Seen on Twitter recently. This is far from the first time I’ve run across that argument. If you call it an argument. And if it isn’t more accurate to say someone tried to run you and me over with it.

Conservatives are not pro-life! They are only PRO-BIRTH!
Conservative Logic:
WAR? YES
TORTURE? ABSOLUTELY!
EXECUTE PEOPLE? YOU BET!
ABORTION?….NO I’M PRO-LIFE!
HYPOCRITES
Fetuses don’t have constitutional rights! WOMEN’S RIGHT TO CHOOSE!!!!

(The original tweet comes with a mild content warning.)

This anonymous tweeter rails hard against “conservative logic.” So let’s turn it around and take a look at the progressive “logic” he uses. I see four fascinating principles in action here. I wish this guy were the only progressive I’ve seen making these mistakes — but he isn’t.

1. Pay no attention to what words actually mean.

First, everybody knows that “pro-life” is shorthand for a position that takes more than seven letters to spell out fully. Everybody. No one thinks it means “opposition to killing in every circumstance, without exception, no matter what.”

It’s no different from “pro-choice” in that sense. No one thinks “pro-choice” must mean being for choice in every conceivable situation. The pro-choice person can be anti-choice when the choice is, say, letting Donald Trump run for a third term in 2024. Likewise no sane person thinks “pro-life” must mean opposing force or killing in every conceivable situation.

But notice the crucial difference. I said — and it’s true — no one says “pro-choice” must mean pro-every possible choice. I’ve never seen it happen. But I have run across a lot of people — including this one — who say “pro-life” must mean pro-life in every conceivable situation. (Where “life” is a stand-in for opposition to all forms of violence or killing.)

There are people who say that. Just not any sane ones.

2. Misunderstand everything.

This tweeter complains that “conservative logic” says a gleeful YES to war. I guess that means “progressive logic” says no. In every conceivable circumstance. Without exception. Otherwise liberal logic on war lands the same place conservative logic lands: Don’t go to war unless something absolutely crucial is at risk, all other methods have failed, and only to the most limited extent necessary to defend what needs defending.

Obviously everyone thinks war is tragic. Obviously, too, people disagree about which wars are justified and necessary. But some of them surely must be, tragic thought that may be.

To take one hypothetical example, thankfully much more far-fetched now than it was a few months ago: Suppose Kim Jong Un had decided to celebrate the new year by launching a nuclear missile at us. We could have sat there and watched it land, then waited patiently for the next one, and the next one … or we could have fought back.

There’s only one sane option there, not matter what your politics. Every halfway sane liberal or progressive is anti-war, but allows for exceptions. Every conservative I know is anti-war, but allows for exceptions.

This tweeter, though, seems to think you want war or you don’t. Not much room for sober reflection there. No room at all for, “sometimes, if absolutely necessary, when all else has failed and we have to defend ourselves and others.”

No room at all for thinking about it. Which is insane.

3. Use illogic to blast others for using logic.

The tweeter fell more than a tad short, too, in describing conservatives’ reasons — and the range of their views — on capital punishment, torture, and coerced interrogation. Add that to the above, and what you’ve got is what logicians call a straw man argument. It starts with distorting your opponent’s position into some ridiculous form that’s easy to knock down (like a straw man — hence the name). Then, when you’ve accomplished that, you claim victory.

But there’s a huge problem with that. The position you’ve defeated is your own, the one you’ve just made up to slightly resemble your opponent’s. So this is a case of someone beating up his own projection and then declaring his opponent the loser. That’s insane.

This is a case of someone beating himself up and declaring his opponent the loser. That’s insane.

But there’s more. Straw man arguments are classified as logical fallacies — failures in rational thinking. This tweeter set out to reveal flaws in conservative logic, and used badly flawed logic to do that. Insane? Maybe not quite. How about simply irrational?

4. Stamp your feet and shout.

The contents of this tweet I’ve been dealing with are bad. But that’s nothing: Look at the approach it takes. It’s even worse. Read it out loud and see for yourself.

Really: Go ahead. Try it. You can’t do it without shouting can you? You might even be tempted to stamp your feet.

There’s a problem, you see, with the way I handled my first three points here. I treated this craziness as if it were an argument needing logic to counter it. That’s not what it is. It’s a tantrum. If your young child did this you’d send her to her room. I’m not sure what you’d do if an adult did this to you in person; I’ve never seen an adult behave this way.

Which may be the best thing you could say in answer to all this kind of insanity.

True Conservative Logic in Action

There’s a caution here for us all to catch, though. I’d be willing to bet this tweeter would never dream of doing anything nearly so childish in person. There’s more afoot here than just his illogic and his bias. There’s the social media hit-and-run effect going on, too. Anonymity is the first key to it. You’ve noticed I keep calling him “the tweeter”; it’s because he’s anonymous. I’m only guessing he’s really a he — though it’s an educated guess.

So my first and easiest advice to you is, if you’re going to be on Twitter, put your real name in your profile.

It’s a good idea for most of us because anonymity, plus anger, minus any actual personal relationship with anyone you’re talking to, yields a dangerous potion that can spell anyone into looking stupid. Add some serious irrationality into the mix, and you get a childish burst of insanity like the tweet we’ve been looking at here.

Yes, I know. That’s just more conservative logic. But it’s the real deal, not to straw man imitation.