Deborah Arnott (of ASH) says, “The Adam Smith Institute, by publishing this report, is acting as the mouthpiece for the tobacco industry, as it has done on many previous occasions.”
Why is it that whenever Antismokers are confronted with reasonable arguments, their first reaction is always to either (A) Wave The Children in the air, or (B) Claim any opposition must somehow be connected to Big Tobacco? The answer is simple: both are highly effective propaganda tools to use if you don’t actually have real justifications on your side of the argument.
(A) “Waving The Children” inspires a hormonally hard-wired protective response in listenersreaders: we are biologically geared to protect our young, and, no matter WHAT the topic might be, the side that can claim to be “on the side of the children” can borrow strength from the propaganda tool.
(B) Pointing to “Big Tobacco” inspires doubts about the opponent’s honesty because corporations are known to lie in their self-interest, with BT having a particularly public record of having been caught at it. It also inspires doubts about the opponent’s motivations — i.e. are they somehow being paid by BT to say what they say (which is what Arnott directly suggests with her use of the term “mouthpiece) for the Adam Smith Institute.
Mr. Snowdon’s Report is valid and well-argued. It’s no surprise that the fanatics who are against anything even sniffing of resembling a vague support of some aspect of something to do with smoking would choose to attack it with Ad Hominems rather than with substance.
Originally written By Michael J. McFadden
