Member-only story
They are a trap aimed at evoking an enemy and away from the real issue.
It is a tried and tested rhetorical tactic. Comparing something provocative and inflammatory to the point of view they are trying to argue. The comparison example is almost always only related in the thinnest of possible ways, if at all. Which is fine, factual understanding through genuine comparison is not the goal. The provocative counter example is meant to make the problem seem falsely simple and anyone disagreeing with them an obvious villain.
We see them in all shapes and sizes. From the mildly irksome and only slightly out of context to the staggeringly offensive and grotesquely inaccurate. The false comparison, or false equivalence, has been around for a long time and is a favorite of those trying to persuade through high emotion rather than to convince through factual evidence.
We are all creatures of emotion. Our emotional reactions are always a prominent force in our perceptions and decisions but the false comparison is an arguing tool which aims purely at emotional reactions while dressed as a factual contrast. The comparison is often offered as a question but the implicit message is that the difference between the two things is undeniable proof of their position. The fact that the comparison is not factually accurate or even remotely relevant is of no…