AOC Establishes A New World Record!
. . . for the number of possible logical fallacies in one paragraph (or tweet).
Hi, kids! Class is back in session! I know it’s been a while, but today’s lesson is historic! Today, our lesson is about a favorite topic, logic. Or, more accurately, logical fallacies.
There are many logical fallacies. First, there are “formal” fallacies, four in all, including “syllogistic” fallacies (all salmon are fish; all sharks are fish; therefore, all salmon are sharks), and a personal favorite, the “bad reason” fallacy. That presupposes that bad reasons always result in bad conclusions. Not true!
And then there are “informal” fallacies, of which there are many, totaling some 44 according to this website. Don’t worry; we’re not going to make you memorize each one, but it wouldn’t hurt if you did. We hear them all from our government betters, especially in Washington.
Today’s lesson focuses on what may qualify as a world record - the highest number of logical fallacies uttered in a single paragraph (or in this case, a tweet) by one person. And guess who that is, but our favorite Boston University graduate and Member of Congress, the Honorable Alexandria Ocasio Cortez. May I call you Sandy?
Let’s count how many logical fallacies may apply to this intellectual gem from our two-term Congresswoman from Brooklyn. But before we do that, notice how many “likes” our progressive icon has attracted - nearly 95,000! One logical fallacy worth noticing is the fallacy of “appeal to authority.” It goes like this: our mayor says crime is down; therefore, any claims or statistics to the contrary are false—a very “progressive” mindset.
To be fair, that’s a favorite logical fallacy employed by both “always Trumpers” (the man is never wrong!) and legions of Democratic loyalists who believe everything published by the Washington Post or New York Times is correct, especially if it confirms their biases. Especially the Trump-Russian collusion hoax that “earned” them a Pulitzer Prize. Which they have yet to return.
But I digress. Let’s explore some of the seven possible logical fallacies our distinguished economic scholar from Boston University (did I mention that already?) has grazed on her highway to a cranial danger zone.
Let’s address what she trying to do here, which may qualify as the “red herring” fallacy, to distract the audience to another topic. She wants to discredit the underlying tweet from the future Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, the estimable Jim Jordan (R-OH), and segue instead to a preferred topic and wild yet unproven accusation that legions of GOP Congressmen sought pardons from President Trump for possible legal violations related to the horrific incidents of January 6th at the Capitol.
Nice try, Sandy, but no cigar. At least yet.
Intelligent thought requires such accusations to be ignored or set aside until evidence is provided. Perhaps it will. I doubt it, seriously, since no evidence of any kind has emerged of malfeasance by GOP Members of Congress related to the events of that day. In leaky DC, such evidence would have emerged months ago if it were real. But it’s been promised, and I’ll wait. My popcorn is ready.
But so many voted against certifying elections by many states, some will claim. Shall we revisit 2004 and 2016? Perhaps you will recall the exhortations by one Rep. Bennie Thompson, putative chair of the rump January 6th inquisition committee, who voted not to certify Ohio’s electoral votes from the 2004 election of George W. Bush? Or perhaps reputed constitutional scholar and US Rep. Jamie Raskin's vote (D-MD) not to certify Donald Trump’s election in 2016? I could go on—hypocrisy leaps and bounds throughout the House Democratic Caucus (and among a few Republicans). Both Members of Congress also bought the discredited Russian collusion hoax hook, line, and sinker. Que Kenny Loggins’ and Michael McDonald’s “What a Fool Believes.” This song has nothing to do with politics. But the title fits a good many in Congress.
Let’s quickly list Sandy’s other logical fallacies to see which ones most apply. There will be a test. And a chance for extra credit!
False Cause and False Attribution.
“False cause refers to an argument where someone cites sequential events as evidence that the first event caused the second. False attribution happens when someone appeals to irrelevant, biased, or unqualified information,” says our source. Sandy’s tweet claims that crime in cities is caused mostly by Republican governors and, perhaps, legislators. If that were true, would not crime be a problem outside of just urban areas? Not a conclusion, just a question.
One common fallacy is that you can judge or assess something as good or bad based on where it originates. Is Sandy suggesting here that most crime emanates from Republican-run states therefore, all Republicans are pro-crime? Or, perhaps anyone who was a Republican in Congress on January 6th is bad? Perhaps that’s a stretch, but perhaps someone might ask her.
“An incomplete comparison occurs when two things are compared that are not related to make something more appealing than it is. This also happens when conclusions are made with incomplete information,” our source says. Does anyone think crime in cities, like Baltimore is related to crime elsewhere in Maryland? Or, is crime in Philadelphia related to crime elsewhere in most of Pennsylvania? After all, not every prosecutor non-prosecutor in Pennsylvania is named Larry Krasner.
This is another common fallacy. When someone simply does not understand a concept or how it works, they simply deem it untrue. Has our distinguished Boston University scholar failed to grasp how crime and law enforcement work?
This fallacy emerges from a desire to ignore circumstances unhelpful to their cause but asks for special consideration. Sandy no doubt she wants you to ignore dramatically rising crime rates in Democratic-controlled cities.
Last, but not least. . .
Texas Sharpshooter Fallacy
This is a classic case we often see in the misuse of scientific research, where someone applies a cluster of data to their argument or supports a presumption. It doesn’t sound like Sandy is using much evidence here or elsewhere, but she thinks that crime is their fault since most crime increases happen in states with GOP governance. That’s a pretty evidence-free claim and probably fits other fallacies above. But I still love the name of this fallacy, thus its inclusion. Gun control advocates and climatistas commonly use it.
So, a round of applause to our world record holder, the Honorable Alexandria “Sandy” Ocasio Cortez! Which of these fallacies do you think most fits here tweet, and, for extra credit, did we miss any?