In explaining why the administration of the 47th White House Occupant was undertaking a purge of DEI from the military (with no apparent grasp of what DEI really is), one Department Of Defense spokesman said, “The previous administration’s zealous and destructive commitment to DEI not only divided our nation and weakened our force, but it also reduced our country’s finest to their immutable characteristics.” Another spokesman, sticking to the same script and adding his own cutesy version of what the acronym stands for, echoed these sentiments: “Discriminatory Equity Ideology is a form of Woke cultural Marxism that has no place in our military. It Divides the force, Erodes [sic] unit cohesion and Interferes with the services’ core warfighting mission.” In addition to illustrating the fundamental propaganda technique of repetition, these statements are nice little mini versions of the Gish Gallop, the next in our series of propaganda props.
The Gish Gallop is named in “honor” of Dr. Duane Gish, a creationist who was very fond of the tactic. In fact, the term seems to have been inspired primarily by one particular debate he had on creation and evolution with Dr. Kenneth Miller in 1982 — although it was not coined until 8 years later, by National Center for Science Education director Eugenie Scott, who commented, “the evolutionist has to shut up while the creationist gallops along, spewing out nonsense with every paragraph.”
But perhaps the best definition of the tactic comes from journalist Paul Logan: “a rapid series of many specious arguments, half-truths, misrepresentations, and outright lies in a short space of time, which makes it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of a formal debate.” (It should go without saying that just because a tactic was named or described at a particular time does not mean that it wasn’t practiced long before that.)
In other words, what the Gish Gallop lacks in substance, it compensates for in sheer volume. It’s the proverbial “fire hose of lies”, a wholesale dump of misinformation and disinformation at such a rapid speed or in such a thick clump that most people won’t bother trying to untangle it. It may, and almost certainly does, include some of the other propaganda techniques we’ve looked at — e.g., repetition, spin, deflection, etc. — but the bundling of those techniques together constitutes a technique in its own right.
It’s most effective when it’s ensconced in rapid-fire delivery; that’s why you’ll hear bloviators of talk radio, cable TV, and the lower bowels of Youtube speak so rapidly (and forcefully, of course, taking advantage of emotionalizing at the same time). The faster they throw things at you, the less time you have to think about and question what they’re saying — and the more likely you are to just assume they know what they’re talking about. The paragon of this tactic is everybody’s favorite chipmunk impersonator, Ben Shapiro. In contrast, people who want you to weigh and consider their words are more likely to take their time, and use pauses. Although some of the latter individuals, like 45-47, are simply dimwitted and inarticulate. Yet despite the latter’s primitive verbal acuity, virtually everything he says is a Gish Gallop.
In the above example about DEI, these two Siamese twin quotes are both comprised of false, dubious or misleading allegations casually stacked on top of each other with the strong suggestion that they all should be just presumed to be true, accurate, and valid. And by clumping them together and giving them strength in numbers, the speakers are hoping you won’t pause to question any of them. But they’re plenty questionable, to say the least.
For instance, we well might ask the speakers: How was the Biden administration zealously committed to DEI? How was that destructive? Why should anyone assume that zealous equals destructive? How did it divide our nation? How did it “weaken our force”? What are “immutable characteristics” (are you complaining about classification by birth gender, maybe?) and how does DEI reduce troops to those characteristics? How is DEI discriminatory? What does “woke” mean? How is DEI “woke” by the presumed definition? What does it have to do with Marxism? (And do you even know what Marxism is?) How does it erode unit cohesion? How does it interfere with the core warfighting mission? What database can you provide to support any of these allegations?
As Dr. Gish discovered, The Gish Gallop is well suited to faux “debates” about science. For example, in discussing climate change, you very well might hear an outburst like this: “Climate change isn’t real. Scientists have been wrong before. The Earth’s temperature has fluctuated naturally for millions of years. CO2 is essential for life. Solar activity is the real cause of warming. Environmental policies are just a way to control people. The evidence for climate change comes from biased studies funded by special interest groups.” These statements are, respectively, false; irrelevant; irrelevant; irrelevant; half true; loony myth; and flat-out lie.
We previously examined something eerily similar to this hypothetical commentary in the exchange on climate science between Sean Hannity and Brent Bozell. In fact, the main reason I considered it important to review that episode years after the fact was precisely because it so perfectly exemplifies le Gallop de Gish. These two accomplished practitioners somehow managed to squeeze 13 lies (plus three additional deceptive references) into the space of a mere 90 seconds. Truly extraordinary.
But do not for one minute be so naive as to expect that these people are going to hit you with a Gish Gallop of 90 seconds, or whatever duration, and then back off and give you a chance to reflect and dissect. Those days are long gone. The bombardment nowadays is 24/7, with one Gish Gallop after another after another after another. From thousands of streams at once. We are all living in one big unending Gish Gallop.
