Telescopic Altruism as Political Strawman

Accusing people of 'telescopic altruism' is often less an empirical claim than a rhetorical move to discredit opponents: critics misread moral‑circle graphics and exploit emotional salience differences (explosive deaths vs chronic harms) to claim moral inversion. The article shows this framing flattens complex motivations and diverts debate from policy trade‑offs to moral theater. — If widely deployed, this rhetorical straw man reshapes public debate by turning legitimate distant‑other concern into evidence of moral corruption, making constructive argument on priorities harder.