4 ms·

Whataboutism.

thrway63245 3y ago
Teaching the masses this word is really an amazing victory by American propagandists. It can be used to instantly shut down any discussion and win any argument (if only in the eyes of the person using it).
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  it can only be used to shut down whataboutism if literally all your arguments and all your discussions depend on your use of whataboutism, the problem and solution lie within yourself: conceive of affirmative arguments supporting your position which aren't logical fallacies, like whataboutism is
capdiz 3y ago
Define Whataboutism? It is my father having a love child with the neighbour's wife while I get a ass whopping for sleeping with the maid. All jokes aside; I believe the western world set a dangerous precedent with the war on terror and the chickens are coming home to roost. Am fearful of what is to come in the future. Russia's war on Ukraine may end up emboldening nations to act as they please with regards to dissidents wherever they might be and this is a scary world that we moving into.
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  Distraction from the relevant point by bringing up cases where the accusee might be construed as having performed the same act as the accused. It's a distraction because it detracts from whether the accused did or didn't do the act. And the matter here is whether India did it; distractions away from this question are either implying that they did it ("so what if I did, you did too"), or an attempt to throw off and confuse the conversations about it.
  - themiddleupper 3y ago
    It is important here because it takes away the moral high ground. It is also important because those who did it previously have not faced any repercussions, so why would anybody hesitate to do this.
    - calf 3y ago
      I think people who use the word whataboutism do not understand the more difficult concept of hypocrisy. It's more difficult because it requires contextual reasoning. "Whataboutism" is easy because it's purely syntactic, every time someone says "What about ...", you are allowed to accuse them of it--instead of having to confront, in good faith, an implied accusation of hypocrisy. It's like Orwellian newspeak, but the new word is less expressive and more likely to confuse the disagreement.
      - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
        I think people who engage in whataboutism and defend it with cries of "hypocrisy" do not understand the even more difficult concept that, even if you personally think that someone else is a hypocrite, it doesn't make you any less wrong. Indeed, whataboutism itself is easy because it's purely distractional: "but Y is a hypocrite!" a defender of X may shout, when the topic is not Y, or their hypocrisy, but X, and what X did. If your argument is that it was okay for X to do the thing, then you should be able to affirmatively say outright "I think it was okay for X to do the thing", and convincingly explain why, on a moral basis, it was okay for X to do the thing, without bringing anyone else into it. Otherwise, it's like a child whining "but Stevie took a candy bar!" – maybe, maybe not, but that doesn't mean it's okay for you to take one, even if you think that makes someone a hypocrite
mahastore 3y ago
Consequentism. What goes around comes around yada yada
- AYBABTME 3y ago
  Explain this in more details. The outline I gather of your position is that "the US killed Ben Laden on Pakistani territory so India killed someone on Canadian territory, Canada had it coming for what they did to Ben Laden". Fill in the details.
  - unmole 3y ago
    > Fill in the details. If you harbour terrorists who are wanted by your ostensible partners, don't be surprised if they lose patience and decide to take matters into their own hands. Does that help?
    - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
      what makes you think that's okay? even children are taught that 2 wrongs don't make a right I'm not saying you were raised wrong though
      - unmole 3y ago
        I don't care how you were raised but killing terrorists is 100% OK.
        deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
        ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
        I don't care how you were raised, but two wrongs don't make a right, and unilateral, extrajudicial, extraterritorial assassinations of political opponents are wrong, even if you shout "terrorist!" while murdering imagine if such shouting made murder okay, like a secret, magical incantation any arbitrary thug could recite to immunize oneself from guilt - it's a ridiculous concept when you think about it!

Whataboutism.

Teaching the masses this word is really an amazing victory by American propagandists. It can be used to instantly shut down any discussion and win any argument (if only in the eyes of the person using it).

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
it can only be used to shut down whataboutism if literally all your arguments and all your discussions depend on your use of whataboutism, the problem and solution lie within yourself: conceive of affirmative arguments supporting your position which aren't logical fallacies, like whataboutism is

capdiz 3y ago

Define Whataboutism? It is my father having a love child with the neighbour's wife while I get a ass whopping for sleeping with the maid. All jokes aside; I believe the western world set a dangerous precedent with the war on terror and the chickens are coming home to roost. Am fearful of what is to come in the future. Russia's war on Ukraine may end up emboldening nations to act as they please with regards to dissidents wherever they might be and this is a scary world that we moving into.

AYBABTME 3y ago
Distraction from the relevant point by bringing up cases where the accusee might be construed as having performed the same act as the accused. It's a distraction because it detracts from whether the accused did or didn't do the act. And the matter here is whether India did it; distractions away from this question are either implying that they did it ("so what if I did, you did too"), or an attempt to throw off and confuse the conversations about it.
- themiddleupper 3y ago
  It is important here because it takes away the moral high ground. It is also important because those who did it previously have not faced any repercussions, so why would anybody hesitate to do this.
  - calf 3y ago
    I think people who use the word whataboutism do not understand the more difficult concept of hypocrisy. It's more difficult because it requires contextual reasoning. "Whataboutism" is easy because it's purely syntactic, every time someone says "What about ...", you are allowed to accuse them of it--instead of having to confront, in good faith, an implied accusation of hypocrisy. It's like Orwellian newspeak, but the new word is less expressive and more likely to confuse the disagreement.
    - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
      I think people who engage in whataboutism and defend it with cries of "hypocrisy" do not understand the even more difficult concept that, even if you personally think that someone else is a hypocrite, it doesn't make you any less wrong. Indeed, whataboutism itself is easy because it's purely distractional: "but Y is a hypocrite!" a defender of X may shout, when the topic is not Y, or their hypocrisy, but X, and what X did. If your argument is that it was okay for X to do the thing, then you should be able to affirmatively say outright "I think it was okay for X to do the thing", and convincingly explain why, on a moral basis, it was okay for X to do the thing, without bringing anyone else into it. Otherwise, it's like a child whining "but Stevie took a candy bar!" – maybe, maybe not, but that doesn't mean it's okay for you to take one, even if you think that makes someone a hypocrite

mahastore 3y ago

Consequentism. What goes around comes around yada yada

AYBABTME 3y ago
Explain this in more details. The outline I gather of your position is that "the US killed Ben Laden on Pakistani territory so India killed someone on Canadian territory, Canada had it coming for what they did to Ben Laden". Fill in the details.
- unmole 3y ago
  > Fill in the details. If you harbour terrorists who are wanted by your ostensible partners, don't be surprised if they lose patience and decide to take matters into their own hands. Does that help?
  - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
    what makes you think that's okay? even children are taught that 2 wrongs don't make a right I'm not saying you were raised wrong though
    - unmole 3y ago
      I don't care how you were raised but killing terrorists is 100% OK.
      - deleted 3y ago
        [deleted]
      - ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
        I don't care how you were raised, but two wrongs don't make a right, and unilateral, extrajudicial, extraterritorial assassinations of political opponents are wrong, even if you shout "terrorist!" while murdering imagine if such shouting made murder okay, like a secret, magical incantation any arbitrary thug could recite to immunize oneself from guilt - it's a ridiculous concept when you think about it!