Member-only story
The Taliban exploit these three logical fallacies to deflect criticisms
Ad Hominem, Whataboutism, and “we made Afghanistan secure” fallacies.
The Taliban’s return to power in Afghanistan has been marked by a series of human rights violations and atrocities. The group has used a range of fallacious arguments to defend its actions and deflect criticism. Three of the most common fallacies used by the Taliban are Ad Hominem, Whataboutism, and the claim that they have secured Afghanistan.
Ad Hominem is a fallacy where a person attacks the character of the opponent rather than addressing their argument. The Taliban has used this fallacy to deflect criticism of their policies, particularly with regard to the treatment of women. When confronted with accusations that they are denying women’s rights, the Taliban often responds by attacking the person making the argument. For example, they may call them a “whore” or make other derogatory comments to discredit their argument. This fallacy is not only a logical error but also shows a lack of respect for human dignity and the value of constructive dialogue.
Whataboutism is another fallacy that the Taliban often employs. It involves deflecting criticism by bringing up another issue or making a counter-accusation. For example, when accused of killing innocent…
