Skip to main content

View Diary: The Second Amendment was Ratified to Preserve Slavery (294 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Bogus Argument (6+ / 0-)

    He has 506 citations in his paper, you chose 10 of them.  All of these were taken from a single paragraph in he is making the claim for an archetype of the hero in popular culture used to sell the need for guns to the public.  The movies are his evidence for the archetype, so popular culture references are entirely appropriate.

    If you want to engage in a serious debate about whether the archetypal hero is an accurate depiction of popular culture, fine.  The short list of movies can be reasonably claimed to be cherry picked.  But don't dishonestly pretend that the movies he cites are his evidence for his main thesis about the purpose of the second amendment.

    •  Fair enough, I'll explain. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Robobagpiper, FrankRose, CS in AZ

      When he uses modern interpretations as you put it:

      popular culture used to sell the need for guns
      It is a red herring that does nothing to establish historical context of the 2nd A when it was ratified as part of the Bill of Rights.

      It may be accurate today but it's inclusion reveals a bias intent on misdirecting us from the actual documents he cannot and did not legitimately provide.

      Ignoring the actual debates in Congress was his first "re-write" to support his false thesis.  His second was taking Madison's words and then extrapolating them to the entire nation.  That's simply not true.  There were various beliefs and regional issues that he completely ignores.  Issues that New York, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire and Rhode Island made clear.  It wasn't about slavery.

      -7.62; -5.95 The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite insane.~Tesla

      by gerrilea on Tue Jan 15, 2013 at 10:05:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I've started reading Bogus' paper (0+ / 0-)

        while I won't make any final judgement prior to completing it, he makes no secret of the fact that his motivation is to provide a counter argument to those who argument that the 2Amd is actually about the "right" to insurrection.

        This means that, whatever the final merits of his analysis, his paper has an political agenda. Ideologically driven arguments are notoriously unreliable for the simple reason that the preferred conclusion precedes and motivates the gathering of evidence, rather than vice versa.

        Nothing human is alien to me.

        by WB Reeves on Wed Jan 16, 2013 at 11:33:34 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site