← Back to context

Comment by epistasis

10 hours ago

Which geopolitical goals was it created for? Certainly not the ones it's being used for right now.

This sort of fallacy, of widening a category such that the initial meaning is lost, and then advancing an argument on that false category, is something I'm seeing a lot more these days in political topics. But I'm not sure I have a name for the fallacy.

It's like people that argue that the US civil wars was "actually" about states' rights and economic differences rather than slavery. It wasn't a war about the concepts of states rights in general, it was about the right of states to do one thing: legalize slavery. It wasn't about the idea of economic differences in general, it was about one specific economic difference: chattel slavery and whether those slaves get paid and have economic freedom.

What point are you trying to make? The above poster is completely correct sanctions are an economic tool used to bend countries to will.

> Which geopolitical goals was it created for?

American interests. (America, like China and Russia, is not subject to the ICC.)