Ricky,
I know that you're giving criticism with the best intention. I appreciate it.
I also appreciate your desire to give Brian the benefit of the doubt. But I've
been confronting Brian, Tony, and the FOCP leadership for many years. I have a
great deal of experience with their standard techniques and practises. (I
think if you review Brian's text closely, and consider his message to those who
"swallowed Glenn's dishonest bile" - you may consider my deconstruction of his
straw man and analysis of his motives appropriate.) That particular statement
was directed at insulting and silencing your neighbors concerned for the safety
of their families, dogs, and the environment, not me. Consider that problem.
Mr. Siano made serious global character assaults in his text. He based those
on a carefully constructed false straw man. Why, becomes the core question
when analyzing this technique? It's not the credibility of any of his
assertions that remains relevant.
It would be an unfair standard to expect anyone not to confront such personal
attacks. But more importantly, considering the purpose or motives behind the
use of straw man creations is vital to understanding the technique, and
understanding the danger of not exposing its use. (I have no personal
animosity or desire for revenge toward the people from the censored Penn list,
but the techniques they use regularly have become too common in our society.
The techniques, which I see play out in our little neighborhood, are the same
that are threatening our country and the hope for democracy.)
The straw man creation: Mr Siano constructed a statement that I never made but
employed some of my words and unique images. Most list readers would not tend
to go back to the original exchange, but would tend to remember key images. It
is very important when creating a straw man, that readers believe it is
actually the person that is to be discredited. That's why carefully choosing
words from different sentences to make the false statement is a device that
keeps the straw man from being immediately rejected. The reader will remember
that Glenn really did write about "neo-victorian sensibilities" even though
they can not remember the alleged false statement. (If you look at Mr. Siano's
full text, he sites times and uses quotes which gives the impression of his due
diligence. The reader is lured to accept the straw man because of this
ostensible research. Conversely, the appearance of Mr. Siano's diligent
research also supports the conclusion that the straw man was a deliberate
creation rather than an accident of haste.)
Siano's conclusion was that I am not believable, and he adds that he has had
previous experience with my crazy lies in the full text. Of course, the straw
man he created perfectly supports that conclusion, his anger, and his insult to
our neighbors for being deceived by me. That is the core purpose of the straw
man! To discredit the target by substituting the false creation.
The straw man and ad hominem fallacies are not atypical. (I was very hurt when
I first discovered that these are primary first strike tools in "neighborhood"
associations.)
Unfortunately, civic associations tend to have unpleasant secrets and
processes. That is why transparency, process, and accountability are important
even in civic associations! Leaders, who misuse their power, also tend to get
very angry when perceived outsiders expose these secrets. I am that outsider.
After UCD targeted these civic clubs locally, a perception of insider power
over the neighborhood has had a terrible influence on the leaders in some of
these groups. (I actually hold their corporate manipulators, Penn real estate
power brokers, responsible for their terrible influence. I get angry at these
"community leaders," but much more often I feel pity.)
These civic associations function as insular clublike or ganglike groups. You
should review the sociology literature on closed groups to understand the
forces at work. Also, review the code of silence phenomena among police to
understand the forces on the recruited friends, who join the boards and remain
silent when power is abused.)
I really do understand why people stay silent when civic association abuses are
exposed. That's why straw men and ad hominem distractions must be condemned
even when it comes from seemingly powerful "community leaders."
Take care,
Glenn
-----Original Message-----
>From: Richard Moreau <[email protected]>
>Sent: Oct 3, 2009 4:02 PM
>To: Univ City Listserv <[email protected]>
>Subject: [UC] Mistakenly attributing malicious intent can also intimidate the
>public: Re: [UC] Strawman tactic intimidates the public
>
>It's also possible that Brian read Glenn's post quickly and
>inaccurately, and/or rushed out an unproofed (as in 'unedited,' not
>'unproven') response in the heat of the moment. Or, maybe he was, in
>fact, toying with the words intentionally in order to push his point
>of view beyond what a rational argument could support. But we can't
>know which it was and should be open to either, and other, possible
>explanations.
>
>Attributing malicious intent to someone who might just be sincerely
>mistaken (as opposed to lying, for example) is one of my "buttons"
>that gets pushed by this and, often enough, other posts on this
>listserv (and other settings.) It also can easily lead to all sorts of
>conspiracy theories if piled up one upon another repeatedly.
>
>Some advice to consider might be to assess and, if need be, counter
>what's observable - like words and actions - not what's unseeable -
>like motivation and feelings. Glenn, granted, you did the former but
>you also did the latter. This is a lesson I had to learn as a social
>worker who often had to justify my recommendations for clients in
>Family Court (part of the process, no reflection on me), and has been
>invaluable in other dialogues and relationships.
