Flippanarchy

Right. Forming a decision or reaching a conclusion about real-life events while basing and/or relating part of that assessment on similar fictional events, is the appeal to fiction. Fiction and non-fiction are fundamentally separate, and needs be considered separately. That distinction is important especially when making comparisons.

The lack of nuance, openness to interpretation and fundamental disconnect which an appeal to fiction inherently carries with it is a large part of what you're describing in the second part of your reply. (IE right-wing "blue pillers" with its relation to The Matrix)

People naturally desire and seek out narratives which align with their views or beliefs. This also makes it entirely too easy for them to mold or fracture parts of fictional themes to fit those beliefs while discarding parts that don't: Writers be damned. It isn't JUST intellectual dishonestly that you are observing here, as convenient as that conclusion would be. This is a basic part of human nature. It will happen every time. I promise you that right wingers are sharing this exact meme and making the same statements about us.

The classic court room example of this would be when an attorney argued that a FED, CIA, or LEO's actions were justified because they closely resembled or even exactly mirrored the actions taken by Jack Bauer in the TV series 24. Even if the events, character, and outcomes of these two scenarios (fiction vs non-fiction) were literally identical in every conceivable way: It would not then be rational, relevant, appropriate nor admissible in any way for the attorney to then pose to the jury that, "When Jack Bauer did this, you clearly understood the necessity and moral justification. But you're refusing to see it in the reality of what our Officer did" - To relate as closely as I can to the meme above.

Parable, metaphor and simile can often serve as convenient didactic tools when introducing complex messages to the otherwise uninformed. Like a professor using a cheeky pop-culture reference in the opening slide of a presentation. It's a very imperfect tool; useful, perhaps, as a narrative hook. The important divergence here is that this brief messaging then leads into the real and nuanced discussion about non-fiction or fiction and where they relate separately without conflating the two.

This is something which brief, easily sharable memes and political cartoons don't do by their nature, leaving only the fallacy.