Definitions by Abzugal

Westerverism

A portmanteau of "Western" and "Bulverism" (assuming your opponent is wrong and explaining why they hold that error). This fallacy occurs when, instead of refuting a dissident or non-hegemonic argument, one dismisses it by asserting: 1) "All other systems are worse," 2) "It's the system that works," or 3) by slapping it with labels like "pseudoscience," "relativism," or "post-modernism." The refutation consists of justifying the opponent's supposed motives (arrogance, ignorance, ideology) from within the dominant worldview, thereby protecting the hegemony from substantive critique.

Example: "When challenged on the ecological damage of industrial agriculture, the agriboard exec relied on Westerverism: 'You're just engaging in anti-capitalist post-modernism. Sure, there are issues, but this is the system that feeds the world. Would you prefer Soviet-style famines?' The actual critique of monocultures and pesticides is never touched."

Westerverism by Abzugal January 30, 2026

Fallaverism

A meta-fallacy where, instead of refuting an argument, one simply asserts it contains a logical fallacy and then shifts the entire discussion into a pedantic meta-debate about fallacies. The goal is to win by default—by moving the goalposts to a terrain of technical rhetoric where you can accuse your opponent of being "illogical," thus avoiding the original, often uncomfortable, point. It's a tactic of rhetorical jiu-jitsu used by those who can't win on substance.

Example: "You: 'The policy has hurt low-income families, here's the data.' Opponent: 'That's just an argumentum ad misericordiam! You're appealing to pity!' This is Fallaverism—they've declared a fallacy and forced you into a defensive debate about logic textbooks, while the data on family suffering goes unaddressed."

Fallaverism by Abzugal January 30, 2026

Fallatokenism

A specific form of meta-fallacy that involves seeing logical fallacies everywhere in an opponent's argument as a primary mode of engagement. Instead of grappling with the core points, the Fallatokenist treats the debate like a fallacy scavenger hunt, yelling "Straw man!" "False dilemma!" "Slippery slope!" at every turn. This tokenistic spotting of fallacies becomes a shield against genuine discourse, reducing complex argumentation to a childish game of logical "gotcha."

Example: "Every sentence in the discussion was met with 'That's a red herring!' 'That's a hasty generalization!' After ten minutes, no progress was made. She wasn't arguing; she was just Fallatokenism-ing, using fallacy names as token counters to avoid actually thinking about the topic."

Fallatokenism by Abzugal January 30, 2026

Fallagaming

The competitive, bad-faith practice of hunting for any possible fallacy in an opponent's argument with the pre-emptive assumption that all their points are therefore false. It's treating logical fallacies as a magic "I win" button in a debate. The Fallagamer isn't interested in truth or understanding; they're playing a procedural game where scoring fallacy-points lets them dismiss the entire opposing view without consideration. It's the ultimate in intellectual laziness disguised as rigor.

Example: "He lost the argument on the merits, so he switched to Fallagaming. 'Your source? Potential bias. Your analogy? Faulty. Your conclusion? Might be a non sequitur. Therefore, everything you said is invalid.' He didn't refute a single fact, but he walked away smug, convinced he'd 'won' by gaming the rules of formal logic."

Fallagaming by Abzugal January 30, 2026

Fallascience

A two-pronged fallacy. First, it's the dogmatic assertion that only that which can be proven by the scientific method or empiricism is "real," dismissing metaphysics, ethics, art, and subjective experience as meaningless—which is itself an unscientific, philosophical claim (making it self-refuting). Second, it refers to the use of Fallacy Fallacies and related meta-arguments specifically to defend the hegemonic system and its ideologies, using the veneer of "rationality" to shut down dissent. It's scientism weaponized as a rhetorical cudgel for status quo apologetics.

Example: "When asked about the ethical implications of AI surveillance, the engineer scoffed with Fallascience: 'Ethics isn't empirically verifiable, so it's not a real discussion. Your concerns are just fallacies arising from an emotional, non-STEM mindset.' He used the armor of 'science' to avoid any non-technical critique of his work."

Fallascience by Abzugal January 30, 2026

Theory of the Four Spheres of Hegemony

A master blueprint for how any ruling class—from ancient emperors to modern corporate oligarchs—maintains total control. Jiang breaks it down into four layered, interlocking spheres of influence that radiate from the center of power outward. Sphere 1: Groups of Power are the actual people in the room where it happens—the political inner circle, billionaire cabals, or secretive committees that make the real decisions. Sphere 2: Institutions are the formal and informal rules they create to codify their power (laws, constitutions, market regulations, even unwritten social codes). Sphere 3: Hegemonic Thinking is the conquered mindset of the populace—the “common sense” ideologies, educational narratives, and media messages that make the existing order seem natural and inevitable. Sphere 4: Coercion is the final, brutal backstop, divided into Visible coercion (police, military, courts) and Invisible coercion (surveillance, algorithmic control, social credit, the threat of ruin). The theory’s key insight: true hegemony operates from the inside out. By the time Sphere 4 is needed, the system has already failed. The goal is to live so comfortably in Spheres 2 and 3 that you never question who’s in Sphere 1.

*Example: “Using the Four Spheres theory, modern America looks like this: Sphere 1 is the Davos/Wall Street/D.C. nexus. Sphere 2 is the two-party system and corporate lobbying rules. Sphere 3 is the ‘American Dream’ propaganda and both sides of the culture war. Sphere 4 is the militarized police and the NSA’s data dragnet. If you’re angrily debating Sphere 3 culture wars, you’re totally distracted from the guys in Sphere 1 rewriting Sphere 2 rules to their benefit.”* It's the Theory of the Four Spheres of Hegemony.

Theory of the Four Spheres of Hegemony by Abzugal January 24, 2026

Imaginary Control Theory

The radical idea that the most powerful forces in society—Money, Individual rights, and Nation-States—are collective hallucinations we all agree to believe in. A dollar bill is just paper; a border is just a line; your "freedom" is just a story. Jiang's theory states that power is the ability to control these shared fictions and make them feel real and immutable. The most successful elites are the master world-builders who can create a new "imaginary" (like cryptocurrency or a new national identity) and get millions to buy into it.

Example: "Imaginary Control Theory explains Bitcoin: it's a new shared fiction of value, created from nothing, that competes with the old fiction of the U.S. dollar. The 'truth' is just whichever story more people believe and enforce. It's all a meta-game of make-believe with tanks and bank accounts."

Imaginary Control Theory by Abzugal January 24, 2026