this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
79 points (88.3% liked)

World News

52790 readers
2287 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

"But today I changed my mind, completely," Ai said. "The West (is) not even (in a) position to accuse China. (They must) just check on their record (of) what they did on international human rights, (their) freedom of speech record."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] whereIsTamara@lemmy.org 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

"Whataboutism" or "whataboutery" (as in, "but what about X?") refers to the propaganda strategy of responding to an accusation with a counter-accusation instead of offering an explanation or defense against the original accusation. It is an informal fallacy that the accused party uses to avoid accountability—whether attempting to distract by shifting the conversation's focus away from their behaviour or attempting to justify themselves by pointing to the similar behaviour (which may be true or false, but irrelevant) of their opponent or another party who is not the current subject of discussion.[1]

[–] andrewrgross@slrpnk.net 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

You're not even responding to anything I said. To repeat: you, me, and Weiwei are all on the same side. We're all critics of the Chinese Communist Party's human rights record. No one is engaging in whataboutery in this article.

You know what would be an absolute Chad move, here? I don't think this is likely, but if anyone is reading this, take note:

You can just say, 'That's a good point: I didn't read far enough to get important context and misunderstood. Thanks for the correction.'

That's an option. I've absolutely misunderstood an article I didn't fully read and had someone politely correct me. It's okay and healthy to just own it.

[–] whereIsTamara@lemmy.org 0 points 1 day ago

Of course I’m not. When you acknowledge the comment is whataboutism, based on the definition of the word, then maybe we can have a conversation. 🤷‍♂️