3 ms·

filed under "whataboutism"

geofft 7y ago
The thing about whataboutism is that it was correct. It was only a logical fallacy in the eyes of US jingoists who didn't want to admit that, actually, the US had tons of human rights violations and the US vs. USSR conflict was not a conflict of good vs. evil. When both A and B do a thing X, there are two potential logically sound conclusions: either that X is bad and both A and B are in the wrong, or that it's not and neither is. It is unsound to say that A doing X is a problem but B doing X is merely a rhetorical accusation that requires no response.
- bildung 7y ago
  Yes, it's a pity most people don't understand this. The idea actually is a valid concept in justice, but only within the realms you posted: If person A does something illegal and then tries to justify the behaviour X with "But everyone does this!", then this is not a valid argument, because either X is illegal or not. Whataboutism as invented by the economist, though, is just rhetoric nonsense. The USSR was perfectly right in highlighting the human rights atrocities of the US in response to accusations of the US against them. That doesn't make the accusations go away, but it correctly exposes the bigotry.
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  yes, but it doesn't excuse the behavior at hand, doesn't further the discussion and it's sad to see whataboutism in both the fist and second most relevant comment in the discussion (at the time of the posting). "but the usa does it" is neither a justification, nor a validation, nor an exculpation. it's just finger pointing and throwing poo at each other in the hope that people, instead of condemning both, concedes the point, leveraging outrage fatigue. there's a reason why it's considered a propaganda tool, after all.
dang 7y ago
Please don't post unsubstantive comments here, and please don't make lazy canned arguments. That breaks the site guidelines against shallow dismissals and name-calling. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20338307 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20338307 https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- LoSboccacc 7y ago
  hacker news, where pointing out people using literal propaganda tools to derail an argument is 'unsubstantive'
  - dang 7y ago
    There's no contradiction there. The comment was quite unsubstantive.

The thing about whataboutism is that it was correct. It was only a logical fallacy in the eyes of US jingoists who didn't want to admit that, actually, the US had tons of human rights violations and the US vs. USSR conflict was not a conflict of good vs. evil. When both A and B do a thing X, there are two potential logically sound conclusions: either that X is bad and both A and B are in the wrong, or that it's not and neither is. It is unsound to say that A doing X is a problem but B doing X is merely a rhetorical accusation that requires no response.

bildung 7y ago
Yes, it's a pity most people don't understand this. The idea actually is a valid concept in justice, but only within the realms you posted: If person A does something illegal and then tries to justify the behaviour X with "But everyone does this!", then this is not a valid argument, because either X is illegal or not. Whataboutism as invented by the economist, though, is just rhetoric nonsense. The USSR was perfectly right in highlighting the human rights atrocities of the US in response to accusations of the US against them. That doesn't make the accusations go away, but it correctly exposes the bigotry.
LoSboccacc 7y ago
yes, but it doesn't excuse the behavior at hand, doesn't further the discussion and it's sad to see whataboutism in both the fist and second most relevant comment in the discussion (at the time of the posting). "but the usa does it" is neither a justification, nor a validation, nor an exculpation. it's just finger pointing and throwing poo at each other in the hope that people, instead of condemning both, concedes the point, leveraging outrage fatigue. there's a reason why it's considered a propaganda tool, after all.

dang 7y ago

Please don't post unsubstantive comments here, and please don't make lazy canned arguments. That breaks the site guidelines against shallow dismissals and name-calling. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20338307 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20338307 https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

LoSboccacc 7y ago
hacker news, where pointing out people using literal propaganda tools to derail an argument is 'unsubstantive'
- dang 7y ago
  There's no contradiction there. The comment was quite unsubstantive.