• Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    I can’t think of any strawman arguments I’ve seen recently from leftists, but as for “whataboutism,” comparison is the basic method by which we can observe what works and what doesn’t. Not all “whataboutism” is invalid, for example comparing the level of infrastructure development in China and the US reveals clear strengths of socialism over capitalism.

    • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      for example comparing the level of infrastructure development in China and the US reveals clear strengths of socialism over capitalism.

      That’s not whataboutism. That’s just a comparison as you pointed out. Whataboutism is when you address a critique of your position by saying, “we’re not the only ones though”

      I can’t think of any strawman arguments I’ve seen recently from leftists

      This post is a strawman. It assumes criticisms of China are centred around infrastructure as opposed to other things. Unless OP specifically made this post in response to someone they had (or are having) a discussion with, I see no reason to generalize this as a position all “liberals” take.

      • Cowbee [he/they]@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        This post is definitely comparison, though, and not whataboutism. Further, it is valid if the point of critiquing something is to imply something else is better when it can be pointed out that they are similar, the same, or the other is worse.

        As for this post, it’s pretty clear that it’s comparing infrastructure in both countries. Claims of “China bad” are ever-shifting, goal posts moving and entire arguments spring up and fall back down, there’s no meme that could genuinely address all of them. Use Occam’s razor a bit here.

        • GrammarPolice@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Claims of “China bad” are ever-shifting, goal posts moving and entire arguments spring up and fall back down,

          Right, but infrastructure is not what makes up the bulk of “China bad” talking points. Why not address the Uyghurs or censorship? That is what makes up the bulk of “China bad” discourse.

          Pointing to infrastructure only to refute the “China bad” comments is a strawman because that’s not what makes up the bulk of the discourse.

          I’m willing to let it slide on the Occam’s razor though, especially since this is just a meme, but it still feels disingenuous.

          Further, it is valid if the point of critiquing something is to imply something else is better when it can be pointed out that they are similar, the same, or the other is worse.

          Sorry, if you’re meaning this as a defense of the use of whataboutism, I don’t agree.