Not wanting to tax the rich because “I might be rich one day”.
This also screams “I am a selfish and self-centered person”.
Yes, and it took awhile for us to recognize that in our friends and family.
Being a republican. Sure there are some educated grifters who decide to label themselves as republican, but your average republican voter is a mouth-breathing fucking idiot.
I don’t think evetybody, i think some rich white egoistic man might also be republican, but besides that, probably yes.
While I don’t always agree, I can see how people can justify fiscally conservative policies. I tend to swing left, but arguing for small government isn’t without merit. The problem is with socially conservative policies. The republican party is no longer the party of small government, but is instead the party of bigotry and hatred for their fellow Americans. I wish I had the option of voting for multiple parties, but unless I suddenly decide that I want to regress to 1920s social policies, Democrat is the only semi-sane option.
Depends on what the motivation is. There are fiscal conservatives that think it is a responsible thing to do and then there are the fiscal conservatives trying to pull the ladder up behind them. Fuck the latter. Agree to disagree with the former.
Being a
republicanfirst-party voter. Sure there are some educated grifters who decide to label themselves as republican or democrat, but your averagerepublicanfirst-party voter isa mouth-breathing fucking idiot.terribly misinformed.FTFY
Sorry tard boy, both sides aren’t the same.
Never said they were. But they are both inescapably corrupt any beholden to their corporate masters. Democrats are just better at pretending to care about social issues.
A vote for either party is a vote against progress.
Unfortunately in a first past the post system voting third party is little more than throwing your vote away, or even worse taking it away from a candidate who you support that actually has a chance of winning
Sad, but true. But also a self-fulfilling prophecy. If everyone was well-informed and voted for who they really felt deserved the position, regardless of party affiliation, we wouldn’t be in this mess. But that would also require that everyone actually spend time researching each candidate, and most people don’t have the time/mental capacity for that.
Thinking more on it, maybe this was always the endgame of representative democracy, especially when mixed with unregulated (for the last few decades, anyway) capitalism. Even if everyone spent hours researching each candidate and chose earnestly, we might have a small resurgence of third-party representatives in positions of power for a short while, but people would inevitably move towards two polarized parties, anyway.
So I guess our only option now is to tear it all down and start anew. Or maybe just wait for the AI singularity to happen, then we all either die horribly or live forever in paradise. 🤞
Ooooor we could push for ranked choice voting, haha
Psh, yeah, if you want the easy way out!
Seriously, though, it boggles the mind that there hasn’t been a stronger push for ranked choice voting. Of course the establishment parties would do their best to suppress anything that might help unseat them, but you’d think the disenfranchised millions who feel no strong affiliation to red or blue would be pushing harder for it. It’s not perfect, but at this point, I think most would agree that a major change is necessary if we ever want to Make America Kinda Okay Again™
Believing the above, but still believing we live in a democracy.
“Let’s go Brandon!” Bumper stickers.
Same with “Fuck Trudeau” stickers and flags in Canada… ALWAYS on an oversized pavement princess truck, driven by a “but think of the children!” idiot who can’t figure out the irony.
Oof, yes. I feel second hand embarrassment whenever I see someone sporting one of those. Maybe it worked at the time, but now it’s just overplayed.
Being a baby. What do they even know?
“Whataboutism”, or if you are unfamiliar with the term:
“The act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse”
People that use this mechanism are “poorly educated” and unable to hold a conversation and they should just be mocked by whatabouting even harder, so they can maybe understand that they’re dumb and that’s not how you should debate.
Example of the last argument I had recently with my dumb c*nt father:
- Me: You shouldn’t idolize that politician, he evaded literally billions in taxes and that befalls on citizens like you
- Dumb c*nt father: Yeah? And what about that other politician?
- Me: What about the disappearing middle class?!
- D.C.F.: What…?
- Me: WHAT ABOUT THE BEES!?!
Honestly, in your example, you sound like, as you put it, a dumb cunt. The purpose of “whataboutism” is to point out hypocrisy in your debate opponent’s position. Your dad pointed out that a politician on your side did something equally deplorable to the one you’d called out on his side. Rather than respond to that and have a reasonable conversation about the nuance and differences between your chosen politicians, perhaps coming to better understand each other, you chose to devolve to nonsense, intentionally killing the conversation. That screams poorly educated (but possibly with an expensive education that makes you feel superior enough that you don’t bother to question yourself and your ideals).
The purpose of “whataboutism” is to point out hypocrisy in your debate opponent’s position.
No, it is not. It would be if the argument was, for example, “which candidate is better” or “who should I vote for”. But that wouldn’t be “whataboutism” either, it would be just “point out hypocrisy”.
If we are talking about just that single person (not even in a political way) and you bring up someone else just to deviate the attention, that is whataboutism and it’s poison for the mind.Rather than respond to that and have a reasonable conversation…
People that use this mechanism don’t whant to have a “reasonable conversation”, they just want to be right at all cost, even by sabotaging the debate. If you want to engage with them feel free to waste your time. I value mine more than that.
