Definitions by Dumu The Void
Fallacy of Objective Reality
The fallacy of assuming that one's own perception of reality is simply "objective reality," and that anyone who disagrees is either mistaken, deluded, or lying. This fallacy collapses the distinction between appearance and reality, treating one's own perspective as the perspective. It's the epistemological version of the objectivity bias: not just believing you're right, but believing that rightness is not a matter of perspective at all—that you have direct access to the way things really are. The Fallacy of Objective Reality is beloved of those who have never encountered a worldview different from their own, or who have encountered it and found it threatening. It makes dialogue impossible because disagreement becomes not difference but error, not alternative but falsehood.
Example: "He didn't think his political views were views—they were just 'reality.' When she presented a different perspective, he didn't engage; he explained why she was wrong to see what she saw. The Fallacy of Objective Reality meant that her experience, her evidence, her reasoning—all were invalid because they didn't match his 'reality.' She gave up arguing; he declared victory."
Fallacy of Objective Reality by Dumu The Void February 20, 2026
Fallacy of Specific Deprivation (also "Communism Killed Millions" Fallacy)
A fallacy that focuses on specific, often well-documented atrocities while ignoring the broader context of suffering in which they occurred. The fallacy presents, for example, the Holodomor or the Killing Fields as uniquely communist evils, while ignoring that Ukraine also suffered under tsarist rule, Nazi occupation, and capitalist shock therapy—or that Cambodia was devastated by US bombing before the Khmer Rouge took power. Specifying deprivation allows the fallacy-user to condemn particular events while absolving the systems that created the conditions for those events. It's history as highlight reel, atrocity as argument-ender.
Fallacy of Specific Deprivation (also "Communism Killed Millions" Fallacy) Example: "He brought up the Holodomor every time someone mentioned socialism, as if one event could settle the question of an entire system. The Fallacy of Specific Deprivation meant he never had to address the millions who died under capitalism, under colonialism, under 'democracy.' One famine, endlessly repeated, did all his arguing for him."
Fallacy of Isolated Deprivation (also "Communism Killed Millions" Fallacy)
A fallacy that isolates the deaths attributed to communist regimes from their historical context, treating them as if they occurred in a vacuum rather than amid civil war, foreign intervention, industrialization, and the collapse of old orders. The fallacy presents communist atrocities as sui generis, uniquely evil, while ignoring that comparable or greater suffering occurred under colonialism, imperialism, and capitalism—often at the same times, in the same places, by the same actors. Isolating deprivation allows the fallacy-user to condemn one system while absolving others, to treat communism as uniquely murderous while forgetting the millions killed by Western powers. It's history as selective memory, atrocity as political weapon.
Fallacy of Isolated Deprivation (also "Communism Killed Millions" Fallacy) Example: "He listed the deaths under Mao without mentioning that they occurred during a brutal civil war, after decades of foreign occupation, amid the most rapid industrialization in history. The Fallacy of Isolated Deprivation had stripped away all context, leaving only numbers—numbers that could be used to condemn, never to understand. His listeners were left with horror without history, which is exactly what he wanted."
Fallacy of Absolute Deprivation (also "Communism Killed Millions" Fallacy)
A form of fallacy that cites the absolute number of deaths attributed to communist regimes—typically the Soviet Union, China, or Cambodia—as an argument against any form of socialism or communist thought, while ignoring context, comparative analysis, or the question of what those numbers actually mean. The fallacy works by presenting large numbers as self-evident condemnation, as if the scale alone settled the matter. It ignores that all modern states have killed millions—colonialism, capitalism, imperialism, democracy—and that the question is not whether atrocities occurred but what caused them, whether they were inherent to the system or contingent, and what the alternatives were. The Fallacy of Absolute Deprivation is beloved of cold warriors and those who prefer moral simplicity to historical complexity. It reduces genocide to a statistic and uses that statistic to foreclose thought.
Fallacy of Absolute Deprivation (also "Communism Killed Millions" Fallacy) Example: "He ended every discussion of socialism with the same numbers: 'Stalin killed millions. Mao killed millions. Pol Pot killed millions.' The Fallacy of Absolute Deprivation meant he never had to engage with arguments about healthcare, wages, or working conditions. The numbers did all his work for him—never mind context, never mind comparison, never mind that capitalism had killed its millions too. Absolute numbers, absolutely weaponized."
Fallacy of Perfect Consistency
The logical fallacy of demanding that an opponent be perfectly consistent in everything they say or do—across contexts, over time, in every statement—while exempting oneself or one's own side from any such scrutiny. The fallacy ignores that human beings are complex, that contexts change, that learning involves changing one's mind, and that perfect consistency is impossible for any real person or movement. It's the logic of "you said X five years ago, so you can't say Y now," of "your actions don't perfectly match your words, so your words are invalid." The Fallacy of Perfect Consistency is beloved of those who want to dismiss opponents without engaging their current arguments, who would rather dig up old contradictions than address present claims. The cure is recognizing that consistency is not a binary state but a spectrum, and that growth, learning, and context all produce apparent contradictions that are actually signs of life.
Example: "He found a tweet she'd written ten years ago, before she'd studied the issue, before she'd changed her mind. 'Aha!' he declared. 'Inconsistency! Your current views are invalid!' The Fallacy of Perfect Consistency had done its work: avoiding engagement with her current arguments by appealing to her past self. She'd learned, grown, evolved—but to him, that was weakness, not strength."
Fallacy of Perfect Consistency by Dumu The Void February 20, 2026
Commentbait
A form of commentpost specifically designed to generate more comments—controversial opinions, inflammatory statements, deliberately ignorant questions, or "hot takes" crafted to provoke outrage and engagement. Commentbait is the engine of platform engagement metrics: the more comments, the more the algorithm promotes the post, the more comments it generates. Commentbaiters don't care what you say, as long as you say something. They're not trying to convince or communicate; they're trying to capture attention, generate metrics, and feed the machine. Every "unpopular opinion" thread, every "am I the only one who..." post, every deliberately wrong answer on a help forum—commentbait, all of it. The commentbaiter has learned that engagement is its own reward, and that the best way to get engagement is to make people angry enough to type.
Example: "The post was simple: 'The earth is actually flat and here's why.' No evidence, no argument, just a claim designed to trigger. And trigger it did—thousands of comments, millions of views, days of engagement. The poster never responded to any of it. They didn't need to. Commentbait had worked: the algorithm loved it, the platform promoted it, and the poster walked away with the only currency that matters—attention."
Commentbait by Dumu The Void February 20, 2026
Commentpost
The act of posting comments on social media platforms—Instagram, Facebook, Reddit, YouTube, etc.—not to contribute to discussion but to provoke reactions, express disagreement, engage in debatebait, gather screenbait, or simply display ignorance. Commentposts are the background noise of the internet: thousands of them, every second, designed to do nothing but occupy space and attention. Some commentposts are sincere (the user genuinely believes what they say); most are performance (the user is playing a role for an audience); many are bait (the user wants to provoke a response). Commentposting has become the default mode of online interaction, replacing conversation with combat, exchange with escalation. The commentpost is the atom of the internet—small, numerous, and often toxic.
Example: "She posted a photo of her cat. Within hours, there were forty-seven commentposts: three about the cat's cuteness, two about the lighting, and forty-two arguing about whether cats should be indoors or outdoors. None of the arguers knew each other; none would change their minds; all had successfully turned a cat photo into a battlefield. Commentposting had done its work: turning everything into argument."
Commentpost by Dumu The Void February 20, 2026