Thank you for the clarification! I think I have a better idea of what your first argument was about. You were answering Harry Reid’s question, “Why would any person of Hispanic heritage want to be a Republican?” To answer that question, all you have to do is show why any one person of Hispanic heritage might want to be a Republican.
To accomplish this, you employ an argument that utilizes the following syllogism:
1) American citizens of Mexican (I know that you also discussed Hispanics and Latinos generally. However, I find it easier to focus on one country) heritage love their country.
2) The country of Mexican Americans’ is America.
3) The Republican Party is the party of American Nationalism.
4) American Nationalism is loyalty and devotion to America; especially : a sense of national consciousness exalting America above all other nations and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations or supranational groups.
5) American citizens who love America will want to join the political party that is the party of American Nationalism (You never discuss this premise. However, there is no way that your conclusion can follow from your premises without it).
Therefore,
Conclusion: An American citizen of Mexican heritage will want to be a Republican.
Please let me know if this incorrectly states your argument.
The above argument is not sound. Thus, it fails to establish that any American citizen of Mexican heritage will want to be a Republican. Admittedly, a Mexican American citizen may wish to join the Republican Party (Harry Reid would not dispute this). However, that citizen will not join the Republican Party because of the logic of the argument set out above. Thus, the argument above does not answer Reid’s question.
The argument falls apart at necessary premise 5 (though, 1-3 are just as shaky). Love of country is not the same as nationalism (you admit this in your reply when you point out my equivocation between patriotism and nationalism). I can love America without exalting it above all other nations (for example, I can love America but still think that Mexico is better than America). Thus, just because I love America does not mean that I will join the party of American Nationalism. We can both agree that there are many non-Republicans who love America. These citizens have not selected the party of American Nationalism (I still find it incredible that you believe that the Republicans are THE party of American Nationalism. I can understand an argument that Republicans and Tea Partiers are the most nationalistic (thought I think even this is arguable). However, your argument that Republicans are nationalistic and non-Republicans are non-nationalistic makes little sense to me).
Because premise 5 fails, your argument fails. The fact that Mexican American citizens love America does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that even one Mexican American citizen will want to join the political party that exalts America above all other nations.That conclusion might follow if the Republican Party was the party of American Nationalism and every other party hated America. In that case, Mexican American citizens might choose the Republican Party by default. However, every major party loves America. Thus, premises 1-4 lead to the conclusion that a Mexican American citizen will choose one of the major parties. Premises 1-4 do not lead to the conclusion that a Mexican American citizen will choose the Republican Party.
No comments:
Post a Comment