Paging George Santayana

From comments in a recent blog post:

Why should we live in the past? Why not focus on the facts of the present? As I reminded you just above?

What does it matter if America may or may not have somehow caused, deliberately or not, the takeover by Islamists of Iran?

Granted, my history is quite incomplete, but let's look at what's happening today. That's most important, after all.

And:

I just don't understand fellow Americans who are ready to blame the United States for everything, CS. I can't, and won't, try to reason with them because they seem to be totally out of reach. I do realize they would say the same thing about me, because I simply refuse to blame the U.S. for what is going on in this world today.

These people openly admit their lack of knowledge of the reason things are the way they are; they don't think it weakens their case. This form of anti-intellectualism is becoming more and more common in debate.

The problem is that it's tough to counter this point of view, because actual historical facts don't matter, the way the debate is framed. The debate can't be won without reframing it.

How can this be done? I suppose first is to gain an admission of fact. For example, in the above debate, I've asked for the writer to describe what Iran would have to do for him to reverse his judgement that they must be attacked. I'm not sure whether it'll work, but it would be hard for him to answer without researching something about Iran, since his current reasons for attacking them are (1) they want nukes, (2) they are Islamic, and (3) they are evil.

Another tack would be to ask why he does not want other similar states to be attacked. For example, Pakistan is Muslim, is not democratic, has actual nuclear weapons, and is openly aggressive on its borders. Why should they not be attacked? Again, it would take a little research to start finding real differences between them.

By getting the other side of the debate to agree that facts are indeed germane to the debate, an actual debate can begin. The important work in these debates is to make that possible.