Flaws in the Many Fallacies of Trumpism - Article Review Example

logo_disclaimer
This essay has been submitted by a student.
This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.

The article the Many Fallacies of Trumpism has several errors since the assumption is that everything that Trump proposes is a lie and negative. Although some of the suggestions that he made may be unrealistic to attain, that does not mean that all his agendas are unattainable. The possibility that would seem balanced and objective would be the one claiming that the beneficiaries of his ideologies would be minimal than those who will suffer loss. It is untrue that all the problems in the United States have resulted from the coming of the immigrants like the Muslims and Mexicans. However, that does not undermine the fact that their arrival has affected the economy and the security adversely. Secondly, it would be wrong to suggest that since Trump is a wealthy man, he is incapable of offering help to the minority. Thats a fallacious argument since assisting, and affluence are not mutually exclusive. Finally, it is an error in thinking to consider the personality of Trump and his affiliates in determining his authenticity instead of considering the logic of his claims. Those three claims form the basis of the arguments presented in this essay.

If this sample essay on"Flaws in the Many Fallacies of Trumpism - Article Review Example" doesn’t help,
our writers will!

Farley in the article argues that it's fallacious for Trump to suggest that the problems associated with poor economy and insecurity are attributable to the immigrants. Apparently, it is true that the Muslims, Africans, and Mexicans cannot be blamed for all the problems in the US. However, they have contributed significantly to insecurity issues. The coming of Muslims who at times extend their visit and illegally become residents of the US, such become contact persons of the terror groups across the globe (Heyman, 2016). It becomes easy for them to target specific groups and individuals since they have a good understanding of the United. Thus, the solution according to Trump would be deportation of all immigrants to help solve that problem. Nonetheless, that would be disadvantageous because it would be a stereotype and would also work against the law-abiding citizens in the US. Further, the coming in large numbers of immigrants has affected the economy as sometimes the government is required to subsidize their rates until they fully settle. Such taxpayers money would be used for the economic development of the nation. Further, some immigrants are poor and homeless and cannot even afford medical insurance thus necessitating other people to bear their burden. Notably, not all immigrants become burdensome. In fact, some make great contributions to the economy through paying high taxes from their businesses and employment. Thus deporting would solve and create problems. The solution would be in having workable policies and strict measures to keep off burdensome immigrants.

In the article, it is clear that Farley is biased against Trump suggesting that he is unable to help the forgotten men and women of the US since he is affluent. In fact, the author seems to have a problem with Trump relieving himself in a golden toilet and living in the most expensive city in the United States. Apparently, its ironical that the fallacy of ad hominem is prevalent because living in whatever city has no correlation whatsoever with ones ability to help the citizens and make America great (Yap, 2013). In fact, by him living that life that desiring the rest of the Americans to have such a life he puts much effort to deal with the widespread problems. For instance, Trumps ideologies are valid like the suggestion that to make America great he would ensure the operation of factories and manufacturing firms. With such strategies, it is possible to create more employment opportunities and reduce the standard of living. More people will be living above the minimum wages. Thus, attacking the individual instead of his argument is fallacious. If the author would leave the life of Trump just as it is and pin him down based on his claims, then that would be sensible. But since that does not happen, the arguments are imbalanced and are not objective. Further, a persons wealth has nothing to do with them being good or bad leaders. Good leadership emanates from the values a person holds and their commitment to govern accordingly. Therefore, the fact that Farley would assume America would go to the drains because of Trump gathering the richest men in the cabinet is untrue since one's logical ability to make critical decisions has no bearing whatsoever on lack or abundance of money.

Farleys argument that Trump was not seeking the common good for the inhabitants of the US is not all truthful. There is a group that is likely to benefit more from the changes he is planning to implement, but in the long run, the benefits would be realized by the majority of the residents. For instance, the slashing down of taxes will favor not only the affluent but also the low-income earners in the country. Further, this strategy will not be pursued in isolation but together with other policies such that the nation will not suffer. The argument that reduced taxes will prevent the low-income earners from accessing medical insurance is unfounded since the reduced taxes will come after the government revenue is increased. Further, reduced government spending and getting more revenue generating strategies by the state will guard the country against having poor people (Delaney and Thompson, 2016). Moreover, Trump had suggested that the welfare of the Americans will be prioritized such that grants to other countries like the African countries while the US is suffering will not happen. Therefore, the issue of taxes handled in isolation brings a biased standing.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is fallacious for Farley to attack the person of Trump and his lifestyle and regard him not an appropriate candidate because of his affluence. Additionally, the blanket statement that Trumps election to the presidency will benefit just a few people is unfounded since Farley is considering issues like taxes in isolation. Finally, it is not all false when Trump suggests that immigrants have had on the well-being of the US regarding economy and security. To have a good grasp of Trumps ideologies, it would have been wise for Farley to consider all issues presented by Trump as one segment and not each issue in isolation.

References

Delaney, T., & Thompson, D. L. (2016, December). The 2016 Elections: Impact on the Work of Charitable Nonprofits. In Nonprofit Policy Forum (Vol. 7, No. 4, pp. 573-579).

Heyman, J. (2016). Frontiers of fear: immigration and insecurity in the United States and Europe.

Smith, E. (2016). Why are we fighting the Medical Device Excise Tax?. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 150(4), 549-552.

Yap, A. (2013). Ad hominem fallacies, bias, and testimony. Argumentation, 27(2), 97-109.

If you are the original author of this essay and no longer wish to have it published on the ProEssays website, please click below to request its removal: