If that was the conversation then yes. But when the conversation is about party A fucking up then bringing party B into it is whataboutism. It’s the literal definition of a whataboutism.
The meme is about Jimmy Carter running as a candidate for election… The conversation is clearly about an election in which we are comparing candidates for an election.
This isn’t “Joe Biden makes a goddamn awful margarita.”, in which “Well putin makes a worse one” would be a whataboutism, this is “Joe Biden is too old to run as a candidate in the election”. And in an election, you compare candidates, which is not a logical fallacy.
And we’re talking about Jimmy Carter because we’re talking about replacing Biden. Telling people to shut up, Trump is worse, is a counter accusation without basis in that context.
Ah, so the idea is that candidates for the position are not yet locked in, therefore comparison between party candidates is not valid. I can get behind that.
However in the current environment I don’t see many other paths forward. I think the best alternative I’ve seen was an article floating al franken. My guess is the original commenters worry is that without viable alternatives, it will likely become a Biden vs trump election, and by then we’ve provided ourselves with enough negativity against Biden to encourage a trump victory. I’d like to see more positive qualities of alternatives be brought up, instead of negatives about the current most likely nominee.
There is nowhere that defines whataboutism with that restriction. You guys are so deep in the sand you’re pulling out literal propaganda techniques to manufacture consent.
The wiki article does not support what you’re saying. It even suggests 2 other methods, accusations of double standards, and hypocrisy. The main point is to distract from the actual conversation by using an accusation.
Common accusations include double standards, and hypocrisy, but it can also be used to relativize criticism of one’s own viewpoints or behaviors. (A: “Long-term unemployment often means poverty in Germany.” B: “And what about the starving in Africa and Asia?”).
Might as well quote the relevant section.
Well would you look at that, there it is laying out exactly what I said. Deflection of an argument by accusing someone else of the same thing.
Stating that you’re voting for Biden because Trump is a Fascist wannabe dictator is not a whataboutism.
Whataboutism is when you point to another similar situation and say “what about that”.
You presented that as the only valid use of the technique. Even the section you just quoted says there are other ways to use it. That’s why there’s the words, “but can also be used to…”
Whataboutism only applies as a logical fallacy when used to avoid defense of the original accusation.
There is no avoidance here, they fully agree that Biden is old etc. etc.
Whataboutism does not apply.
No he’s right. Shouting about Trump as a deflection from valid criticism of Biden is a classic whataboutism.
Comparing two candidates for a position is not a logical fallacy.
Using whataboutism to deflect from the criticisms of one is.
Again, criticism was acknowledged.
And then discarded with a whataboutism.
Can you go into detail? What’s the criticism that you think is being deflected?EDIT: nah, I’m just going to stick with my initial assertion. Comparing two candidates for a position is not a logical fallacy. Do you agree?
If that was the conversation then yes. But when the conversation is about party A fucking up then bringing party B into it is whataboutism. It’s the literal definition of a whataboutism.
The meme is about Jimmy Carter running as a candidate for election… The conversation is clearly about an election in which we are comparing candidates for an election.
This isn’t “Joe Biden makes a goddamn awful margarita.”, in which “Well putin makes a worse one” would be a whataboutism, this is “Joe Biden is too old to run as a candidate in the election”. And in an election, you compare candidates, which is not a logical fallacy.
And we’re talking about Jimmy Carter because we’re talking about replacing Biden. Telling people to shut up, Trump is worse, is a counter accusation without basis in that context.
Ah, so the idea is that candidates for the position are not yet locked in, therefore comparison between party candidates is not valid. I can get behind that.
However in the current environment I don’t see many other paths forward. I think the best alternative I’ve seen was an article floating al franken. My guess is the original commenters worry is that without viable alternatives, it will likely become a Biden vs trump election, and by then we’ve provided ourselves with enough negativity against Biden to encourage a trump victory. I’d like to see more positive qualities of alternatives be brought up, instead of negatives about the current most likely nominee.
No. It’s a complete misunderstanding of whataboutism.
Whataboutism is when you point to another similar situation and say “what about that”.
Examples…
A non-whataboutism - Biden is old, but we absolutely cannot have trump, a self proclaimed wannabe dictator, become president.
A whataboutism - Biden is old. Yeah, but trump is old too!
There is nowhere that defines whataboutism with that restriction. You guys are so deep in the sand you’re pulling out literal propaganda techniques to manufacture consent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
Here try this^^
Or just google “what is a whataboutism” and take your pick.
Basically, take the argument against you, and accuse your opposition, or someone else of the same thing.
The wiki article does not support what you’re saying. It even suggests 2 other methods, accusations of double standards, and hypocrisy. The main point is to distract from the actual conversation by using an accusation.
Actually try reading your sources.
Might as well quote the relevant section.
Well would you look at that, there it is laying out exactly what I said. Deflection of an argument by accusing someone else of the same thing.
Stating that you’re voting for Biden because Trump is a Fascist wannabe dictator is not a whataboutism.
For comparison, what you said was,
You presented that as the only valid use of the technique. Even the section you just quoted says there are other ways to use it. That’s why there’s the words, “but can also be used to…”
Stop digging your hole.
What the fuck do you think “relativize criticism” means?
Whataboutism is a specific type of logical fallacy. It is not enough for it to just be a deflection to another topic
For instance… Biden is old. Yeah, but Trump golfs too much and he cheats at it.
That is not a whataboutism.