# Right-wing reductio ad absurdum: Should the government be trusted to run the government? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [October 28, 2010, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693 "2010-10-28T19:04:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/41 "2010-10-29T22:33:14Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > My gut suggests of that 59% a majority are leaning right. I have no evidence for it from that but were I a betting man that’s what I’d put my money on. Of course by “government” they mean “a specific subset of programs for which there is firm evidence that they are less efficient than a pure ‘free market’ solution,” and emphatically not a phrase to simply be used as evidence in favor of cutting the programs you hate anyway. Right? Bueller? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2010, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/42 "2010-10-29T23:44:56Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think the difference is that you don’t hear “capitalism never does anything right” from the left nearly as much as you hear “the government can’t do anything right” from the right. I think that is an unprovable assertion, highly subject to confirmation bias. But if you think you can prove it, I’m all ears. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/43 "2010-10-30T00:14:41Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > The full quote lends context. Emphasis added: But the part I quoted has become holy writ for the right. I have not heard the full quote before, but it doesn’t surprise me. We all know that Reagan would be considered too liberal to get nominated for anything in the Republican party these days. He saved Social Security and raised taxes, after all. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/44 "2010-10-30T00:23:48Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > But the part I quoted has become holy writ for the right. I’d call it more snappy slogan than holy writ. And I always interpreted it as a call for limited government, especially in the sense of not expanding government to deal with every _problème du jour_. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/45 "2010-10-30T03:33:48Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I think that is an unprovable assertion, highly subject to confirmation bias. > > But if you think you can prove it, I’m all ears. Tired of this dodge to what is obvious to anyone paying attention (and I suspect you are paying attention and just being difficult). But at the end if someone demands facts they should get them so (bolding mine)… > [@](#): > > Self-described Tea Party supporters differ from those neutral or opposed to the movement on the issues they perceive as threats to the future of the United States, most notably federal government debt and **the size and power of the federal government**. > > \ > > Tea Party supporters’ heightened concerns about federal debt help make that issue the top perceived threat among all Americans. At the same time, **the size and power of the federal government is only a middling concern among the general public**. > > \ > > However, as Gallup has pointed out,\*\* those who describe themselves as Tea Party supporters are in many ways indistinguishable from, and largely a subset of, Republican identifiers more generally\*\*. > > As a result, Tea Party supporters’ issue concerns are not decidedly different from those of Republican identifiers. The two groups differ only slightly in their views of federal government debt and the size and power of the federal government among the 10 issues tested. > > \ > > **Tea Party supporters’ concerns about government power are apparent, as 8 in 10 say the government is doing too much that should be left to individuals and businesses. Those who are neutral toward the movement are far less likely to hold this view, and Tea Party opponents reject it.** > > \ > > Americans who say they support the Tea Party movement share a common concern about government and its scope, particularly with regard to deficit spending. Their views do set them apart from those who are neutral or opposed to the Tea Party movement, but hardly distinguish them from supporters of the Republican Party more broadly. > > SOURCE: [Debt, Gov't. Power Among Tea Party Supporters' Top Concerns](http://www.gallup.com/poll/141119/debt-gov-power-among-tea-party-supporters-top-concerns.aspx) You demanded cites so there you go. If you want to dispute it I want you to provide cites. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/46 "2010-10-30T03:41:57Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > You demanded cites so there you go. If you want to dispute it I want you to provide cites. That’s nice, but do you have any cites for what was claimed? Saying “the government is too big and the national debt is too large” is hardly the same thing as saying “the government shouldn’t do anything”. Just because my wife steals my pillows doesn’t mean I want her out of my bed altogether. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/47 "2010-10-30T03:50:04Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > That’s nice, but do you have any cites for what was claimed? Saying “the government is too big and the national debt is too large” is hardly the same thing as saying “the government shouldn’t do anything”. I already stipulated that Tea Baggers are not anarchists. I have shown though that they decry “big government” and want government to be smaller. The OP is following that line of reasoning to its absurd conclusion…government can’t do anything better than the private sector. If you think government is bad and private business is good then follow that line and distinguish where government has a legitimate role. Broad generalizations are not enough. Be specific. Use the reasoning that government is bad in certain roles and distinguish that from where it has a place and does it better than the private sector. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/48 "2010-10-30T04:12:06Z")
> [@](#): > > If you think government is bad and private business is good then follow that line and distinguish where government has a legitimate role I still haven’t seen any cites that Tea Party members think that government is always bad and private business is always good. No one argues that. And it does not logically follow that, if you think something is too large, that you necessarily believe that it shouldn’t exist at all. I heard a whole shitload of complaints that Bush’s deficit was too large. Does that mean that therefore, we shouldn’t have a federal government at all? “I don’t want that sofa - it won’t fit in my living room.” “OK, that means you don’t want a sofa at all.” Come on, that’s ridiculous. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/49 "2010-10-30T04:22:42Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I still haven’t seen any cites that Tea Party members think that government is always bad and private business is always good. No one argues that. > > And it does not logically follow that, if you think something is too large, that you necessarily believe that it shouldn’t exist at all. I’ll try this once more with you. No one is saying they are anarchists (I certainly am not) which is what you are trying to hang around our necks. Read my previous post and try again. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/50 "2010-10-30T04:33:36Z")
