6 ms·

I didn't make the site, but I think it's a good site to have. I think the idea is that it just makes it easier for people to find examples of government making

I didn't make the site, but I think it's a good site to have. I think the idea is that it just makes it easier for people to find examples of government making mistakes-- and government makes mistakes consistently. And I acknowledge that the plural of anecdotes isn't proper proof-- but it works on a lot of people. Personally, I have tried to use principles to argue against government and people throw anecdotal excuses back at me. (For example: It's been proven that the existence of a minimum wage reduces employment in low-skilled workers http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0c2vmFGbtk http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j0c2vmFGbtk ) There is a lot of bias in the article summaries though. :/

JClaussFTW 15y ago
Civilian, the site is definitely biased, but not partisan. It's biased in favor of personal liberty and meritocracy, yes. But it's not anti-government or anarchist. The idea behind DAG is that you can quickly spot where the trouble areas in government are, be they people or bureaucracies. If the site has wide enough readership, being named on DAG could eventually become a political scarlet letter.
- bithive123 15y ago
  You're correct that it's not "anti-government" but pretending that it has much intellectual, political, or literary merit is "anti-critical-thinking". If TheDailyWTF.com was instead called "Dumbass Programmers" and promised to help people "quickly spot where the trouble areas in programming are" it would be simplistic to the point of tedium. The real problems are not simply a matter of someone being a "dumbass", that analysis is just self-serving pablum.