[lit-ideas] Re: reforming immigration

Spin as in "a special interpretation, especially as used by politicians to sway public opinion"?

If you are countering the anti-immigrant person's "fictions," you are replacing their ignorance with your facts. But if you have all the facts and your reasoning is correct, you certainly have no need to be biased, do you?

Maybe we should maintain that our positions on an issue represent the best way to advance the things we value with the least overall harm to the world? I don't know. Every side has valid points, and where they seem to diverge is on what is valued.

For example, if we value the advantage of the current citizens of the US nation, we might oppose illegal immigration or resist being oblivious to it. If we value "humanity in general" or have an ethnic stake in it (as Mexican-Americans might) then we would encourage obliviousness to, or leniency toward, illegal immigration.

So assuming the "facts" of an issue are not grossly inaccurate, the debate is really about the bias itself. And if we exclude debate about the bias itself, there probably isn't anything to debate is there?



_______
Let me try again

"I'm, like Krugmann, in theory inviolably biassed towards immigration. But rather than say "**** off I'm pro-immigration" I acknowledge such facts as anti-immigrant persons proffer and (attempt to) counter their fictions."

have you got it now?

(I think it would help if you looked up "spin")

------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html

Other related posts: