• VILenin [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    I love how liberals take diplomatic moves and rhetorical methods that have been in use for thousands and thousands of years and pretend it's some new nefarious tactic invented by either the Soviets or the dastardly celestials.

    Like whataboutism. It's called pointing out hypocrisy and it's been a thing since people stopped communicating with grunts and moans.

    Investing in infrastructure: wow, this is the first time any polity has ever gained popular support through mutual assistance, truly an evil seeseepee plot.

    • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Carries over to Russia too. Why would Russia want to have a friendly or neutral buffer state? How oppressive and evil and imperialist of them! (Whoever taught them the words imperialism? Hilarious hearing NATOids and neocons swinging that one around)

      These fuckheads forget how great power geopolitics and realism works. They live in their fantasyland where everything goes their way and the other party gets 0. Worked for them when they massacred everyone who opposed and bought out domestic traitor cronies, but the world is waking up

    • 420blazeit69 [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Whataboutism is also a term for an entirely sensible way to judge something. You compare things to peer things all the time in all sorts of fields.

      • A_Serbian_Milf [they/them]
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        It’s also the case that people are often saying that the US is dishonest or biased, not merely hypocrites. Calling out American intelligence agencies or the pentagon for being unreliable sources is a distinct thing from saying they are hypocrites so it’s ok for the other party to do it too.

        I see this around Xinjiang and the Uighur discourse. Lib says that China is genociding the uighurs, you say that only the lying, genociding imperialist west claims that and not the majority of the planet then the lib says you are doing “whataboutism” because you pointed out the source and accuser is biased and has an interest in projection and muddying the waters