Plus keeping the argument going will make relationships worse: I voluntarely crash arguments like that with my father because yes, I do think that he’s a dumb cunt, but at the end of the day I still want to say him “I love you nonetheless”.Sounds like this is more of a debate about semantics. “Whataboutism” is a recently-popularized term that doesn’t have a concrete definition yet. You see it as a tool to escape a debate by diverting attention, but I see it as a tool to highlight hypocrisy while continuing a debate. Really, I guess what matters is context - specifically, whether one is attempting to debate “in good faith” (another recently-popularized, inconsistently-defined term).
I certainly don’t know you or your personal relationship with your dad. He doesn’t sound like a great debate opponent, but to be fair, neither do you. Most people aren’t nowadays, sad to say. Somewhere between Trump and Biden, people forgot how to wait their turn and debate the idea, rather than the person. It takes two to tango, they say, and it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find two individuals who are able to set aside their egos and listen in earnest to opposing beliefs.
I guess I’m a bit biased. 2020 turned me into a misanthrope. 🤷
“Whataboutism” is a recently-popularized term that doesn’t have a concrete definition yet
It’s neither recent nor interpretable XD. It was coniated by a journalist in the '70s with the specific meaning I’m telling you. The origin is actually interesting.
I’ll give you that it is more frequent nowadays, since it is an escamotage that populist groups use a lot and they are rising all around the world.He doesn’t sound like a great debate opponent, but to be fair, neither do you
If you are both ignorant and arrogant I’m the worst debate opponent on the fucking planet and I will just troll you into the ground. Expecially with people from my father’s generation, with their “I’m always right” attitude. It doesn’t matter how well informed/educated you might be, they are never receptive and never will. So if I’m forced to argue with them, I make sure I’m the one having fun.
In any other context (luckily the majority) I’m pretty chill and I’ve actually been told by many people to be a really good talker/debater.So if I’m forced to argue with them, I make sure I’m the one having fun.
I can respect that. If they’ve proven themselves to be ignorrogant, there’s no reason to get all flusterfucked trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. I’ve dealt with enough people who use trolling as their primary debate strategy that I guess I got shit-triggered. Apologies, friend, for assuming the worst.
Well. No.
Whataboutism as an argument is about chasing the lowest possible ethical standard. You’ll always find someone worse. That doesn’t mean it’s ok.
Even worse, they’re always exaggerated comparisons, such as “zomg, hunter Biden was using drugs”. Well, did you vote for hunter? And almost consistently, the sources being used aren’t reliable sources. And once those claims are fully rebuked, they move on to the latest nonsense (there are a lot of scared whistleblowers out there who the allegedly mentally weak “sleepy Joe” Biden is apparently threatening lol).
And this seems to be mostly a Right wing attitude
this seems to be mostly a Right wing attitude
Let’s not make this political. Right wing and left wing are still part of the same bird. They used to move in harmony, balancing each other, but for the past few years, those wings have been either attacking or ignoring each other. The eagle is in free-fall, and it’s mindsets like this that keep it from course-correcting.
But what about the children? Won’t somebody please think of the children?!
AKA changing the topic to avoid learning anything.
Thinking that someone without a formal education is somehow beneath you.
On the flipside, the belief that someone with a formal education is somehow beneath you or brainwashed for it.
Ten years ago I never would’ve believed that people like that exist, or that they think Science is evil for some reason
Science is neutral, but can be used for evil.
Science is not neutral. It is biased towards the truth.
Yeah, it’s just a tool that has been used for so much good that it’s bonkers to trash it altogether
Basically judging people in groups doesn’t work, you have decent and shit always wrapped together.
Everyone is below someone else somehow, since you use that word. I’m beneath my friend in film knowledge. I’m above my friend in gardening skill. In this sense, one can clearly be beneath someone else in education. Or height. Or travel experience.
You meant that regardless of education, we all have the same human worth. That’s true. But yeah you can absolutely be beneath me somehow
Not sure if you understood the assignment.
Ironically, defending arguments using scientific studies and experiments, but not being able to think critically about the methodology used or what the results mean. Too often people will cite scientific literature based off the title and MAYBE skim it. Trying to have a discussion with them will usually result in them calling you anti-science.
A good example is the pseudo-scientific belief common within incel circles that women can store and absorb dna from past sexual partners and that their children can then have more than one genetic father (an excuse to shame sexually active women while fear mongering about cuckoldry). If you track down the source the study actually explicitly explains exactly why this isn’t the case.
I’m going to forget that I read this comment and continue living in the moment before I knew this was a thing.
Being poor and idolizing the rich.
That’s by design
Wearing camo and American flag shit in public. Honestly just having American flags on anything now pretty much is the same as that read hat
Nationalism
People who are proud about their lack of knowledge on a topic as if that somehow means that they were not programmed prior to the encounter.
I’ll take “poorly educated” over “educated and unwilling to learn or grow.”
Any reference to “common sense”, which really means “what I believe”. Violating it is used as a universal rebuttal for any intellectually sophisticated argument.
Which sucks because it’s diluting the meaning of the phrase, and there are still many situations where it does/should apply.
Racist and intolerance to people different than them
Listening to loud music without giving a shit about the neighbours.
