Katie Miranda and Charlotte Kates
October 2021
The Zionist arguments for maintaining control over Palestinian land and Palestinian self-determination have become so ubiquitous in media, politics and culture that they are rarely challenged outside of progressive circles.
Media and politics are driven by exaggerations, dishonesty and hyperbole. One of the common methods of driving home the Zionist arguments are logical fallacies. Logical fallacies are exaggerations, deceptions or hyperbolic arguments that can be proven incorrect through reason.
This article will give show three examples of logical fallacies and how you can respond to them.
THE SLIPPERY SLOPE FALLACY
A slippery slope argument presumes that a specific outcome will occur as a result of a certain chain of events. Often the outcomes are extreme, ridiculous and backed by no supporting evidence.
For example the argument: If Palestinians were granted full rights either as citizens of the state of Palestine or as citizens in a bi-national state, that would mean genocide for Israeli Jews.
We know there is no evidence that suggests liberating Palestinians would result in genocide for Israeli Jews, yet this argument is emotionally laden and hearkens back to the Holocaust which makes it hard for people to respond to.
It is also important to note that there is a tremendous amount of transference and false attribution happening with this argument. The Holocaust was carried out by European Nazis in Germany. Palestinians living under Israeli colonialism may not be held responsible for the crimes of European states. Instead, we can look at the history of decolonization for examples. It is the colonized people who have been subjected to massacres and have much to fear, not their colonizers.
THE AD HOMINEM ATTACK
An ad hominem attack uses personal or immutable characteristics like ethnic background, physical appearance or a non-relevant trait instead of logic to fuel in an argument.
Example: You cannot allow Palestinians from Gaza to enter Israel because they’re hellbent on murdering Jews.
Or: The people who elected literal terrorists don’t deserve self-governance.
These arguments are based on dehumanizing Palestinians and deciding they don’t have the right to self-determination. Zionist groups during and before the Nakba engaged in terrorist actions to secure their colonization of Palestine. just look at the history of Israel’s top politicians. On the other hand, Palestinians are fighting for their freedom. And within that context, each Palestinian denied their rights and freedom is an individual with loves, hopes, dreams and goals being frustrated by occupation, siege, apartheid and exile. In addition, the designation of who is a terrorist and who isn’t is arbitrary and changes depending on American political interests; take Nelson Mandela for example.
THE STRAW MAN
A straw man argument attacks the opponent with an unrelated subject as an attempt at redirection. The intention is to put the opponent on the defensive.
The reality is that Palestinians were the ones pushed into the sea — for example, in Haifa during the Nakba. Palestinians’ right to return has been recognized by the UN year after year in resolution 194, and the right to return is embodied in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Right now, there are millions of Palestinians living in forced exile from their homes and lands, and their suffering is the subject we need to focus on.
Katie and Charlotte are organizers with NorCal ISM.