Thread: Chilling comment by John Kerry

Originally Posted by Colonel

He did raise question of how to curb alleged lies then stated that the first amendment blocks the government from simply eradicating those lies by force. But there are other ways of stemming the tide, including as discussed in the mentioned "twitter files". You claim that he implied somewhere that the curbing should be done by getting better at telling the truth instead. Where exactly did he say that?

His words: "What we need is to win the ground, win the right to govern, by hopefully winning enough votes to be able to implement change."

In my words, by convincing, not by forcing.

Originally Posted by njtom

His words: "What we need is to win the ground, win the right to govern, by hopefully winning enough votes to be able to implement change."

He's not talking about "telling the truth about climate change", he's talking about winning the election so that they can implement change even though the first amendment blocks direct action on the alleged lies. Surely winning the election requires a lot more than "getting better at telling the truth about climate change".

Originally Posted by Colonel

He's not talking about "telling the truth about climate change", he's talking about winning the election so that they can implement change even though the first amendment blocks direct action on the alleged lies. Surely winning the election requires a lot more than "getting better at telling the truth about climate change".

As a politician, you earn the voters' votes by convincing them that your positions are better than your opponent's positions. This applies to any area of public policy. If they agree with you, they elect you. And if they elect you, you implement your policies. If they don't agree, they elect the other guy, and you don't implement your policies. That's how democracies are supposed to work.

Originally Posted by njtom

As a politician, you earn the voters' votes by convincing them that your positions are better than your opponent's positions. This applies to any area of public policy. If they agree with you, they elect you. And if they elect you, you implement your policies. If they don't agree, they elect the other guy, and you don't implement your policies. That's how democracies are supposed to work.

I can see the cultural/political war here. One side thinks that his statements on the topic of climate change can simply be generalized to apply to anything, the other side attempts to completely tame what he said.

Originally Posted by Colonel

I can see the cultural/political war here. One side thinks that his statements on the topic of climate change can simply be generalized to apply to anything, the other side attempts to completely tame what he said.

I agree with both sides. Side1: Kerry's approach to climate change (convincing the voters of your position) should be applied to other areas of public policy. Side2: What Kerry said in the video is completely appropriate and consistent with the concept of freedom of speech. Nowhere in that video does he event hint at suppressing speech.

We may be approaching "beating a dead horse" territory with this topic.

Originally Posted by njtom

We may be approaching "beating a dead horse" territory with this topic.

Was that your aim?

Originally Posted by Colonel

Was that your aim?

Nope. Just saying that we seem to be going around and around in circles.

I'll gladly continue the dialogue if you prefer.