that just shows that china was investing in infrastructure, while US was investing in corruption to funnel more money to the people who need it the least.
I was referring to whataboutism broadly, and not necessarily in this instance.
that just shows that china was investing in infrastructure, while US was investing in corruption to funnel more money to the people who need it the least.
Right, i agree with you, but who was saying otherwise is my point. That’s why i said this is a strawman. “China bad” comments are due to other factors and not infrastructure. This post addresses the China bad comments with “but look at how developed the infrastructure is” whilst the comments are about completely separate things.
If those “other factors” were legitimate why would china be investing anything into infrastructure? If they could simply unilaterally repress discontent, why would they invest so heavily in the experience of their working class? Doesn’t that imply a huge impossible level of benevolence, in your version of events, to do these things with absolutely no mechanism for the people to enforce it?
“Whataboutism” is a thought-terminating buzzword employed by brain-rotted westerners whenever a relevant comparison is made in which they come out looking bad
Tu quoque is a real fallacy, whataboutism is a word used by people who are too fucking stupid to google the real name and are 100% always also too stupid to correctly identify a fallacy
Your point has no validity as several other users have already explained at length, my point is that you’re also rhetorically/logically/literally illiterate and should be embarassed
several other users have already explained at length
You mean communists like you? We’re so deep in this thread that no one else other than you guys care enough to be still here downvoting my comments.
Similarly you’ve been insulting me this whole time, but I’ve stayed passive, only wanting to engage with your talking points. Maybe you could try being less aggressive for a change.
Seems like the only thing you guys do here is strawman and “whatabout”
where either of those things here?
that just shows that china was investing in infrastructure, while US was investing in corruption to funnel more money to the people who need it the least.
I was referring to whataboutism broadly, and not necessarily in this instance.
Right, i agree with you, but who was saying otherwise is my point. That’s why i said this is a strawman. “China bad” comments are due to other factors and not infrastructure. This post addresses the China bad comments with “but look at how developed the infrastructure is” whilst the comments are about completely separate things.
If those “other factors” were legitimate why would china be investing anything into infrastructure? If they could simply unilaterally repress discontent, why would they invest so heavily in the experience of their working class? Doesn’t that imply a
hugeimpossible level of benevolence, in your version of events, to do these things with absolutely no mechanism for the people to enforce it?“Whataboutism” is a thought-terminating buzzword employed by brain-rotted westerners whenever a relevant comparison is made in which they come out looking bad
Whataboutism is a real fallacy
Tu quoque is a real fallacy, whataboutism is a word used by people who are too fucking stupid to google the real name and are 100% always also too stupid to correctly identify a fallacy
So what exactly is wrong if someone wants to use a colloquial? You’re acting like this has any actual bearing on the validity of my point
Your point has no validity as several other users have already explained at length, my point is that you’re also rhetorically/logically/literally illiterate and should be embarassed
You mean communists like you? We’re so deep in this thread that no one else other than you guys care enough to be still here downvoting my comments.
Similarly you’ve been insulting me this whole time, but I’ve stayed passive, only wanting to engage with your talking points. Maybe you could try being less aggressive for a change.
Yes, several communists have already explained to you in great detail exactly how and why your assertions are incorrect. Your point?
Your passivity is worthless.
Hmm, now let’s see how a Trump supporter would say their version of this:
Yes, several fascists have already explained to you in great detail exactly how and why your assertions are incorrect.
Doesn’t sound as sexy now does it?