Skip to main content

Slippery Slopes: Not Just for Libertarian Paranoia any more

About two weeks ago I got into it with Jason on Delawareliberal over (of all things) opera.

What's interesting is the comment Jason made in critiquing one of my argument:

The logical fallacy that Libertarians like most, above all logical fallacies is that slippery slope argument.


I pointed out in rebuttal:

Not all slippery slope arguments are invalid–you guys use them all the time about Republicans when it suits your purposes, so get real.


And Dana Garrett agreed with me:

“Not all slippery slope arguments are invalid”

Now there is a truth few know. Any chance you could teach it to Al Mascitti? If you tell him the predictable consequence of some action (that he likes, of course), his knee twitches and out comes the “You are committing the slippery slope fallacy.”

Here’s the scoop on it folks:

“If A happens, then by a gradual series of small steps through B, C,…, X, Y, eventually Z will happen, too. Z should not happen. Therefore, A should not happen, either.”


The whole bit disappeared from my mind (things often do; it's cluttered and things get lost) until I was cruising the website of George Lakoff's Progressive think-tank, the Rockbridge Institute, and found an article on Strategic Initiatives. Here's the lead-in:

There are many types of Strategic Initiatives. The most far-reaching type is a Multiple Issue Strategic Initiative but another important one is a Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative. Both introduce wedge issues to divide opponents and make it easier to accomplish ambitious, long-term goals.


More specifically,

A Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative is so called because the first step is intended to be only part of what you want, but is a step that opens the door to further steps on the way to your ultimate goal. This works by making the first step on the slippery slope so attractive or palatable that traditional opponents have a hard time countering it.

For instance, the issue and ideas behind a Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative are presented in such a way that you put your opponents on the defensive, placing them in a difficult spot, and making it more likely that you will succeed. Critically, the first step puts a new frame in place. Once the first step is accomplished, the next step is easier because the new frame can be elaborated once it is in place. Using the same reasoning, you continue down the slope step by step, gaining momentum toward your final goal.

An important feature of both a Multiple Issue and a Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative is that they divide your opponents by operating as wedge issues—each drives a wedge between members of your opponent's usual coalitions.


The article cites bans on partial birth abortion as a successful Conservative Slippery Slope Strategic Initiative and clean air/clean water initiatives as similar potential strategies on the Progressive side.

In fact, the article argues,

What Can Progressives Do? Craft Our Own Slippery Slope and Wedge Issues.


There follow detailed instructions for creating and carrying through such initiatives.

So I guess it's not a matter of Libertarian paranoia.

Comments

Bowly said…
I have said before that it is a fallacy to consider the slippery slope fallacy a fallacy.

Two examples from a libertarian viewpoint are Social Security and the income tax; neither are what they were originally claimed to be.

And by "Social Security" I don't even (just) mean the growth in the "income redistribution" aspect. I mean claims like "The SS number will only be used for SS purposes and no other, and will not be used for identification."
Anonymous said…
Damn straight. Good stuff, Steve. I hadn't gotten around to it, but your blog's [finally] going into my RSS feed.

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

Libertarian National Committee Deathwatch Part 1

As the LNC continues to lurch towards collapse, with the latest news of mass layoffs at HQ, I've decided to begin tracking those things leading the national party to irrelevance, even as state and local parties gain power. As news, rumors and rhetoric break out, I shall chronicle them in this ongoing series at Delaware Libertarian. Organizations approaching failure have a number of characteristics. One of the most striking is renunciation of their purpose and effort to reinvent themselves as a "me-too" provider of services in the marketplace. In this, the LNC has been on a collision course with destiny for a while now. Recently, for example, it hired Republican Party web site developer TerraEclipse to redesign the LNC web site . Terra created a web site very similar to those of the clients it brags most about -- far-right Republican conservatives like Tom McClintock and BJ Lawson. A quick look at the web site they built for the LNC is instructive. The tagline on the ...

The disturbing decline of the Delaware blogosphere: a very unfortunate Around the Horn (even if it's not Friday)

I've noticed a change in my own blog-checking habits over the past several weeks, and I don't know if it's just me or the reality of the last month of a divisive political campaign. I automatically used to check out Delawareliberal first and several times a day, because it was where I could find edgy, thought-provoking, and (dare I say it) funny banter going on. These days visit several other spots first, and my visits to DL are both shorter and less engaged. Why? Because the combination of invading neo-con commenters with the stridency of some of the major contributors has led to such pleasant exchanges as a post dedicated to labeling another blogger racist by donviti, whose own sense of provocative humor is generally so far out there that he makes John Belushi doing Samurai bartender on the SNL look positively pro-Asian. Or I can find Delawaredem and jason periodically spewing the idea that anybody who is not a liberal or progressive Democrat is somehow a non-American,...