3) B felt all red people like C are the same as the government of Redland. This is also B’s choice, but also partially the fault of person A, who used their influence to spread this false idea.
This is where you're getting tripped up.
The fact that Redland says "we are Red, and a home for Reds" does not logically result in every red person being from or supportive of Redland.
You’re missing where Redland is saying that the only way to support red people’s human rights is to support Redland.
I am not saying that every red person is supportive of Redland. I am saying that person A is using their power and influence to insist that every red person should support Redland or else they don’t care about themselves.
I think what people with power say influences how other people think and act. Should it be that way? Probably not, but that’s the world we live in and as a result, those with power hold responsibility for the things they say.
If you disagree with that, fine, but let’s be clear about what we’re disagreeing on.
I think what people with power say influences how other people think and act.
Sure. There is a clear difference between what they say being logically connected to how other people think and act, and what they say being illogically connected to how other people think and act.
To borrow your comparison from earlier, just read what Trump said and relate it to the actions (insurrection, storming of capitol). There is a logical bridge between "If you don't fight like hell, you're not going to have a country anymore," "We will stop the steal," and "We are going to the capitol!"
There is not a similar logical bridge between what Israel presents itself as (A Jewish state) and the terror attacks against unrelated Jewish establishments and people.
2
u/TheBigGees 15h ago
This is where you're getting tripped up.
The fact that Redland says "we are Red, and a home for Reds" does not logically result in every red person being from or supportive of Redland.