The Disastrous Effects

We often think of Winston Churchill as the British hero that saved Europe from the Nazis and was a great ally to America, but most people don't know about his imperialist side. In Churchill's speech "Our Duty in India," he uses fallacies to build up the belief that Britain couldn't allow India to become independent and that the Conservative Party should unite for that cause.
Churchill begins his speech by building an idea with a wrong ending fallacy. He wants to make his audience feel attacked by the Socialist Party and blame someone for the situation, so he states that as the plans of the Conservative Party are being stopped, the Socialists will take advantage of them to keep them out of the issue of India. Churchill is using the slippery slope fallacy as he shows one possible solution as if it was what was actually happening. As he antagonizes the Socialists, Churchill proceeds to explain his ideas about India.
According to Churchill, everyone would agree that allowing India to become independent would be self-destructive and absurd for everyone, so they shouldn't do it. Apart from being a hasty generalization, his proof doesn't lead to the conclusion, so it's also a wrong ending fallacy. Churchill then continues to explain how everything would go wrong if British imperialism ended.
Churchill says, "The princes, the Europenas, the Moslems, the Depressed classes, the Anglo-Indians--none of them know what to do nor where to turn in the face of their apparent desertion by Great Britain. Can you wander that they try in desperation to make what terms are possible with the triumphant Brahmin oligarchy?" He uses the straw man fallacy to make people believe that one of the many paths India could follow once independent would be destructive and horrible for everyone. He also wrongly assumes that no one in India would know how govern the colonies. Not even Gandhi, who, if you read his latest declarations, cannot stop fighting, would be able to govern India. That statement tries to make people skeptical about what would happen if India became independent using a hasty generalization, as Churchill only uses a very general example to condemn the Indian leader. Churchill goes back to victimizing the Conservative Party, suffering under the attack of the Socialists. He uses post hoc ergo propter hoc by assuming that as the Party is suffering because of the Socialists, it must be the fault of something that preceded it.

The beginning of Winston Churchill's speech used different types of fallacies but as he further explains his ideas, he bases most of what he says in a slippery slope fallacy. Churchill wants to keep the British Empire ruling the world and according to him, if it wasn't like that, places like India would have chaos. He attacks the idea of a federal system saying that it would collapse in India because every region or religion would try to seize power. He also says that the untouchables would suffer because of the authoritarian and evil-minded (in a reductio ad absurdum way) Brahmin rule. The problem is that those things would not happen but could happen. In his slippery slope fallacy that puts together all elements of his speech, Churchill choses the worst case scenario for India's independence, that could happen, and makes it seem like the only possible outcome. He literally says that all services in India would collapse in the case of British withdrawal. Although it's true that defense could collapse, hygiene deteriorate and many things get messy, it is not as simple as "independence equals disaster."

Set to make Indian independence look like a huge disaster and wrong decision, Winton Churchill uses rhetorics and a lot of fallacies to convince his audience that they needed to support British imperialism. Churchill oversimplifies the situation and makes assumptions that disconnect his proofs from his conclusions. Although his speech could sound like strong and convincing for some people, if you look closely to what he says you will notice that his imperialist argument is not logical.