• Knightfox
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    It’s not really a strawman argument, it’s closer to an ad hominem. In fact, the argument you are making is closer to a strawman.

    “A straw man fallacy is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion, while not recognizing or acknowledging the distinction.” -Wikipedia

    Saying that “if you can’t tell the difference between the two parties is a you problem” is attacking the person not the issue. Saying that the difference between the two parties isn’t the problem (when that’s what is being argued) and instead it’s the system is by definition a strawman. Using the strawman to make the discussion about the futility of voting in a flawed system just goes to show how much of a strawman it is.

    • Ajen@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s a strawman because they’re trying to shift the focus from one thing (the system is broken) to another (Republicans are bad)

      • Knightfox
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Nope, the thread they were responding is this one (https://lemmy.one/comment/13175909) which is about the two parties (specifically whether higher turnout would benefit one party or the other). Someone else replied saying that it’s about the system being broken (itself a strawman). This guy made an attack on the person, but was still focused on the two party system. Then you made a strawman as well.