[jennyjuniper]

Originally Posted by mrsmith78

Well I think this comment is kind of why people are relating with Katie Hopkins.

Because people don't like when disingenuous arguments are made not in a way to promote debate and opinions but to stifle it. By throwing around loaded terms to shut down a conversation.

I mean the example you use is the perfect example.

She believes in Isreal's bombing campaign.

As do many.

Why is that?

Because many think a coordinated bombing campaign is the only way. Because of Hamas's own less discriminate bombing campaign who deliberate target innocent women and children and also use their own women and children as human shield. Because the Hamas ideology is the extermination of all Jews.

This might be an argument you agree with, or disagree with. Because actually there is a genuine argument against.

However what you have chosen to do is go the easy route and shut down the argument because it's much easier to do that by throwing out loaded untruths like 'genocide', and 'hate crime'.

As with terms like 'sexism', 'racism' when they are used to quiet real debate however extreme or opposing an opinion might be most people in real life don't like it. Because not only is it insulting and irritating to the people who you oppose but it undermines and insults the people who you agree with.

And that's why people like Katie. Her opinions are often at the extreme ends of the spectrum for dramatic effect and as such fairly two dimensional and black and white. However her loaded terms are designed to encourage debate not shut it down. Whether I agree or disagree I like that.

Very well said.