588
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 22 Oct 2023
588 points (97.3% liked)
World News
38969 readers
2152 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Where is the place for whataboutism then? Never? When a narrative is being pushed in the media that is hypocritical, should we just accept it? People seem to think anyone critical of America is defending Russia/China or another country. I think it’s downright UN-American and negligent to never try to make the country you reside in live up to the standards it puts forth.
Well, you could start your own Lemmy post speaking specifically about the United States, instead of derailing this post talking about Russia.
I can do both, and do.
Do you understand the concept of derailing a conversation?
They probably do, as evidenced by the fact that they’re attempting to do so.
Russia interfered. What’s the conversation to be derailed? No one is saying it didn’t happen. They are just pointing out the hypocrisy because America does it too. Claiming “whataboutism” suppresses dissent and promotes the state department narrative.
They can point out that hypocrisy in their own post, instead of derailing this one.
Nah, this is just how a conversation works IRL. Points, counterpoints.
All parties just agreeing with each other staying on the same point is not a conversation.
Making a counterpoint can hardly be considered derailing the conversation .
Whataboutism is not a counterpoint. A counterpoint would be disagreeing with the original point being made, not bringing up a new point.
One point at a time is what's being advocated.
Might want to edit your comments to use the correct word.
Ta
Fine. Carry on with the foreign hate, while ignoring America’s problems. Can you at least acknowledge that the US has interfered in foreign elections? Lol
I have no problem discussing that, at all. Create a topic I'll be glad to add my opinion to it.
The only point I'm making is that you shouldn't be discussing two distinct points simultaneously, take them one at a time.
Even Jesus gets this. Why can’t you?
I'm actually big on forgiveness for those who are honest and earnest about redemption.
Having said that, when you say this to someone ...
That's going to get a response, from anyone who's on the receiving end of it.
Oh, and for the record, my wife is a foreigner, born and raised in another country. So hating foreigners is really not my thing.
How did this become about you?
Well, ...
What was the original article about anyway?
I wasn't replying to the original article, I was replying to your comment...
... concerning your earlier comment to me in the form of a question...
Didn’t you already do that?
Moving the goal posts.
Okay so now your are making a counter point. You're saying hypocrisy invalidates A point. You're saying that if I live in a country that does shitty things that I can't criticize shitty things another country has done?
But countries aren't people. They're closer to corporations. I can criticize Pepsi while working at Coke. I don't give a shit about either countries or corps beyond the people they employ
It worked. The Russians won again.
Nah, you won. I can't even remember what the original article was about now.
Can we at least agree that the US and Russia are both police states, and that those are two bad things that need to change?
The place is indeed "never". Every action should be addressed in the vacuum of its own context. Whatabousims detract from the argument at hand and prevent a Socratic exchange from narrowing its scope sufficiently enough to reach a consensus of understanding.
It's not about deflecting hypocrisy, it's about being able to have sane arguments in good faith.
Maybe have a Big Think?
Thank you. This is far more coherent than what i wrote. I'm tired of seeing conversations shutdown or railroaded by people crying whataboutism.
Whataboutism is like false choice and straw man combined. Not only is the suggestion that one needs to choose between being critical of Russia or US, that it's either/or, but you're also then implying that the person you're replying to is making an argument in support of one of the things. That they can't possibly believe both things to be bad.
They are only talking about one BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THE DISCUSSION IS ABOUT.
It's fallacious, so yes, its time is never.
It is called a false dichotomy:
I am aware of what a false dichotomy is. Some people use it interchangeably with "false choice/dilemma".
Been years since I took a logic course, but here's a link that talks about the differences:
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/false-dilemma-fallacy/
Oh, yeah no I just dropped that as a general FYI for anyone passing by not as engaging with the argument, I find a lot of people don't know.
Is the whataboutism in the room with us now?
Lol, caring about being rational is lame
If this were rational you wouldn’t be giving it so much energy. The whataboutism would have been dismissed and people would have moved on and focused on the article. The fact that the whataboutism worked shows just how irrational this is. It proves that the whataboutism is a valid point.
How did it work. Do you think typing this comment takes a lot of energy? I'm not really invested in this at all.
Then stop 🛑
Show me where the whataboutism poked you.
Yes, never is the correct answer. It's cheap, obvious and condescending as fuck as well as being a total waste of time. The correct thing to do with whataboutism is to call it out and then ignore. Like what I am doing with you right now.
You have a different definition of ignore than I do.