Isn't the simplest solution to this invented excuse of 'whataboutism' to admit wrong on both sides? To speak of both equally? For example:
"We were wrong to invade other countries"
"We have to never invade others"
"We have to pay reparations for what we've done"
"We have to try our war criminals in court, or hand them over to the ICC"
There, do that and the so called 'whataboutism' becomes nothing. It's the simplest solution to 'whataboutism' that maintains the pretense of principle on the speaker's side.
Yeah, like okay, if both things are bad and there are already tons of posts about one of them, shouldn't we be all for people posting about the other to raise awareness? But no, at the end of the day it's national chauvinism.
Isn't the simplest solution to this invented excuse of 'whataboutism' to admit wrong on both sides? To speak of both equally? For example:
"We were wrong to invade other countries"
"We have to never invade others"
"We have to pay reparations for what we've done"
"We have to try our war criminals in court, or hand them over to the ICC"
There, do that and the so called 'whataboutism' becomes nothing. It's the simplest solution to 'whataboutism' that maintains the pretense of principle on the speaker's side.
deleted by creator
The response is always "We aren't doing the bad things right now!"*
*:citations-needed:
the more common one i see is “two things can be wrong at the same time” sure but why is only one of them regularly on the front page of :reddit-logo:
Yeah, like okay, if both things are bad and there are already tons of posts about one of them, shouldn't we be all for people posting about the other to raise awareness? But no, at the end of the day it's national chauvinism.
“No toss stick, only fetch stick.”