The Strawman Argument and The Strawman Theory.
Some would claim the debate is nearly over.
Others might suggest that the debate is just beginning.
Let us allow for the Court of International Public Opinion be the Measurer as to the state of discourse.
However, the elements of the facts of the matter in all respects have been obtained. And so, let the points of the debate commence as they will.
As a preface to the debate - here are the facts as we know them so far:
A strawman argument is a type of logical fallacy where an individual misrepresents an opponent's position to make it easier to attack. This involves creating a distorted or exaggerated version of the original argument and then refuting this weaker version, rather than addressing the actual argument presented by the opponent.
This tactic is often used to divert attention from the real issue and can be misleading, as it gives the illusion of having effectively countered the opponent's stance.
Criminal investigators and interrogators might use a strawman argument as a tactic by misrepresenting a suspect's statements or beliefs to make them easier to challenge or discredit.
This involves presenting a distorted version of the suspect's position, which can be more easily refuted, potentially leading the suspect to inadvertently admit guilt or provide more information.
Such tactics can be considered abusive if they manipulate the suspect into making admissions or confessions based on misrepresented arguments rather than factual evidence.
In criminal investigations, some poorly educated, or improperly informed individuals might attempt to assert their natural rights by invoking the "strawman theory", claiming they are "separate" from their "legal identity" and thus not subject to statutory laws.
This theory suggests that legal obligations apply only to a fictional "strawmen" created by nefarious government entities.
To properly move this alleged theory into the realm of being possibly factually based, investigators must exercise and conduct due diligence by researching such claims levied against the allegations of a "strawman" existence, rather than denying the possibility outright.
The remedy is embedded in the fact that "Strawman Arguments" are a factual, disingenuous tactic firmly identified as being used in an attempt to attack someone's authentic stance on a particular topic.
Any genuine investigator would then thoroughly investigate in an attempt to determine if this same disingenuous tactic has been exploited to also create an instrument of physical attack against living people. Logically, if it is possible to attack someone's belief structure through the use of a "Strawman Argument" for purposes of intellectual abuse, then it is highly likely that a "Strawman Entity" could also be created to exploit further fallacies.
At this point, the underlying difference between these two potential tactics, is that the "Strawman" strategy pivots from intellectual abuses and attacks, to physical abuses and attacks.
With regards to alleged "Sovereign Citizen" assertions, corrupt law enforcement have, and might continue to exploit this opportunity by using strawman arguments to carelessly, or purposefully misrepresent an apprehended and interrogated individual's position through crafty questioning, and thereby falsely assert that such claims oppose local laws. This tactic can lead, and has led to false reporting, portraying the individual as rejecting legal and/or lawful authority entirely, rather than simply questioning and attempting to confirm any legal and/or lawful obligations, or corrected political status.
In this observation, sincere investigators can clearly sense the parallel similarities between an individual " intellectual position" and an individual "political status" being set up for attack or exploitation by careless or disingenuous actors reporting false assertions by use of the "Strawman Argument."
- For Safety Sake -
Always remain mindful of your surroundings.
Be aware of the stage cast before you, both as a spectacular or as a potential player in the theater of life.
People deserve to be properly informed. While at the same time, people who accept nothing less than truth, will seek out a matter themselves, rather than relying upon other people or alleged government entities to determine a on their behalf.
