Poll: Is the "Slippery Slope" a valid concept?

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 47
Like Tree12Likes

Thread: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

  1. #1
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your left... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:00 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    13,990
    Likes Received
    7213 times
    Likes Given
    6734

    Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    Is the "Slipper Slope Theory", aka the "Domino Theory", a valid concept?

    I say 'Yes'. Taking federal income tax, for example. It was supposed to be small and affect only the richest. Within 10+/- years it had expanded greatly beyond the original reassurances. Today, it affects way more people than originally promised, AND the rates have increased as well.

    To me, this fits. While it is not a single person or group consciously plotting something big and slipping it by us one piece at a time (that would be a conspiracy theory), the end result is that something grew to be bigger than it ever was meant to be one piece at a time.

    Second example: Well-meaning politician sees that a tax or regulation was passed. They want more. They see the passage as a "mandate from the people" that what they want is really what the public wants, hence they propose taking said tax or regulation further.

    What was the Dept of Homeland Security's original narrowly-focused purpose?

    This is a big reason why I am reflexively worried whenever a new tax or bureaucracy is proposed. Even something small and reasonable. History tells me it won't stay small and reasonable for too long.

    Opponents of the Slippery Slope argument often say that they take each issue as it comes along. I say that is easier said than done when group politics is concerned.
    Last edited by radcen; 10-17-11 at 03:33 PM.

  2. #2
    Beilski Partisan
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    06-30-13 @ 05:39 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    22,130
    Likes Received
    9156 times
    Likes Given
    11518

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    It's valid based on the potential evidence, per the topic.
    If you have evidence, that things within that topic, progressively get worse, it's worth noting.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 10:05 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Likes Received
    2440 times
    Likes Given
    4969
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    In regards to history, yes. Slippery slope is plausible, and a reason to remain vigilant. It is particularly interesting when things continue to happen despite the choir of critics.

  4. #4
    Dungeon Master
    Hoplopologist



    X Factor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Where my demons hide.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:15 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    28,848
    Likes Received
    14095 times
    Likes Given
    10758

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    These are my slippers. They're not the best on slopes but they're damn cool looking.


  5. #5
    Educator Jucon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    USA
    Last Seen
    04-22-14 @ 05:52 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    787
    Likes Received
    222 times
    Likes Given
    446

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Is the "Slipper Slope Theory", aka the "Domino Theory", a valid concept?

    I say 'Yes'. Taking federal income tax, for example. It was supposed to be small and affect only the richest. Within 10+/- years it had expanded greatly beyond the original reassurances. Today, it affects way more people than originally promised, AND the rates have increased as well.

    To me, this fits. While it is not a single person or group consciously plotting something big and slipping it by us one piece at a time (that would be a conspiracy theory), the end result is that something grew to be bigger than it ever was meant to be one piece at a time.

    Second example: Well-meaning politician sees that a tax or regulation was passed. They want more. They see the passage as a "mandate from the people" that what they want is really what the public wants, hence they propose taking said tax or regulation further.

    What was the Dept of Homeland Security's original narrowly-focused purpose?

    This is a big reason why I am reflexively worried whenever a new tax or bureaucracy is proposed. Even something small and reasonable. History tells me it won't stay small and reasonable for too long.

    Opponents of the Slippery Slope argument often say that they take each issue as it comes along. I say that is easier said than done when group politics is concerned.
    How could you answer this question any other way than maybe? It really depends on what we are talking about.

    Here's a ridiculous (and offensive, I might add) "slippery slope" example for you... gay marriage will lead to people being allowed to marrying animals.
    "There is nothing which I dread so much as a division of the republic into two great parties, each arranged under its leader, and concerting measures in opposition to each other. This, in my humble apprehension, it to be dreaded as the greatest political evil under our Constitution." —John Adams

  6. #6
    Global Moderator
    Basketball Nerd
    StillBallin75's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    College Park, Maryland
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 01:58 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,966
    Likes Received
    12306 times
    Likes Given
    13258

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    Slippery slope arguments hold validity in some cases, in others not. The onus is on the argu-er to explain why something is likely to lead to something else, and how such a thing would happen.

  7. #7
    Advisor nijato's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Charm City, USA
    Last Seen
    01-19-12 @ 01:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    417
    Likes Received
    198 times
    Likes Given
    149
    Blog Entries
    2
    If I were to accept one slippery slope hypothesis, I'd be accepting them all before you know it.
    "A witty saying proves nothing." Voltaire

  8. #8
    Godwin's Lawyer
    Phys251's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Liberal
    Posts
    3,204
    Likes Received
    1433 times
    Likes Given
    8210

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    I have never heard of the "Slipper Slope Theory." Does this have something to do with friction on hills?
    "[T]he most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society. Those who are creditors, and those who are debtors, fall under a like discrimination." --James Madison, Federalist Paper #10

  9. #9
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:54 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,145
    Likes Received
    11413 times
    Likes Given
    19444

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    Quote Originally Posted by radcen View Post
    Is the "Slipper Slope Theory", aka the "Domino Theory", a valid concept?

    I say 'Yes'. Taking federal income tax, for example. It was supposed to be small and affect only the richest. Within 10+/- years it had expanded greatly beyond the original reassurances. Today, it affects way more people than originally promised, AND the rates have increased as well.

    To me, this fits. While it is not a single person or group consciously plotting something big and slipping it by us one piece at a time (that would be a conspiracy theory), the end result is that something grew to be bigger than it ever was meant to be one piece at a time.

    Second example: Well-meaning politician sees that a tax or regulation was passed. They want more. They see the passage as a "mandate from the people" that what they want is really what the public wants, hence they propose taking said tax or regulation further.

    What was the Dept of Homeland Security's original narrowly-focused purpose?

    This is a big reason why I am reflexively worried whenever a new tax or bureaucracy is proposed. Even something small and reasonable. History tells me it won't stay small and reasonable for too long.

    Opponents of the Slippery Slope argument often say that they take each issue as it comes along. I say that is easier said than done when group politics is concerned.
    Are you talking about using baby steps to accomplish a larger goal? For example instead of 2nd amendment opponents just banning all fire arms they enact license requirements, storage requirements, registrations, waiting periods, a ban on certain types of fire arms and all sort of other **** towards eventually banning all firearms.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  10. #10
    Phonetic Mnemonic ©
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your left... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:00 PM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    13,990
    Likes Received
    7213 times
    Likes Given
    6734

    Re: Is the "Slipper Slope Theory" a valid concept?

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Are you talking about using baby steps to accomplish a larger goal? For example instead of 2nd amendment opponents just banning all fire arms they enact license requirements, storage requirements, registrations, waiting periods, a ban on certain types of fire arms and all sort of other **** towards eventually banning all firearms.
    Can be something like that.

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •