• GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    7
    ·
    1 year ago

    Calling out whataboutism is perfectly acceptable when it is being used regardless of its origins.

    It is in no way a logical fallacy and in fact the use of whataboutism is itself a logical fallacy.

    The flaw in gorilladrum’s argument is that the hypothetical example demonstrates the flaws in that specific situation and does not address problems in socialism as a whole yet they suggest it dismisses the ideology completely.

    • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      People cry whataboutism when they dislike people throwing context that goes against their argument into a discussion.

      • Gorilladrums@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        The only people who feel threatned by others calling out fallacies are the ones who know they’re disingenuous but still act in bad faith anyway.

        • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s literally whataboutism, I criticized people using the vocabulary of “whataboutism” and then you said “but whatabout people who are doing whataboutism!”

          To be clear, I dont believe whataboutism is a fallacy, but you do, so why are you doing it?

          • sub_ubi@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            It’s funny liberals had to start calling it “Whataboutism” as the previous term made it clear they were racist.

          • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            No it isn’t. I am explaining why whataboutism is a fallacy itself. If you have a valid counterpoint to a claim there would be no need to engage with whataboutism.

            I am not engaging in whataboutism but based on your view that it isn’t fallacious Im not sure you will understand that. Not everyone is good at logical processing.

            • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I was criticizing people claiming whataboutism, you were doing “but what about people doing whataboutism!” Which is whataboutism.

              Not everyone is good at logical processing.

              Hence why we are having this conversation.

                • OurToothbrush@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  4
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  You’re literally advocating for the concept of a fallacy which is basically whining “no you can’t just provide context nooo that would defeat my point.” Which was first used to excuse British colonial brutality and later used to defend lynching.

                  • GreatGrapeApe@reddthat.com
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    No I am not doing that.

                    Whataboutism is an actual fallacy even if you din’t recognize that.

                    If we were talking about the vast amounts of crimes the British East India company was responsible for and you chimed in with “whatabout the Dutch East India company’s crimes” that would be a fallacious point because it is unrelated to the discussion and is only a diversionary tactic.

                    That is why whataboutism is a fallacy. It is used by people who cannot address the argument being made which you have done here.

                    The fact that the initial use of the term was to defray from atrocities doesn’t make the use of whataboutisms logically valid.