• @Navaryn
      link
      201 year ago

      the “whataboutism” logical fallacy always felt to me like bringing it up was the real fallacy. It just allows you to deflect pretty much anything because you deem it not relevant. How am i supposed to debate you on anything if any information concerning your side is whataboutism?

      So glad i gave up the cringe internet “debate” culture a while ago

      • @cayde6ml
        link
        131 year ago

        I always say that “whata-burger-izuhm” itself is a fallacy. Calling out lies and hypocrisy and telling the truth shouldn’t be considered whataboutism.

        • @Lemmy_Mouse
          link
          51 year ago

          Yeah but if it didn’t, there wouldn’t be a point to calling “whataboutism”, would there?

      • @Shrike502
        link
        121 year ago

        Ayup. That’s why it is always brought up - can be used to deflect any criticism and shut down any attempts at analysis

      • @cfgaussian
        link
        11
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        If there is such a thing as “whataboutism” then it would be bringing up something entirely unrelated to the topic of discussion. It is not “whataboutism” however when you point out rampant hypocrisy and how they are guilty of much worse instances of the exact same thing they are accusing others of. That shows that they are entirely engaging in bad faith and that they do not really care about the issue. In which case there is no point in continuing to argue with such a dishonest interlocutor.

      • @Lemmy_Mouse
        link
        41 year ago

        arming neoliberal tools to debate in bad faith like the pette bourgeois right has been since pepe became a thing