to reward a company whose management’s world view is in line with yours? Go for it! Just don’t do it because you’ve been fed a narrative that stands up Hobby Lobby’s ability to refuse to provide contraception coverage as the last defense between you and the destruction of religious freedom in America. Just remember the next time someone wants to swing their fist of religious freedom it may be your nose that gets in the way.

* - For the purposes of conversational short hand when I refer to religious rights or beliefs of Hobby Lobby I’m actually referring to the rights and beliefs of the owners and/or management of Hobby Lobby. Hobby Lobby is an abstract concept called a company. The purposes of constructing such a non-tangible entity are ones of societal benefit. This doesn’t imbue these pieces of legal paper with feeling, thoughts, beliefs, wants, or desires. A figment of our collective imagination can not have a belief to even be considered under the umbrella of freedom of religion (or speech or anything else that could be endowed by a creator, other supernatural being, or even a just an enlightened society that thinks having a collective set of rights defined is a spanking good idea)

** - For those that know me and where I grew up. I just want to reiterate that unless I’m in immediate mortal danger and I won’t survive the trip to the next closest hospital, please don’t take me to the Catholic hospital in my hometown even if I’m injured in the lobby of that hospital. I’m ok with driving the extra 20-30 minutes to a hospital (even Catholic ones) closer to where I now live. My experiences and those close to me have given me the “belief” that in this particular hospital there is not always clarity of whether they understand the difference between a Hospital and a Church and how being one or other affects the relative priority between saving your soul and saving your life.

*** - Paraphrased from Blowing Smoke by Micheal Worlaich