For those of you who don't know, Dan Maes is a republican and tea party supporter running in Colorado's gubernatorial elections. While I don't know a lot about him as a politician, I did happen to come across this article which I'm hoping doesn't sum up his character and ideology. While I am all for people presenting their own beliefs, especially on the internet (after all, that's one of the main reasons it is so popular) I can't believe the way in which some people do it. If you didn't click on the link, I'll summarize the article for you. Basically, Maes is blaming Denver's mayor for promoting a community bicycle program because it is "converting Denver into a United Nations community." Let that sink in. My first reaction was, logically, one of doubt. But, there have been strange and unlikely things said before now that turn out to be true, so I decided to give Dan the benefit of the doubt and admit that it could be possible that the mayor of Denver, John Hickenlooper, is secretly working to allow the U.N. to infiltrate local American governments.
As with any allegation of this kind, I, along with any reader, will need said statement proven to me. After starting an article like that, I was eager to read on and find out what proof Maes had for this rather outlandish statement. So, read on I did. If you have read the article, you will no doubt be just as disappointed as I was when I discovered that there was no real evidence for the allegation, but rather vague statements like "These aren't just warm, fuzzy ideas from the mayor. These are very specific strategies that are dictated to us by this United Nations program that mayors have signed on to."
Yes Dan, but what program are you talking about? The U.N. Bicycle collective that will somehow coerce the American people through environmentally friendly initiatives such as this? I'm still not buying it Dan, but again, maybe this article isn't giving all the details. After all, it's not too uncommon for bias to creep its way into journalism. So, after a bit of Googling, I discovered that this wasn't the case, and turned to the ICLEI website to see if I could spot any suspicious agendas. Here is their website, and as far as I can tell, they've got a pretty comprehensive and forward-thinking agenda, but one that doesn't include local government domination.
So, if Maes is so convinced about the validity of his convictions, why doesn't he produce the evidence needed to back up statements like "Some would argue this document that mayors have signed is contradictory to our own Constitution"? After all, calling an international environmental initiative unconstitutional is a hefty allegation. My patience and Dan's credibility wearing thin, I realized what Dan Maes actually is. Perhaps I should have realized it sooner, either due to his party affiliations or just because of the idiocy of the statements he's made, but Dan Maes is a troll. I think that's the long and the short of it. He, and other trolls out there, bank on the fact that once something is published, regardless of the validity of the statement, that a certain percentage of people will assume it is true, or at least become suspicious about the topic at hand. If there is smoke, there has to be a fire, right? Even if the statement is so outlandish no one believes it, a trolls work is done, just because you've spent the time reading what they have to say.
What these unsavory and low-handed people don't realize is the ability most people have in seeing bullshit for what it is. Things like this might have been more believable five or ten years ago when the Internet was a newer thing, and online articles still had (nearly) the same amount of credibility as print media. But, as the web has evolved and more and more people realize how easy it is to post ones opinion on any issue, it has become increasingly easy to spot a poorly thought-out argument.
What do I have to say about this? Well, in the case of Dan Maes, and I suppose it goes for anyone putting their opinion on the internet, I say: get your facts straight. It is very easy for people to research what you're talking about and find out just how much fact there is behind anything you say. Realize that your audience isn't filled with gullible idiots who will believe anything that comes out of a politicians' mouth. While I'm sure there are some people who lap this shit up, they are in no way the majority. I ask that you think about what you want to say before saying it, and above all, attempt to grasp the repercussions of what you say might have. Because for Maes, all his blathering has done for me (and I'm sure quite a few other people) is show how deluded politicians can be; both in their convictions, and in their belief that others will automatically assume they speak the truth.
No comments:
Post a Comment