I read it. You are arguing a strawman. Tea Party members do not hold the position that you are trying to assign to them, at least as far as your cites go. Tea Partiers are not anarchists. Therefore, they do not hold the position that you are apparently trying to saddle them with. All of your cites say the same thing - that they believe that the government is too large and spends too much, and that the deficit is too big. It is not logical to conclude that therefore they think the government is always bad. When your doctor tells you to go on a diet, he is not advising you to starve yourself to death. Similarly, when Tea party members say the deficit is unsustainable, they are not saying that the government has no legitimate role to play. > [@](#): > > I have shown though that they decry “big government” and want government to be smaller. > > The OP is following that line of reasoning to its absurd conclusion…government can’t do anything better than the private sector. There’s your problem - this is silly. “Government can’t do anything better than the private sector” does not follow logically from “government and the deficit should be smaller”. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/51 "2010-10-30T04:45:07Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I read it. You are arguing a strawman. Tea Party members do not hold the position that you are trying to assign to them, at least as far as your cites go. > > Tea Partiers are not anarchists. Therefore, they do not hold the position that you are apparently trying to saddle them with. > > All of your cites say the same thing - that they believe that the government is too large and spends too much, and that the deficit is too big. It is not logical to conclude that therefore they think the government is always bad. > > When your doctor tells you to go on a diet, he is not advising you to starve yourself to death. Similarly, when Tea party members say the deficit is unsustainable, they are not saying that the government has no legitimate role to play. There’s your problem - this is silly. “Government can’t do anything better than the private sector” does not follow logically from “government and the deficit should be smaller”. Good grief… Read the title of the thread again. Reductio ad absurdum [is a form of argument in which a proposition is disproven by following its implications logically to an absurd consequence.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reductio_ad_absurdum) I did not say they think government is always bad and have said so more than once. However, take their stance and walk it through to its logical conclusions. Where is government “good”? Where is government’s proper role? So far I am not seeing them draw a bright line and say, “This is the proper role of government by which we should all abide.” I see a lot of vague, nebulous hand waving. However, from people who would like to hold power in government and impose their ideas on the rest of us, I want something more specific. Tell me what a Tea Bagger, given god-like powers (i.e. wave their magic wand and get the government they think ideal), would do. As it stands, if you follow their logic as expressed so far (read insanely vague, just do not like government) you are led to the absurd of no government (anarchy). Be clear, I and NOT saying they want anarchy. You tell me where it stops before anarchy per the Tea Bagger ideals. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/52 "2010-10-30T14:53:50Z")
> [@](#): > > As it stands, if you follow their logic as expressed so far (read insanely vague, just do not like government) you are led to the absurd of no government (anarchy). No, you are not. Anarchy, as you appear to recognize, is not the logical conclusion of Tea Party ideals. As **Sam Stone** points out, this kind of foolishness can be used for any political position. Obama wants to raise taxes, therefore he wants to change to a Marxist, centrally-run economy. Abortion supporters want to force all women to get abortions. Like I said, a strawman. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/53 "2010-10-30T15:23:58Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > No, you are not. Anarchy, as you appear to recognize, is not the logical conclusion of Tea Party ideals. The what is the Tea Party end game? When are taxes low enough that they will stop calling for lower taxes? When will spending be cut enough to end their calls for smaller government? When will government regulations be reduced so they will stop calling for less intrusive government? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/54 "2010-10-30T16:00:15Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > The what is the Tea Party end game? When are taxes low enough that they will stop calling for lower taxes? When will spending be cut enough to end their calls for smaller government? When will government regulations be reduced so they will stop calling for less intrusive government? Every article written about them, every thread we’ve had here about them, and every study done about them emphasizes the fact that the “Tea Party” is not a centrally run organization with clearly defined leaders and clearly defined goals. So the answer to your question is: it depends on the particular Tea Partier you’re talking about. The closest thing to a TP manifesto is the Contract from America. But that is a general blueprint, more concerned with process than meeting specific goals. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/55 "2010-10-30T17:55:11Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Every article written about them, every thread we’ve had here about them, and every study done about them emphasizes the fact that the “Tea Party” is not a centrally run organization with clearly defined leaders and clearly defined goals. So the answer to your question is: it depends on the particular Tea Partier you’re talking about. Ok, then where do Republicans draw the line? From the study I linked to earlier: \*"However, as Gallup has pointed out, those who describe themselves as Tea Party supporters are in many ways indistinguishable from, and largely a subset of, Republican identifiers more generally. As a result, Tea Party supporters’ issue concerns are not decidedly different from those of Republican identifiers. The two groups differ only slightly in their views of federal government debt and the size and power of the federal government among the 10 issues tested."