The Propaganda Professor 
While this of course won’t work in a timed spoken formal debate or against a TV show or whatever, on a forum such as this, when someone pulls a Gish Gallop, one way to rebut it is to list the deceptive statements in a numbered list (say, if someone were to post the Hannity/Bozell 1½-minute Gish Gallop video, you’d have 17 items in your list, numbered 1–17, each with the specific false or deceptive statement).
You then say that you can refute all of them, but you don’t have time, so you’ll only refute one — but you challenge them to pick which one. You point out that you have no way of knowing in advance which one they’ll pick, and you wouldn’t make this challenge unless you were fully confident that you could refute any and all of them.
“Go ahead. All you have to do is pick a number between 1 and [in this case] 17, and post just that number in your Reply to me.”
Good suggestion. Thanks.
Unfortunately those on the extreme right, keep refusing me the right to post my own responses to some of the many issues they push. Its now 8-7-2025, And here’s a comment I first tried to post under a newer article by the POP;
Whoever keeps removing my comments must not understand the meaning of the first Amendment, and must think that since my views may differ from theirs, that means I am denying their first Amendment rights. But its not about all that at all!
Americans do not have to agree with each other, even if they have no facts to prove their own beliefs. And we do not even have to like others to honor all of theirs and our civil laws. But when Trumpers deny anything that non-Trumpers say, which really are factual and true, they are echoing the words of the farm animals in “Animal Farm”—who, as the most important beings in George Orwell’s novel, affirm that, “All animals are equal, but some animals are (more equal) than others.” This kind of rationalization used by autocrats and dictators to make common people believe that their enemies everywhere will only acquiesce if they are protected by fearless leaders like Trump, (who alone have the knowledge and moral right to spread facts and rational information—therefore making all the people willing to accept their lies, and also keep the will of all Americans malleable, and in the hands of their Autocratic political saviors!
Imagine if both you and I were walking down a beautiful road, with a bright sunny sky full of beautiful clouds, and if I disagree, with you, saying that I don’t see any clouds or sunlight, there is no way to convince you otherwise, since some political leaders claim to speaks the only real truths which they tell us all to accept?
Don’t you see how relying only on subjective faith to base objective facts on, makes it possible for all sides to sneak some factual 18 wheedlers, past the subjective reasoning used by members of other “Tribes–some of whom only accept what they are told by their chosen leaders,”
Perhaps all of us have accepted blind faith at some point because it’s easier to rationalize beliefs by accepting only the ideas we want to believe. However, the human race need not be composed of hostile warring tribes that are doomed to annihilate each other. Such, reasoning may make it easier for all of us to think “we are always right,” especially after throwing away our trust in both facts and reason! But in fact, such obstinate attitudes will make it much harder for us to get along with others, unless we understand that they are too are protected by the 1st Amendment.
I know it was not this blog’s owner who removed my comments, so it grieves me to see that so many powerful people are wasting precious time in order to discredit all the facts and beliefs held by others. Our fourth Amendment right to privacy, is being attacked because Musk has been allowed to collect all the medical and personal data about each and every one of us, and we are now forcing children from others religions and countries to feel uneasy by forcing them to read the 10 commandments on the walls of classrooms normally used to teach science and math. And by the way, no Christian can stop another worshiper from practicing his or her faith, even in public schools– because as free Americans we all have the right to choose our own beliefs anyway! What the Courts ruled against was, using school settings to “Force” others to accept the religious and cultural beliefs of others, by creating classes that all students (must take). But all of our students have always had the right to pray quietly to themselves, or while in private area of their schools anyway.
So not only is the radical right trying to remake human sins by using their own imaginations, but they are also weakening our first amendment rights to believe in the doctrines and truths that we and/our parents choose.
If we try to make everyone else conform to our beliefs then Musk and Trump will have won. But In reality none of the “woke” beliefs and philosophies that Trumpers use to stereotype those on the left, are really being enforced at all. However, they are being used by Trumpers as propaganda against liberals, because every right-wing power man benefits from spreading ideas that affirm their own illusions! However, in reality, none of the horrible charges made against Democrats has a grain of truth to them, except that they can be used as valuable propaganda to help Fascists and Autocrats re-make the minds of ordinary people, so that they are open to the tenants’ of the radical right’s philosophies.
So remember to look beyond the surface claims, if our nation continues to deteriorate to the point where Trump and his sycophants control everything! Because if they succeed, none of our valuable science and technological advances will ever be used to open peoples minds and allow them to reject apocalyptic ending–even if those on the left are only seeking to preserve a sustainable future–by helping us all to keep keep living in healthy natural environments! Where they are free to see the forest, despite all its many trees.
Peter W. Johnson,
Superior, WI. 54880