3 ms·
It's pure whataboutism that only serves to totally distract attention away from this newly-designed Chinese policy. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
by Chaebixi 9y ago
It's pure whataboutism that only serves to totally distract attention away from this newly-designed Chinese policy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
> Whataboutism (also known as whataboutery) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy that attempts to discredit an opponent's position by charging them with hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving their argument, which is particularly associated with Soviet and Russian propaganda. When criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, the Soviet response would be "What about..." followed by an event in the Western world.
> The Guardian deemed whataboutism, as used in Russia, "practically a national ideology". Journalist Julia Ioffe wrote that "Anyone who has ever studied the Soviet Union" was aware of the technique, citing the Soviet rejoinder to criticism, And you are lynching Negroes, as a "classic" example of the tactic.
- hexane360 9y agoI don't think this applies here, because in this case the two events are directly related. Poster's aren't bringing up random unrelated problems with the U.S., they're bringing up similar systems already in place in the U.S. that HN commentators aren't up in arms about. So you either need to do what I asked, which is explain why the two aren't comparable, or admit that the pushback against these policies is because they're new, foreign, or framed differently than their American counterparts.