4 ms·

The OP is not invoking whataboutism. It's actually an important point. If the US (or any other western country) tries to admonish China there are plenty of huma

The OP is not invoking whataboutism. It's actually an important point. If the US (or any other western country) tries to admonish China there are plenty of human rights violations in our own countries which China will come back with. The point is that they will be able to engage in whataboutism. In global politics hypocrisy (why do we need to call it whataboutism?) is going to come back to bite you.

ZeroGravitas 10y ago
A century of examples from Russia and American history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes
seppin 10y ago
No, it's textbook false equivalency. When Gitmo was called "the gulag of our time", the UN failed to mention that while Gitmo had about 150 prisoners at it's peak, Sibera had tens of millions. It's not an appropriate comparison.
seanmcdirmid 10y ago
> In global politics hypocrisy (why do we need to call it whataboutism?) is going to come back to bite you. No, that is exactly the very definition of a whataboutism! Many Chinese feel like they always need the high ground, and if their criticiser is not "perfect", whatever they say is null and void. This is just nuts, because no one is perfect.
- srssays 10y ago
  There's a slight difference between being "not perfect" and having a torture camp and a president who says the US doesn't torture enough people (!). When the US preaches about human rights it devalues the concept. That makes it harder to hold countries like China to account.
  - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
    What do US torture camps have anything to do with BBC journalists? Really, what? And anyways, how do US torture camps compare to Chinese torture camps? Its not like China is a paragon of virtue here, torture by the police is a huge problem that even the gov admits to (hey, police shouldn't torture people, please don't, it makes us look bad). > When the US preaches about human rights it devalues the concept. And who is the "US"? It is like some unified person that speaks with one voice? Is the NyTimes the US? Is the BBC the US? When I speak out on China, am I the US? > That makes it harder to hold countries like China to account. That is a straw man. We can't hold China to account for their human rights behavior, we have no right to do that. But we can damn be sure that everyone knows about it. I would expect the same for other countries with respect to the US.
    - euyyn 10y ago
      When people speak of a country admonishing or lecturing another, they refer to their respective governments. > how do US torture camps compare to Chinese torture camps? Bringing the conversation there is super weird. A torture camp is not a normal thing for a civilized country to have. The US government failed to dismantle it for 8 years when it had a democratic mandate to do that. Now, with a president elected after proclaiming torture a fine thing, when a western country tells a dictator to stop human rights abuse, they can just shut the conversation with "tell your American friend to stop it first".
      - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
        Yes they aren't. But as you clai. Guantanamo bay is one, well, china has plenty of examples of that. America has first world problems, china has third world problems, different scales completely. Anyways, this whataboutism-ing is idiotic. If you want to talk about the USA whenever we are talking about china fine, but why don't you start a separate article submission.
colanderman 10y ago
> hypocrisy (why do we need to call it whataboutism?) The terms mean different things. "Whataboutism" is the calling-out of hypocrisy, not hypocrisy itself.

ZeroGravitas 10y ago

A century of examples from Russia and American history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/And_you_are_lynching_Negroes

seppin 10y ago

No, it's textbook false equivalency. When Gitmo was called "the gulag of our time", the UN failed to mention that while Gitmo had about 150 prisoners at it's peak, Sibera had tens of millions. It's not an appropriate comparison.

seanmcdirmid 10y ago

> In global politics hypocrisy (why do we need to call it whataboutism?) is going to come back to bite you. No, that is exactly the very definition of a whataboutism! Many Chinese feel like they always need the high ground, and if their criticiser is not "perfect", whatever they say is null and void. This is just nuts, because no one is perfect.

srssays 10y ago
There's a slight difference between being "not perfect" and having a torture camp and a president who says the US doesn't torture enough people (!). When the US preaches about human rights it devalues the concept. That makes it harder to hold countries like China to account.
- seanmcdirmid 10y ago
  What do US torture camps have anything to do with BBC journalists? Really, what? And anyways, how do US torture camps compare to Chinese torture camps? Its not like China is a paragon of virtue here, torture by the police is a huge problem that even the gov admits to (hey, police shouldn't torture people, please don't, it makes us look bad). > When the US preaches about human rights it devalues the concept. And who is the "US"? It is like some unified person that speaks with one voice? Is the NyTimes the US? Is the BBC the US? When I speak out on China, am I the US? > That makes it harder to hold countries like China to account. That is a straw man. We can't hold China to account for their human rights behavior, we have no right to do that. But we can damn be sure that everyone knows about it. I would expect the same for other countries with respect to the US.
  - euyyn 10y ago
    When people speak of a country admonishing or lecturing another, they refer to their respective governments. > how do US torture camps compare to Chinese torture camps? Bringing the conversation there is super weird. A torture camp is not a normal thing for a civilized country to have. The US government failed to dismantle it for 8 years when it had a democratic mandate to do that. Now, with a president elected after proclaiming torture a fine thing, when a western country tells a dictator to stop human rights abuse, they can just shut the conversation with "tell your American friend to stop it first".
    - seanmcdirmid 10y ago
      Yes they aren't. But as you clai. Guantanamo bay is one, well, china has plenty of examples of that. America has first world problems, china has third world problems, different scales completely. Anyways, this whataboutism-ing is idiotic. If you want to talk about the USA whenever we are talking about china fine, but why don't you start a separate article submission.

colanderman 10y ago

> hypocrisy (why do we need to call it whataboutism?) The terms mean different things. "Whataboutism" is the calling-out of hypocrisy, not hypocrisy itself.