4 ms·

They never had an issue operating in Saudi Arabia despite the invasion of Yemen. They still maintain their Guantanamo Bay location. How is operating in Russia i

They never had an issue operating in Saudi Arabia despite the invasion of Yemen. They still maintain their Guantanamo Bay location. How is operating in Russia inconsistent with their values?

bloblaw 4y ago
[flagged]
- xtian 4y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy """ Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another or the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles.[1] """
- whataboutery 4y ago
  [flagged]
- dspillett 4y ago
  Not every comparison is pure whataboutism design to pull the discussion off-topic or complete off-track. Perhaps the difference is so obvious to you that the question doesn't even need asking, but I think it is a valid question: what values does this invasion violate that the other situations do not, at least not to the extent that McD reacts by considering pulling out completely. It would undeniably be whataboutism if it were McD being asked why they've done (or not done) something and they're point out something unrelated (or only tangentially related) that they have/not done or asking about what other bodies have/not done in that area of discussion. But as an outsider looking at McD, asking them to define their position more precisely, perhaps with reference to their position in what may be seen as similar circumstances, feels like a valid request rather than the fallacy of whataboutism. Of course the question could be used purely to make McD look bad, particularly if the asker of the question as some axe to grind (against McD specifically, American corporates more generally, or big business even more globally), which flips the pendulum back in the direction of a logical error because the asker is not actually trying to gain perspective but is instead intending to impose that others take their perspective. --- FWIW I think I have a fairly solid idea of what the difference is. If you remove the moral aspect and just look at the circumstances from the robotic PoV of a business doing business: while the sanctions don't directly affect McD their impact does affect their ability to efficiently do business in Russia. Such sanctions don't exist in a manner that affects them in the same way in those other situations. Moving away from purely robotic business related points, this is happening in Eastern Europe not the East so it is both closer to home to those making decisions and is getting a lot more attention in Europe and the US (meaning that there is more push from their customer base in the west).
programmarchy 4y ago
McDonalds is a symbol of US global hegemony. Exiting from Russia is maintaining that status quo. Protesting an ally of the US, or the US itself, would be a significant political statement, and probably contrary to their interests.
2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
These things are not the same.
- boomboomsubban 4y ago
  So what are their values that make the first two acceptable but not the third?
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
    They list unpredictability as a factor. They obviously believe Saudi Arabia is a stable place to conduct business.
    - boomboomsubban 4y ago
      So their values have nothing to do with the humanitarian concerns they mention, just the ease of doing business in the country. Believable, but makes this press release sound like BS.
- FpUser 4y ago
  Yep. Shit comes in a variety of colors.

They never had an issue operating in Saudi Arabia despite the invasion of Yemen. They still maintain their Guantanamo Bay location. How is operating in Russia inconsistent with their values?

bloblaw 4y ago

[flagged]

xtian 4y ago
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocrisy """ Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another or the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform. In moral psychology, it is the failure to follow one's own expressed moral rules and principles.[1] """
whataboutery 4y ago
[flagged]
dspillett 4y ago
Not every comparison is pure whataboutism design to pull the discussion off-topic or complete off-track. Perhaps the difference is so obvious to you that the question doesn't even need asking, but I think it is a valid question: what values does this invasion violate that the other situations do not, at least not to the extent that McD reacts by considering pulling out completely. It would undeniably be whataboutism if it were McD being asked why they've done (or not done) something and they're point out something unrelated (or only tangentially related) that they have/not done or asking about what other bodies have/not done in that area of discussion. But as an outsider looking at McD, asking them to define their position more precisely, perhaps with reference to their position in what may be seen as similar circumstances, feels like a valid request rather than the fallacy of whataboutism. Of course the question could be used purely to make McD look bad, particularly if the asker of the question as some axe to grind (against McD specifically, American corporates more generally, or big business even more globally), which flips the pendulum back in the direction of a logical error because the asker is not actually trying to gain perspective but is instead intending to impose that others take their perspective. --- FWIW I think I have a fairly solid idea of what the difference is. If you remove the moral aspect and just look at the circumstances from the robotic PoV of a business doing business: while the sanctions don't directly affect McD their impact does affect their ability to efficiently do business in Russia. Such sanctions don't exist in a manner that affects them in the same way in those other situations. Moving away from purely robotic business related points, this is happening in Eastern Europe not the East so it is both closer to home to those making decisions and is getting a lot more attention in Europe and the US (meaning that there is more push from their customer base in the west).

programmarchy 4y ago

McDonalds is a symbol of US global hegemony. Exiting from Russia is maintaining that status quo. Protesting an ally of the US, or the US itself, would be a significant political statement, and probably contrary to their interests.

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

These things are not the same.

boomboomsubban 4y ago
So what are their values that make the first two acceptable but not the third?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
  They list unpredictability as a factor. They obviously believe Saudi Arabia is a stable place to conduct business.
  - boomboomsubban 4y ago
    So their values have nothing to do with the humanitarian concerns they mention, just the ease of doing business in the country. Believable, but makes this press release sound like BS.
FpUser 4y ago
Yep. Shit comes in a variety of colors.