More CDTC Tactics
Guest Post by Michael Chambers (guest posts are moderated, but not approved or endorsed by the CCA Steering Committee)
The most common tactic the Charlestown Disinformation Town Committee (CDTC) uses in this town is to attack the messenger, not the issue. I, for one, have been the target of this type of disinformation. I cannot recall one time when the local Democrats argued an issue that I introduced. What I got was name calling, attacks on my intelligence, and on my personal character. This does not concern me because the more the attackers directed their abuse at me; the more I knew that they could not argue with my observations.
Often, those dealing in disinformation in this town attack the town officials that are supported by the Charlestown Citizens Alliance. They attack the Town Council, carefully excluding the Vice President who is a supporter of their political philosophy. They attack the Planning Commission carefully avoiding mention of one member of their Party. The disinformation specialists attack by name and through photographs just to punctuate recognition of the person. These photos rival DMV license photos or passport photos in quality. Destroying the reputation of good leaders has been developed into an art and science by the CDTC. Even the Charlestown residents who comment on issues during town council meetings that do not support the local Democratic strategies have not escaped the hostility of these mudslingers. If and when the Republicans in this town get their act together, the number of personal attacks from the local disinformation committee should increase accordingly.
Much of the disinformation of this type involves insulting or belittling an opponent in order to attack his claim or invalidate his argument. It can also involve pointing out character flaws or actions that are irrelevant to the opponent’s argument. Such disinformation is inherently fallacious because it relates to the opponent’s personal character, which has nothing to do with the logical merit of the opponent’s argument. Arguing “ad hominem” is a tactic most used by the CDTC. This has a negative effect on the functioning and the future of Charlestown. It actually is a way of suppressing the Freedom of Speech which we all have a right to employ.
There are several instances where capable, dedicated individuals have shied away from running for or volunteering for public service in Charlestown because the negative consequences these attacks will have on their businesses and personal lives. The dealers in disinformation would not think twice about damaging someone’s reputation/business if that person did not share their politics. For example, this is one well-known tactic used against one well-respected Town Council member. Claims have been leveled that are not supported by facts; that have not been sourced in the news media; or in any other public manner. In my mind, the way the disinformation was spread over the internet is unethical and a crime. To intentionally try to destroy a person’s good name without evidence or cause is reckless behavior. If they do it to one person they will do it to another and the Town suffers. These people have little regard for the well-being of this town unless it benefits their Party goals. Is there any wonder such disinformation tactics are shunned by ethical candidates?