Would it be whataboutism to note that even now, Democrats are engaged in violent acts that go uncovered by the media and are not denounced by the Democrats who organized them?
It would be one thing if Democrats had an epiphany that violence is wrong but clearly they haven’t if they continue using violence as a mundane strategy.
Two of the absurd outcomes of whataboutism is that when evenly applied, then it justifies anything as long as the worst actors are doing it. And it assumes that there is nothing worse than hypocrisy. I can think of a few things that are.
As long as observations of hypocrisy are used to improve the moral argument rather than excuse evil, it’s a good thing.
I’d be happy if leftist extremists were treated how they are, and will, be treating those who fought Capitol security or run afoul of the speech police online. Consistency of rules, even if you disagree with them, allows you to work with them or advocate changing them. Rules inconsistently applied but applied indiscriminately, maliciously, and retroactively to Democrat party enemies lists creates a system that can’t be worked with.
I found that article confusing, and am still not sure what the point, if any, was.
Would it be whataboutism to note that even now, Democrats are engaged in violent acts that go uncovered by the media and are not denounced by the Democrats who organized them?
It would be one thing if Democrats had an epiphany that violence is wrong but clearly they haven’t if they continue using violence as a mundane strategy.
Two of the absurd outcomes of whataboutism is that when evenly applied, then it justifies anything as long as the worst actors are doing it. And it assumes that there is nothing worse than hypocrisy. I can think of a few things that are.
As long as observations of hypocrisy are used to improve the moral argument rather than excuse evil, it’s a good thing.
I’d be happy if leftist extremists were treated how they are, and will, be treating those who fought Capitol security or run afoul of the speech police online. Consistency of rules, even if you disagree with them, allows you to work with them or advocate changing them. Rules inconsistently applied but applied indiscriminately, maliciously, and retroactively to Democrat party enemies lists creates a system that can’t be worked with.
I found that article confusing, and am still not sure what the point, if any, was.