It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

WHATABOUTISM, Old Soviet Propaganda Made New Again by Trump

page: 3
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 02:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: soberbacchus

obviously convenient deflection by Democrats is obvious.


Is it only deflection when "democrats" do it?

Is it ever a valid tactic?




posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 02:32 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...

Well "Whataboutism" has a wikipedia page.

Funny it only features main sections on Russia, and Trump.

Unless anyone can explain how this is any different than typical partisan deflection then that page requires a massive overhaul as partisanship (binaryism AKA Us vs. Them) is essentially an universal Iron Law of Human Affairs.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 02:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
en.wikipedia.org...

Well "Whataboutism" has a wikipedia page.

Funny it only features main sections on Russia, and Trump.



It used to be considered a logical fallacy that was easily dismissed on both sides of the aisle and by the media.

Trump has taken it to the Whitehouse and used it relentlessly and his minions have followed suit.

I can't fault wiki for using the most widespread and prominent example available.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 02:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
Can you show me proof Moore is a pedophile?


6 women came forth:



Earlier this month, the Washington Post reported that Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore initiated a sexual encounter with 14-year-old Leigh Corfman when he was a 32-year-old district attorney. The Post investigation also quoted three other accusers who said that Moore pursued relationships with them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18.

Five other women have since come forward with their own allegations against Moore. The former Alabama state judge has denied the allegations and his campaign has vowed to stay in the Alabama Special Senate election. Moore’s wife, Kayla Moore, has also said her husband will not step down from the Senate race.


There is no absolute proof here because it's his word against the 6 other women. Do you think all 6 are lying as part of some conspiracy?


edit on 20-11-2017 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 02:57 PM
link   
a reply to: dfnj2015

I think that just having a group of people accuse someone of something is not proof of guilt.

I think there claims should be investigated if credible, and if they are found to be true, legal recourse to the fullest extent should be applied, and beyond that the public should be made aware of that proof and he should be forced to resign at that point.

One of those women supposedly has proof in the form of a signed yearbook from moore, yet she won't show that actual physical proof to an independent investigator.

Now why would that be?



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:00 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

Sounds not unlike the Projectonism Hillary attempted to stampede across Planet Earth with, all last year. (everything that Bill & I are I'll label Trump that before he can expose me for it; I'll get ahead of the story that is me)

So Trump turns around and WhataboutHillary, and that warrants a wikipedia page.

Like these feminists (whom Hillary represents) they SCREAM that everyone is a "sexist", which is itself sexism, so them if someone points how they're being sexist well here shall come John Oliver to label it "Whataboutism". lol

How much you wanna bet that page hardly existed a year ago?

One person could go in and write that thing up, and the liberal bias friendly wiki scene would keep it held. In this way wikipedia can readily be turned into a vehicle for propaganda.

Or would you argue that Obama / Obama worshipers hadnt done any of this "Whataboutism" for 8 years?

The part that makes it obvious the page is propaganda is its 'ALL' about RUSSIA, and TRUMP. As if Russia invented it and Trump got it from them is how one would summarize the page if restricted to a couple sentences, just how John Oliver did with an entire segment.

Note how the page is all about Soviet Imperialism, yet my page here in 2007 about the "27,000,000++" Death Toll of American Imperialism is some 10+ pages of people screaming 'what about Russia' 'what about China' ' what about Germany' 'what about UK' etc:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

So as I said if that page is, well, even warranted beyond the logical fallacy page, well its in need of a serious overhaul.
edit on 20-11-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Grambler
Can you show me proof Moore is a pedophile?


6 women came forth:



Earlier this month, the Washington Post reported that Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore initiated a sexual encounter with 14-year-old Leigh Corfman when he was a 32-year-old district attorney. The Post investigation also quoted three other accusers who said that Moore pursued relationships with them when they were between the ages of 16 and 18.

Five other women have since come forward with their own allegations against Moore. The former Alabama state judge has denied the allegations and his campaign has vowed to stay in the Alabama Special Senate election. Moore’s wife, Kayla Moore, has also said her husband will not step down from the Senate race.


There is no absolute proof here because it's his word against the 6 other women. Do you think all 6 are lying as part of some conspiracy?



American history (Salem witch trials, 1950’s McCarthy hearings) would seem to indicate it’s possible...



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:23 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

It’s true. Trump does sometimes engage in whataboutism. But that you concluded this from a man with a penchant for ad Homs, appeals to emotions, straw men, cherry picking and quote mining, is hilarious.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

Trump has taken it to the Whitehouse and used it relentlessly and his minions have followed suit.


Who exactly are Trump's "minions"?

Faux News?

John Oliver showed a bunch of clips of them doing it sure.

Thing is they're the only Republican news channel. The Democrat have like 5 or more. Are you saying that CNN etc etc etc doesn't ever do that? I dont have TV to know, about all I see are clips I encounter while looking intently at specific topics (usually herein ATS) to know, but given the TRUMP HYSTERIA the MSM has been engaged in all year+ I would be absolutely stunned if the other channels dont so it every bit as much as Faux. And, again, the Dem outlets have them outnumbered 5 to 1.


Now if you're talking about online 'people' as being the "minions", whether they be shills or parrots or whatever, well thats the daily milk & cookies in the realms of partisans. Herein ATS its so prevalent I even came to point out how utterly grand form it has come in, primarily with the Dem crown mind you:
Damage Control Via Deflection AKA "Passive Regressive" defensive tactics
Although I will add Deflection is part of that overall tactical toolkit, where DERAILMENT is the larger overall Damage Control objective I've been observing in grand form around here (very specifically with the Hillary / BLM / SJW crowd). Which was taken to such extremes by the left I was compelled to do a followup:
Everyday Terrorist Sympathizers

The moral of that story being, when this stuff is pushed too far it ends up taking the form of 'being an Enabler'.