>
>I can't help but wondering if documentation and proof wasn't asked for
>of Glenn because of this sort of argumentation (referring to logic,
>not demeanor) which he seems to use regularly, if (IF) my memory
>serves me correctly, making people not see a point in asking for such.
>
>I know I'm being tough on you, Glenn, yet again, but I openly invite
>you to disagree with me and, I hope you at the least see that I do it
>with the best intentions for you and all. You have many good points to
>make about issues in the neighborhood; I just think you could make
>them in more effective ways.
>
>- Richard
>
>
>On Oct 2, 2009, at 2:41 PM, Glenn moyer <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Siano gives such a classic example of the use of a straw man to
>> silence public discussion. Here are the quotes for everyone to
>> analyze. I think this is a dangerous propaganda technique important
>> for all citizens to study and recognize!!
>>
>> From a reply to Craig when the unknown chemicals were first exposed:
>> Craig wrote about the 40 year history of the chemical industry and
>> benefit to mankind.
>>
>> Moyer says:
>> "Craig, there is a big difference between any use of chemicals, and
>> arbitrary use for neo-Victorian aesthetic sensibilities.
>>
>> With the unregulated corporate greed that your buddies worship, the
>> proper science is always avoided before millions of gallons of these
>> chemicals are dumped. You can point out that a demand for no
>> chemical use has trade offs. But no kids are dying from nutritious
>> dandelion in Clark park. These millions of gallons of pesticides
>> are being dumped to increase corporate profits. (Organic farmers
>> have found that good techniques can increase yield above chemically
>> doused soil.)"
>>
>> Siano's straw man creation:
>>
>> "Oh, I have to mention something that's very disturbing. Glenn has
>> made wild and unsupported claims that "millions of gallons" of
>> "poisons" are being dumped in the park, as a "corporate" effort to
>> promote "neo-Victorian" values. I have not seen anyone demand that
>> he support these claims with anything like proof. But when Tony
>> tries to answer these wild accusations-- and we're researching the
>> issue, trust me-- suddenly the people who swallowed Glenn's
>> dishonest bile are demanding "facts and data." Well, we're trying,
>> but they take time to assemble: Glenn has the luxury of throwing
>> whatever he wants onto the list, relevant, documented, or not."
>>
>>
>>
>> Anyone reading the text of the exchange with Craig can easily see
>> that Siano pulls words from separate sentences. My point was that
>> proper science is avoided before nation wide release of these lawn
>> care chemicals in the interest of profits. I never said it all went
>> on Clark park, which is an absurd deliberately created deception
>> known as creating a straw man. He is attacking my character, yes;
>> but he is also trying to intimidate everyone requesting information
>> on these chemicals. The concerned community residents, parents, and
>> dog owners are annoying Siano, because they are simply being
>> manipulated by my "bile" and lies.
>>
>> Do you see how Siano can make such attacks against the fictitious
>> straw man he created?? His false constructed quote looks ridiculous
>> when you go back and look what I actually said. Isn't it ridiculous
>> to think I was asserting that Clark park's treatments are the center
>> of the profits for huge corporations?
>>
>>
>> It may seem funny to think that Siano made such a silly
>> interpretation and that mistaken quote, '"millions of gallons" of
>> "poisons" are being dumped in the park' But Siano knew I said no
>> such thing as he took words from different places to help deceive
>> all of you. He wants to support the general ad hominem strategy,
>> which I have long encountered from those known as the aninted.
>> ("Crazy, paranoid," etc, etc.")
>>
>> Once people have been proven using this technique, they must never
>> be blindly trusted, especially, when they are officers or board
>> members of civic associations believed to have credibility. I think
>> the important question is not how we should react to Siano, but does
>> the FOCP board approve or condemn the use of Siano's straw man
>> fallacy to falsly portray a dissenter to their official business????
>>
>> If FOCP board members on this list don't condemn Siano's public
>> straw man, as an agent of FOCP; the FOCP organization bears the
>> responsibility and should not be trusted by government nor members
>> of this community! This is crafted deception. It is not civil and
>> is one of the first strike strategies, which truly makes civility
>> impossible in public discourse. (FOCP controls their dog and pony
>> shows but can't control our study of the public text!)
>>
>> Folks, we need to stand up to these tactics on the list, before it
>> gets started again! I believe that civic associations should all
>> require an ethics rule in their by-laws.
>>
>> Glenn
>> PS: I have not received a retraction from Siano about the
>> accusations based on the Chance e-mails he wants to site. I will
>> soon forward the Chance e-mail as I promised without the public
>> retraction.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----
>> You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
>> list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
>> <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
>----
>You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
>list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
><http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
----
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the
list named "UnivCity." To unsubscribe or for archive information, see
<http://www.purple.com/list.html>.