\* Seems republicans are a close enough analog to TPers to be used as a proxy. Republicans are a centrally run organization with clearly defined leaders so where would they draw the line? ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 7:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/56 "2010-10-30T19:10:21Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Every article written about them, every thread we’ve had here about them, and every study done about them emphasizes the fact that the “Tea Party” is not a centrally run organization with clearly defined leaders and clearly defined goals. So the answer to your question is: it depends on the particular Tea Partier you’re talking about. > > The closest thing to a TP manifesto is the Contract from America. But that is a general blueprint, more concerned with process than meeting specific goals. I would be satisfied with one Tea Partier addressing my points. I agree, they see it as a process. Unfortunately, it is a process without end, and they will eternally gripe about taxes, spending and regulations. The may not want to create anarchy and chaos, but I have yet to met a single one who be satisfied before that occurs. The Tea Party will cease to exist if a large portion of them conclude that taxes are low enough, government is small enough, and regulations are just right. And presently, there are forces on the Right who recognize an agitated Tea Party is a useful tool, and will continue to spare no expense to keep the Tea Party in a perpetual state of fear and anger. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2010, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/57 "2010-10-30T19:20:35Z")
I think the TPers are just going to be absorbed into the GOP. In fact, I think we’re seeing that happen already. But I don’t get this idea that they need to have an end game. What is the end game for either the Democrats or Republicans? Do Denis Kucinich and Jane Harmon agree on what tax rates should be? What is the end game for the Blue Dog Democrats? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2010, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/58 "2010-10-31T14:21:16Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > But I don’t get this idea that they need to have an end game. What is the end game for either the Democrats or Republicans? Do Denis Kucinich and Jane Harmon agree on what tax rates should be? What is the end game for the Blue Dog Democrats? Thing is there is no flip side to this. There are no members of congress or serious candidates for congress who are saying, “Business is the problem, the government should take over.” If there were then your question would be fair and relevant. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2010, 5:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/59 "2010-10-31T17:42:32Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > I would be satisfied with one Tea Partier addressing my points. I agree, they see it as a process. Unfortunately, it is a process without end, and they will eternally gripe about taxes, spending and regulations. Yeah? And just when do you think Democrats will go, “You know, I think we have enough government. We’re good.” ? The fact is, there’s a constant tug-of-war that goes on. Every time a problem crops up, someone thinks a government program needs to be created to fix it. And every time a tax is proposed, the other side says, “whoa! We need to be cutting taxes, not increasing them.” As for how far the tea party wants to go, one obvious answer is that before Bush and Obama started ramping up the size of government dramatically, there was no tea party. Balance the budget, get government spending back down to where it has historically been since 1970, and the Tea Party will vanish. In Canada, our ‘tea party’ was the Reform party. It did exactly the same thing - it rebelled against the conservatives and ‘red tories’ - our RINOS. In our case, it split off into a new party, fractured the conservative vote, and allowed Liberals to rule for more than a decade. They formed at almost exactly the same point as the Tea Party in the U.S. - when the debt reached 70% of GDP and government spending neared 50% of GDP. However, in our case the Liberals actually listened, and began a program of spending cuts and deficit reduction. They got the deficit under control, then ran a surplus. They brought our deficit down from 70% of GDP to 30%. They reduced the size of government from 53% of GDP to 33% of GDP. The result was that the Reform party lost its energy, and eventually re-formed with the Progressive Conservative party to make a new Conservative party. The Liberals eventually shot themselves in the foot with scandals, and the Conservatives won the election. And the leader of the party (and now Prime Minister of Canada) was one of the more vocal leaders calling for smaller government and lower taxes. But you know, he’s doing a pretty good job, and he’s not gutting the government. He reduced our national sales tax from 7% to 5%, and mucked about a bit with lower taxes here and there, but in general it’s business as usual, except on a smaller scale. If Obama were Clinton, he’d triangulate, turn himself into a budget cutter, work to maintain the progressive policies he thinks are important while eliminating the less useful programs, and he’d be re-elected in a landslide and the Tea Party couldn’t do a damned thing. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [October 31, 2010, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693/60 "2010-10-31T17:45:10Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Thing is there is no flip side to this. There are no members of congress or serious candidates for congress who are saying, “Business is the problem, the government should take over.” > > If there were then your question would be fair and relevant. And no one in the Tea Party is saying that the government should be eliminated. And you know it. I think you all know damned well that the Tea Party would have no legs if the government cut its size back to where it was in 1990 and balanced the budget. This whole thread is a giant straw man. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/right-wing-reductio-ad-absurdum-should-the-government-be-trusted-to-run-the-government/558693.md?page=4)