Most of what you call "whatboutism" is really expressing "Actually, this is normal and accepted. Just not for me, right?". If someone is pointing out that you are using a double standard, then the problem is not with them.
As I said in other comments, I agree with this but the issue is that whatboutism is still being used as a shield when the other side does something. My original comment was a bit sarcastic, I was just pointing out that this would be seen as whatboutism in any thread about say, Russian media control
Oh the hand wringing. Fair's fair when the other side is doing it.
Anyway, public discourse will always have someone pushing an agenda. Nabisco, CIA, your local Instagram influencer. It's a race to the bottom. That's why bastions of unbiased investigative journalism is just such a precious thing.
Oh definitely. This is the same reason why probably every company that's critical to the functioning of the internet probably has moles from every major intelligence agency private and state-run
I love how famous American propaganda is simply overlooked when people are whining about "Russian propaganda", the evidence of which is usually a cleverly written story (which is also propaganda).
The irony, naivete, and logical inconsistency of this planet and Westerners in particular is mind boggling.
At least the other side didn't pretend to have a free press. The problem here is to pretend you're in the freest country in the world while everything is being controlled by secret agencies that think it is all fair and good.
Objectively my country is the most free, you can whip out a swastika or one of those stupid Russian Z symbols here and nobody's going to put you in jail. You might deservedly suffer reputational harm, but that's it.
The system is far from perfect, and it has suffered horribly in the part 20 years from loss of ad revenue, but my local Mercury News is going to give me better local reporting than Pravda would for Muscovites, or Xinhua for anyone.
Most of the latter ones did receive media time. None of those in the article were arrested for simply holding up political symbols like a swastika or Z symbol. In the entire article, there were only a few controversial ones, from the WW1, immediately post-WW1 era and the Vietnam era, and they have all been featured in media.
It's not what's okay, it's comparing existing or previously existing nations or systems with each other, and not an ideal. Yes everyone can and should do better.
Except that the comparison is not done in a fair way. To be specific, Americans believe their country is exponentially better than other nations like France or UK. It's not.
Libel law in the UK is nuts. I really have no idea about France, I just assumed it's some weird Napoleonic code where they guillotine you if you insult the emperor. That's the system that's there right?
I mean I agree, but that's also Russian rhetoric. Fair's fair when the other side is doing it is basically the basis of Russian foreign policy, or at least the justification for their foreign policy.
Again though I agree with you, whatboutism is just enforcing precedent.
I completely agree, I think that precedent matters. But again, that's just not how conversations go when it's the other side that's being discussed. Try bringing up the US in a Russia thread, here or elsewhere and you'll get that magic word on every single reply lol.
Then let us not descend to the level of our inferiors but maintain an intelligent standard of discussion. There is no reason to cry whataboutism which is what you are doing here in a roundabout way.
