One of the reasons I stay out of debating politics, or even discuss it in private with people who disagree with me, is the utter fallacious nature of most peoples arguments. Logical fallacies are used in political propaganda to create mired arguments that are seemingly impossible to penetrate with a countering point of view. This has always been used by both parties, but the past eight years the sheer amount of this I’ve seen from the Republican party has been staggering. I believe this is mainly caused by the lack of logic their constituency inherently possesses, and their eagerness to eat it up. *wink*
A logical fallacy by definition is a collapse in logic often used in debate to mislead or distract people from the real issue.
The entire “War On Terror” is built around different logical fallacies.
“Either you’re with us or against us.” Sounds like something you would hear on Fox News and it forces someone into a fight that isn’t theirs to begin with. These are the “bandwagon” or “guilt by association” fallacies.
“If you’re protesting against the war, then you’re unpatriotic!” Again this one has Fox news written all over it. This attempts to use shame as a tool and bypass a Constitutionally guaranteed right.
“If you’re not doing anything wrong, then you have no reason to fear the passage of the Patriot Act.” This should send shivers down the spine of anyone fortunate enough to have read and absorbed the book 1984. This uses guilt as a tool to bypass a Constitutionally guaranteed right. This is the “Emotional appeal” fallacy or the “Appeal from authority” fallacy.
The example that bothers me the most after Obama was elected president was the idea that you’re either a reformer or unifier. This is a false dichotomy.
A false dichotomy is committed when the arguer claims that his conclusion is one of only two options, when in fact there are other possibilities. The arguer then goes on to show that the ‘only other option’ is clearly outrageous, and so his preferred conclusion must be embraced.
Roosevelt and Lincoln governed as radical reformers but were also great unifiers. Obama’s challenge is to create a new consensus that is designed by the circumstances that he is inheriting. One if his great strengths, that is also reminiscent of his character and similar to Lincoln, is he has the self confidence and intellect to listen to other people and then come to a amiable conclusion. Based on this, what I’ve seen from the campaign he’s run, and historical parallels, I believe he is perfectly capable of turning this country around and effectively exposing and discrediting the ideology that led us into the mess our country currently stands in.
