4 ms·

>There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about. Sounds a lot like whataboutism. I heard a lot of that term going around when

by lbrito 1y ago

>There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about. Sounds a lot like whataboutism. I heard a lot of that term going around whenever anyone dared mention any non-mainstream talking point about the Russian invasion of Ukraine, but funnily enough, no one seems to talk about now.

ActorNightly 1y ago
Lol its not whataboutism. You can't do this thing where you just throw in fallacies at something randomly do discredit. Whataboutism is when you justify the wrongdoing of X by pointing out that Y is also wrong and nothing is being done about it. Im simply pointing out that if your outrage about Palestine is genocide, then you should be outraged about the other genocides. You can either agree, or you can further narrow down your position on why specifically Palestine conflict is the one you chose to place your outrage on, and not others.
- lbrito 1y ago
  It absolutely is about whataboutism insofar as people here (not you specifically) use it as a pseudo-argument that automatically wins a discussion, but applying it only when convenient for their political preferences or worldview. Took me a while, but: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31084334 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31084334 Compare our two posts: "I can think of one very powerful country doing exactly that for over half a century. Hope we're all collectively raging against anything coming from that country." and "There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about." Please be honest and fair. Don't you agree both of these arguments are more or less in the same vein? We're both pointing out that Bad Shit is happening elsewhere in time or space, and for some reason we think that public attention/outrage is unfairly shifted towards a specific conflict. We both imply that there is a deliberate political reason leading to that specific conflict being in the limelight and not any other conflict. Given our little discussion here, I probably strongly disagree with you on the specifics of this specific conflict (Gaza). But we both have made the same argument, coming from diametrically opposed points of view: we both think (correct me if I'm wrong) that people/media/society etc have pet conflicts to be outraged with in detriment of all other ongoing conflicts. Or in short -- hypocrisy. Although I disagree with you, I very much think this specific argument is absolutely valid. My point is that media and online people (HN) were very eager to scream Whataboutism when the exact same comment was made in another context (Ukraine), but everyone seems to have forgotten about Whataboutism in this conflict when people like yourself make comments in the same vein.

by lbrito 1y ago

ActorNightly 1y ago

Lol its not whataboutism. You can't do this thing where you just throw in fallacies at something randomly do discredit. Whataboutism is when you justify the wrongdoing of X by pointing out that Y is also wrong and nothing is being done about it. Im simply pointing out that if your outrage about Palestine is genocide, then you should be outraged about the other genocides. You can either agree, or you can further narrow down your position on why specifically Palestine conflict is the one you chose to place your outrage on, and not others.

lbrito 1y ago
It absolutely is about whataboutism insofar as people here (not you specifically) use it as a pseudo-argument that automatically wins a discussion, but applying it only when convenient for their political preferences or worldview. Took me a while, but: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31084334 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31084334 Compare our two posts: "I can think of one very powerful country doing exactly that for over half a century. Hope we're all collectively raging against anything coming from that country." and "There are other genocides happening in Myanmar and Sudan that nobody talks about." Please be honest and fair. Don't you agree both of these arguments are more or less in the same vein? We're both pointing out that Bad Shit is happening elsewhere in time or space, and for some reason we think that public attention/outrage is unfairly shifted towards a specific conflict. We both imply that there is a deliberate political reason leading to that specific conflict being in the limelight and not any other conflict. Given our little discussion here, I probably strongly disagree with you on the specifics of this specific conflict (Gaza). But we both have made the same argument, coming from diametrically opposed points of view: we both think (correct me if I'm wrong) that people/media/society etc have pet conflicts to be outraged with in detriment of all other ongoing conflicts. Or in short -- hypocrisy. Although I disagree with you, I very much think this specific argument is absolutely valid. My point is that media and online people (HN) were very eager to scream Whataboutism when the exact same comment was made in another context (Ukraine), but everyone seems to have forgotten about Whataboutism in this conflict when people like yourself make comments in the same vein.