Reuters

  • jetA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s a rhetorical tool. It’s not new. I’ve been familiar with it ever since I was cognizant of global news. Fascist governments like to conflate their populations with their ideology to make criticisms difficult.

    If the facts are in your favor, you argue the facts

    If morality is in your favor you argue morality

    If historical precedent is in your favor, you argue historical precedent

    And if nothing else, you argue about arguing. This is where the "if you’re not with me you’re against me " accusations of antisemitism exist… from my perspective. It’s a bullying rhetorical tactic. When you hear this, it means the other sides already conceding they can’t defend themselves, and they’re just relying on rhetoric to shut you up so that they can get their message out there.

    I don’t blame people for using all the rhetorical tools available to them, I am sad that a lot of people don’t have the proper critical thinking skills to deal with empty rhetoric. That makes me sad.