I never realized there was a term to describe the low-effort phrases that people often use to get other people to shut up.
A thought-terminating cliché (also known as a semantic stop-sign, a thought-stopper, bumper sticker logic, or cliché thinking) is a form of loaded language—often passing as folk wisdom—intended to end an argument and quell cognitive dissonance with a cliché rather than a point.[1][2] Some such clichés are not inherently terminating, and only becomes so when used to intentionally dismiss, dissent, or justify fallacies.[3]
The term was popularized by Robert Jay Lifton in his 1961 book Thought Reform and the Psychology of Totalism, who referred to the use of the cliché, along with “loading the language”, as “the language of non-thought”.[4]
So if Israel supporters use the growth of Palestinian citizens as proof that no genocide is happening, does that mean that the growth of Israel’s borders are proof that the country surrounding them haven’t been trying to destroy Israel? Or does it work the other way around?
People use whatever bad faith arguments they want, it does not change facts.
Arab League countries have attack Israel many times with conventional war and covert terrorism. They also openly state they want Israel destroyed.
Israel has a massive military advantage over its surrounding neighbors. If Israel wanted the destruction of Jordan and Yemen, for example, just as much as Jordan and Yemen want the destruction of Israel… the IDF could wipe them out. But they don’t.
That combined with the fact that tens of thousands of Arab Muslims live and work in Tela Viv while no Jew can openly live in Jordan or Yemen tells you which side is trying to wipe someone out.
Yes, IDF is going way too far in Gaza now and they need to back off.
But they are in a very difficult situation due to being surrounded by fanatical enemies.