Now dont confuse my intentions. Hypocrisy Isnt Bliss, so deflections used to coverup ones own teams evils is no good either. Too bad I fear John Oliver there was doing exactly that in his piece, which I did watch and actually enjoyed much of it until he got to the part where one of his big examples of Trump doing 'it' was in pointing out how the "Alt-Left" were out there in Charlottesville insitigating the eventual climax that day, and Trump was right the Antifa etc militant SJW's were just as much at fault as the other crowd that day (hell, they trolled that whole crowd into existence in the first place) and Oliver smeared Trump for it as if he was wrong. Oliver went as far as to dgress that topic in justifying the whole punch a Nazi" ideal (which is DANGEROUS when one Party has declared not only the other Party but all of their critics as "Nazi's").

Argh.

Partisansnip blows.

My punchline for these topics is this: It's up to people to keep their own team honest, as they're the only ones who even can, while if they dont and they engage in the aforementioned enabling behavior that it proves they're just the same as the people they supposedly ar enothing like.
edit on 20-11-2017 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:43 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

The substance of what you say is true. Your attribution is ridiculous.

This has been going on for as long as i have lived. It defines "political debate" in the US



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Nope!

It was invented by Russians and they taught it to Trump. Didnt you see the WIkipedia page???




posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Whataboutism is a way to force people not to put context on any issue.

It's a method the left uses to avoid being called hypocrites.


You just did some whataboutism. Well done.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:58 PM
link   
a reply to: soberbacchus

So you respond to me claiming I'm doing the same thing that you cite in your OP, even though I point out exactly what I'm doing and how it's not the same thing.

Nice.

Now, we agree that it should be called out whenever it happens, but like I noted, it happens all of the time with politicians. I'm guessing that the only reason that you're making a big deal out of it now is because the linked article in the OP is anti-Trump.

As far as your claim that Trump does it "more so than all past presidents combined" is ludicrous, as you have no proof and it adds to the air of hyperbole consistent in your OP.

And concerning Obama--he deflected to other people doing the same stuff that he was doing all of the time. The subject matter of this thread isn't pressing enough for me to do research on your behalf. If you truly think that it's hard to find instances of Obama doing this...well, never mind. Let's just say that Obama did it much more eloquently, and it's not easy to spot for those less capable of or unwilling to see it.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 03:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: soberbacchus

It’s true. Trump does sometimes engage in whataboutism. But that you concluded this froma man with a penchant for ad Homs, appeals to emotions, straw men, cherry picking and quote mining, is hilarious.


Are we still talking about Trump?



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Taggart

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: soberbacchus

It’s true. Trump does sometimes engage in whataboutism. But that you concluded this froma man with a penchant for ad Homs, appeals to emotions, straw men, cherry picking and quote mining, is hilarious.


Are we still talking about Trump?


It's one thing for a politician to use fallacy—no one goes to a politician as a source of facts—but it's quite another for a propagandist to do so. I was talking about John Oliver.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 04:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: Taggart

originally posted by: DBCowboy
Whataboutism is a way to force people not to put context on any issue.

It's a method the left uses to avoid being called hypocrites.


You just did some whataboutism. Well done.


No.

I called the left hypocrites.

Feel free to call the right hypocrites.

Don't really care.



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 04:13 PM
link   
Well as you see - ---

Sam Harris, who is very serious spoke about it recently on his podcast:

www.samharris.org...

The "Whataboutism" is in the first five to ten minutes.


The tactic behind whataboutism has been around for a long time.

Rhetoricians generally consider it to be a form of tu quoque, which means "you too" in Latin and involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of

rather than refuting the truth of the accusation made against you.

Tu quoque is considered to be a logical fallacy, because whether or not the original accuser is likewise guilty of an offense has no bearing on the truth value of the original accusation.


www.merriam-webster.com...

It is the 'go-to' tactic for those whose position is indefensible by other means.

So generally, you can trust that those using this 'technique' have no defense for their argument; that they have nothing to say and cannot defend or refute a statement of fact.


edit on 20-11-2017 by FyreByrd because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 04:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: SlapMonkey
a reply to: soberbacchus

Obama used this method like a pro, as have numerous appointees of his (including Clinton).



Whatabout Obama?





Yes, on the surface, I'm using that tactic now, but the difference is that I'm not point this out to minimalize Trump's use, I'm just showing you that all politicians use this


I am pointing out that it is fallacious, false, failed logic and should be called out as the same whenever it is employed.




But, sure, if you want to play make-believe, we'll pretend that Trump has revived this dormant tactic that was last used by the Soviets, if it makes you and John Oliver feel better.



Yes, Trump more so than all past presidents combined, uses this tactic.

Trump employs it at least once a week. With every single issue. Please provide one in which Obama used whataboutism? It's certainly possible he did, but I imagine you might struggle to find an example?



Prayer breakfast and christians on their high horse vs islamic terrorism.

Not just used by obama.






posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 04:25 PM
link   




posted on Nov, 20 2017 @ 04:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: soberbacchus

originally posted by: 3daysgone
a reply to: soberbacchus

Shouldn't Roy Moor be proven guilty before he is not allowed to run for Senate?


He IS allowed to run for senate and is doing so now?

As far as "proven guilty"?

We do not apply a court standard of justice to making voting decisions, or what we should eat for breakfast, or a million other decisions in our daily lives.

No, we operate on informed decision making in voting and other things, not a full-on jury trial for each and every conclusion or decision we make.


You've been catch 'chasing someone else's squirrel'. Rather then return to the original topic "Whataboutism", you have become catch up in an off-topic subject.

I believe we were talking about the diversionary tactic/defense of:





top topics



 
10
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join