I think this is a real fallacy, but akshually a logic fallacy generally only refers to operations that can't be performed under formal logic. Which is a very us

I think this is a real fallacy, but akshually a logic fallacy generally only refers to operations that can't be performed under formal logic. Which is a very useful definition for computer languages, not so much for natural language which doesn't really follow formal logic (since people make actually fairly good arguments all the time that would be "fallacious" under the terms of formal logic). I don't know if its appropriate to just apply the name fallacy to any old worldview or system of argument that one dislikes. You could call communism a "labor activism fallacy" or capitalism a "capital investment fallacy." You deride any sort of system of argumentation by saying it's fallacious. Now, to be totally fair, if we accept Godel's incompleteness theorem as true, then the Nirvana Fallacy really is a fallacy under the terms of formal logic. But I believe that there is more complexity to this than that.