Now on ScienceBlogs: Oldest Human-Made Object in Space

ScienceBlogs Book Club: Inside the Outbreaks

Profile

Please read the DISCLAIMERS.

markhoofnagle.jpg Mark Hoofnagle has a MD and PhD in physiology from the University of Virginia, and is now a general surgery resident. His interest in denialism concerns the use of denialist tactics to confuse public understanding of scientific knowledge.

Chris Hoofnagle Chris Hoofnagle teaches privacy and computer crime law at the University of California, Berkeley School of Law. A former Washington lawyer, Chris wrote the The Denialists' Deck of Cards based upon his experiences working on consumer protection.

PalMD.jpg PalMD is a practicing internist in the Midwestern United States. Aside from the great joy he finds in his family and his work, he likes communicating some of that joy to others. He has a special interest in the ways patients---and we are all patients at one time or another---are deceived by charlatans. He aims to change the world, one reader at a time. Previous writings can still be found here.

Please read the DISCLAIMERS.


HONcode Certified

This blog is hosted by SEED Media Group; ad space on the top and right side belongs to them. The rest of the content is HONcode certified.

This website is accredited by Health On the Net Foundation. Click to verify. We comply with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information: verify here.

Search

Recent Posts

Recent Comments

Archives

Blogroll

Blog carnivals

  • asclepius_phixr%282%29.jpg
  • BadgeMed.jpg

    Other

    « 62nd Skeptic's Circle is up | Main | The NYT gets it right on No Child Left Behind »

    Denialists' Deck of Cards: The Ace of Diamonds, "Communism!"

    Category: Denialists' Deck of Cards
    Posted on: June 7, 2007 9:48 AM, by Chris H

    Communism!Suricou Raven guessed it--after calling your opponent "Unamerican," you call them "Communist." Here, use loaded phrases, such as "the proposal smacks of the paternalistic 'command and control' of Communism."
    Share on Facebook
    Share on StumbleUpon
    Share on Facebook

    Comments

    1

    Or militant (the commentariat touches on 'communist' as well).

    Posted by: coturnix | June 7, 2007 10:14 AM

    2

    You are running out of cards, and I haven't seen "If we do that, the terrorists will have won" yet. ;)

    Posted by: xander | June 7, 2007 10:36 AM

    3

    @xander--that's the King of Spades, "DANGER!"

    Posted by: Chris H | June 7, 2007 10:49 AM

    4

    From xander's comment, I went back and looked at the whole deck (the link by your photo). I can't see the four of hearts, or any of the fives except the hearts. Am I missing something?

    Posted by: David | June 7, 2007 12:51 PM

    5
    From xander's comment, I went back and looked at the whole deck (the link by your photo). I can't see the four of hearts, or any of the fives except the hearts. Am I missing something?
    It's a conspiracy! I knew something was fishy!

    Posted by: coturnix | June 7, 2007 12:55 PM

    6

    @coturnix, you're right...I'll fix Saturday. C

    Posted by: Chris H | June 7, 2007 5:21 PM

    7

    I think this calls for some high quality PDFs and a visit to the nearest print shop for some Denialist Top Trumps! :)

    Posted by: Ithika Author Profile Page | June 8, 2007 6:49 AM

    8
    @coturnix, you're right...I'll fix Saturday. C

    Caught redhanded playing with a short deck. For shame. In the olden days, there'd be a necktie party.

    For the world, I'm not sure that being called a "communist" or "socialist" is an insult these days. Although old guard communism has withered, their educated children -- social democracies have flourished. I didn't really care for the ultra-wide boulevards anyway.

    Saw the republican debates a few days ago and they characterized the democrat positions on health care as "socialist". Oooh! No..., anything but that.

    Fact is the mainstream US democrats are nowhere close to what "liberal" goes for in many places in the world.

    Posted by: Ted | June 8, 2007 7:34 AM

    9

    @Ted, the deck is actually a card short...that's one of the jokes. But I've unintentionally shortened it by a couple of cards. Will fix.

    Posted by: Chris H | June 8, 2007 5:50 PM

    10

    This is not as illegitimate as you make out. Communism is/was the unrestrained implementation of a command economy. The evidence is in: it doesn't work.
    Besides, the evidence is in that any time you implement a fully socialist social structure, it rapidly morphs into a dictatorship.
    There are empirically valid ways to run a good economy. High levels of regulation, as per socialism and communism, is not one of them.
    What sort of science blog is this?

    Posted by: David Dufty | June 9, 2007 4:02 PM

    11

    And unrestrained capitalism solidifies social stratification and leads to abusive oligopolies and monopolies as those that have raise the barriers to entry ever higher for those that have not. As a general rule that leads to corporate dictatorship. So laissez-faire capitalism obviously doesn't work too well either.

    So the question is: what next? Social democracy seems a good place to start -- what can we do about the tax issues there while maintaining the social safety net? (That's the problem of most Westernized countries. The left is trying to get a rudimentary safety net in place, but the right would rather squabble over prayer in classrooms, the right to own an entire gun shop's worth of weapons, and whether or not the fossil record actually says what it looks like it says.)

    Posted by: Brian X | June 10, 2007 12:23 AM

    12
    And unrestrained capitalism solidifies social stratification
    You give capitalism too much credit! Social strata are everywhere, whether you're talking democracies, monarchies, or communist dictatorships. This is one reason why "Animal Farm" is such a clever book, because it illustrated this truth.

    But seriously, yes, I agree with you. Implementing a social safety net or wanting to keep an eye on corporations isn't "socialism", much less communism.

    Posted by: Daddy Dave | June 10, 2007 12:38 AM

    13

    Mark, I was checking out your deck of cards, and many of the cards are standard conservative tenets - market forces, rights, technological innovation, job creation, small government, etc.

    Your deck of cards looks more like a criticism of conservatives than a criticism of anti-science crusaders. And most of your rhetoric is about dealing with leaders of industry. Guess I should have dug deeper before getting excited about the mission of this blog. It's not what it seems.

    I guess that explains why you don't give a toss about vaccination deniers, fluoride deniers, or other public health policy deniers that jeopardise people's lives every day: these are boring to you because they don't fit into your political mission. Climate change, on the other hand, fits right in because it's a big stick for you and your realclimate buddies to beat evil capitalists with.

    Should have left here two days ago. Cya round.

    Posted by: Daddy Dave | June 10, 2007 1:24 AM

    14

    As you say, one missing.

    Bated breath.

    Posted by: David | June 11, 2007 6:32 PM

    Post a Comment

    (Email is required for authentication purposes only. On some blogs, comments are moderated for spam, so your comment may not appear immediately.)





    ScienceBlogs

    Search ScienceBlogs:

    Go to:

    Advertisement
    Follow ScienceBlogs on Twitter

    © 2006-2011 ScienceBlogs LLC. ScienceBlogs is a registered trademark of ScienceBlogs LLC. All rights reserved.