Whataboutism And Why Its Effective

 

A Polemic on East versus US perspectives on human rights.

Lets Go!

Looking at largely the left, and by extension most of the right, you will see logical inconsistencies on the subject of "human rights". many a Tankie will cry foul at the Jewish treatment of Muslims in Israel but stay quiet on China, simply because it keeps a narrative going, or rather they don't want to "appear" racist towards anyone but white males, which is another consistent narrative, especially on the left, and why is this kind of behavior encouraged?

Let's see....

If you look at the demographics of both the left and the right, especially in extremism, they are unanimously white (and often male), because they are outcasts of society (I would know that feeling) they extend these feelings on to other persecuted groups as an empathetic gesture. Why is it enforced? well, no one wants to be the guy who stands alone on an opinion, especially when each member of the group "self-policies" one another to act a certain way, to a certain standard, on a common ground of ethics, to a specific moral code and any disruption to that code can cause said individual(s) to get ousted from the group, who are already made up of alienated individuals at writ large, the greater society, furthering suicide, and even murder (in rare cases). both Georg Simmel and Emile Durkheim touched upon subjects such as suicide and secret societies and the causes and effects of "not going with the herd" such as in the case of vaccine resistance (if you haven't noticed about Corona, though to be fair, I'm not getting the jab, too much evidence to support they're beyond the bargaining phase, more on that further along) or with lefties, vaccine advocacy to the point of virtue signaling. Every group has one or two outliers, and they find themselves sooner than later without company. I've been subjected to such things.

Like how the vaccine is being pushed at the level of "get it or get locked up" almost at this point, the same can be said about how certain groups push certain agendas to get their point across, they have to use violence, verbal or otherwise, to keep people marching in lockstep with their ideas, no matter how logically inconsistent they may be. Taking a look at philosophy, many thinkers in America had nothing bad to say about other countries but plenty to say about their own, conversely, many European ones often said bad things about America but rarely anything bad about their own, instead postulating it towards a neighbor or national adversary. This kind of whataboutism even goes as far as Russia talking about American slavery, while we had plenty of abolitionists here but few opposed or how Europeans say how racist we are and then rail against the gypsies that breed like rats in their poorest enclaves. 

What I'm trying to say is "Ur-Europe or Contra-US" isn't perfect and shouldn't throw rocks in glass houses and fix their problems instead of trying to talk about trying to "fix" us. As an aside, I have plenty of criticism towards my own country, like our expansive military-industrial-complex, but that's not up to a foreigner to have an opinion towards America on that, and nevermind we're not even a true democracy and most of what we say has little impact on who gets elected here, "We" as citizens can't do anything about it, and what stands, stands today. But Europe shouldn't seek to "fix" our problems, either.

                                                                                                                    J./Adolf Stalin