A few years ago, I wrote, “The Doctrine of Associated Irrelevance” as a guide to helping conservatives understand liberal arguments and talking points. The doctrine states:
“The relevance of a fact, statement or action to a particular subject is irrelevant if that fact, statement or action is relevant to an associated irrelevant subject. As such, use of associated irrelevant facts, statements, or actions to substantiate an opinion or position is relevant to any debate or discussion even if that opinion or position isn’t relevant to the discussion or debate.”
The somewhat convoluted construction of this doctrine may make it difficult to follow, hence the example below, which should bring clarity and understanding. Following is a news report concerning statements made by Democratic Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington, shortly after news of the IRS targeting scandal became fodder for public comment. (Among other places, it was posed in a liberal-dominated forum on Facebook, where it began a rambling discussion.)
“But as I listen to this discussion, I’d like to remind everyone what we are talking about here,” he continued. “None of your organizations were kept from organizing or silenced. We are talking about whether or not the American taxpayers would subsidize your work. We are talking about a tax break.” The tea party groups in question were applying to become tax exempt 501(c)4 groups, also known as social welfare organizations. McDermott noted the purpose of such groups was to advance the common good and general welfare a community. Political organizations, on the other hand, are categorized under section 527 of the federal tax code.
“Each of your groups is highly political,” the congressman said. “From opposing the President’s healthcare reform, to abortion restrictions, to gay marriage, you’re all entrenched in some of the most controversial political issues in this country – and with your applications you are asking the American public to pay for that work. Many of you host and endorse candidates. The line between permitted political activity and non-permitted political activity can be very fine, and it’s important that tax payers know which side you fall on.”
The congressman made some valid points, but they are irrelevant to the core issue of IRS wrongdoing, and appear designed to shift focus away from that core issue. To see associate irrelevance in action, consider the following hypothetical question and answer session based on McDermott’s statements:
Q- A New York Times report stated, “None of this ought to take away from the major part of the I.R.S. scandal — the targeting of conservative groups that applied for 501(c)(4) status, which the I.R.S. has admitted to and for which the statistical evidence is very clear.” In light of that, how do you respond to the charge that the IRS targeted conservative groups?
McDermott- “None of your organizations were kept from organizing or silenced.
Q- We are not talking about whether organizations were kept from organizing or silenced. We are talking about unacceptable actions taken by the IRS.
McDermott- We are talking about whether or not the American taxpayers would subsidize your work. We are talking about a tax break.
Q- I don’t think you’re following congressman. We’re discussing a scandal involving the way the IRS does business. If the groups seeking 501(C)4 status weren’t qualified to receive it, shouldn’t they have been turned down simply because they didn’t qualify, regardless of their political orientation?
McDermott- Each of your groups is highly political, from opposing the President’s healthcare reform, to abortion restrictions, to gay marriage, you’re all entrenched in some of the most controversial political issues in this country – and with your applications you are asking the American public to pay for that work.
Q- Again congressman, the core issue speaks to the IRS’s targeting of specific groups and the methods it employed. You have not addressed those issues.
McDermott- The line between permitted political activity and non-permitted political activity can be very fine, and it’s important that tax payers know which side you fall on.
All of McDermott’s comments, which were taken directly from his original statement, pertain to issues associated with the IRS, but are irrelevant to the question of wrongdoing. Use of associated irrelevance is a very effective tactic for diverting attention from core issues, as demonstrated by the responses in the thread that began with the congressman’s statement. That thread contained 58 comments, most of which focused on debate about the political nature and activities of targeted groups. And of course, other associated irrelevancies.
Leave a Reply