Arm band Hypocrisy

winker

Member
I’m not trolling, for the record I think it’s a terrible regime in Qatar, what I’m saying is that we’re picking and choosing this specific battle whilst ignoring loads of other human rights issues because it might actually inconvenience us. Anyone can bang on about an armband but it changes nothing when we are happy to buy their gas, fly their airlines have an office in their ‘shard’ etc.
But hey what do I know.
 

The Card Cheat

Well-known member
It reminds me of the climate change argument - "why should we do anything cos China produce more than us"

People wouldn't do anything if all they relied on was whataboutery. As soon as you start saying 'but what about so and so' you have kinda lost the argument. It's all about what WE do.

Surely all argument is essentially "whataboutery ". If you're trying to prove whether something is a penalty, whether someone has the right to govern or whether actions are balanced and measured, you compare and contrast, you look at the context and you consider like for like evidence.
If every time somebody does this you just shout "oh whataboutery ', it just seems as though you have no proper argument but are relying on a tired old cliche.
I personally think there is breathtaking double standards regarding Qatar, but nobody wants to address this.
 

changingman

Well-known member
One of the arguments now frequently trotted out in defence of the hypocritical position taken, is that by working with, promoting and (to some extent) tacitly accepting the views of certain states we're able to improve their HR record, almost by stealth?

I'm not sure I agree with this, there's hardly shed loads of evidence to point to it working?

Much more likely in my view, is that it's a comforting position for the West to take, knowing that they have made questionable decisions in working with these states in the first place.

That said, I'm not sure the extreme opposite view works either - effectively cutting off or punishing these states based on their records. Long term that probably leads (in my view) to more deeply entrenched positions, dangerous societies for citizens and deepening of lines between "the West" and everyone else.

It's a bloody tricky one if I'm honest.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
Surely all argument is essentially "whataboutery ". If you're trying to prove whether something is a penalty, whether someone has the right to govern or whether actions are balanced and measured, you compare and contrast, you look at the context and you consider like for like evidence.
If every time somebody does this you just shout "oh whataboutery ', it just seems as though you have no proper argument but are relying on a tired old cliche.
I personally think there is breathtaking double standards regarding Qatar, but nobody wants to address this.

Comparing and contrasting is fine, but 'whataboutery' is essentially not acting on something because others aren't, isn't fine. For example:

1. We should cut our carbon emissions because we are contributing to climate change. China are producing a lot of carbon and are doing little about it so we are right in trying hard to reduce ours by as much as possible.

Or

2. Why should we cut our emissions cos China are producing more and they aren't doing anything?

In one we are trying to address the actual problems - the other we are refusing to address problems. I know which is best.

Usually it is some ignorant righty who comes out with the 2nd argument - mainly as justification why they don't need to do anything because they are alright, Jack.

Comparing and contrasting isn't whataboutery. It is comparing and contrasting.
 

Jedi boro

Well-known member
I'm not sure I agree with this, there's hardly shed loads of evidence to point to it working?
Vettel said something similar as well as he said are we improving it if are just validating it. I think it’s one of the reasons he’s decided to walk away as he just can’t square this circle.
 

r00fie1

Well-known member
Comparing and contrasting is fine, but 'whataboutery' is essentially not acting on something because others aren't, isn't fine. For example:

1. We should cut our carbon emissions because we are contributing to climate change. China are producing a lot of carbon and are doing little about it so we are right in trying hard to reduce ours by as much as possible.

Or

2. Why should we cut our emissions cos China are producing more and they aren't doing anything?

In one we are trying to address the actual problems - the other we are refusing to address problems. I know which is best.

Usually it is some ignorant righty who comes out with the 2nd argument - mainly as justification why they don't need to do anything because they are alright, Jack.

Comparing and contrasting isn't whataboutery. It is comparing and contrasting.
Agreed!

Those who do the "what about China / India / blah blah" actually mean - I dont understand the issues involved and wont acknowledge I / we have responsibility - and they stick their heads up their arzes or in the sand - or both.

We have to continue fighting and campaigning and doing what we can, and ignore those who cant see what they are looking at.
We are wasting our time with the wasters.✊
 

SmallTown

Well-known member
I’m not trolling, for the record I think it’s a terrible regime in Qatar, what I’m saying is that we’re picking and choosing this specific battle whilst ignoring loads of other human rights issues because it might actually inconvenience us. Anyone can bang on about an armband but it changes nothing when we are happy to buy their gas, fly their airlines have an office in their ‘shard’ etc.
But hey what do I know.
I like this line about ignoring other l human rights issues. It's a great fake outrage play by right thinkin, prejudiced people isn't it?
As if protesting about LGBT rights means you don't care about, say, the environment. It's such a useful trolling technique because it means the person can push their (in this case homophobic) stance whilst feigning fake righteousness and making the other person look bad by lying about their beliefs . It's actually quite clever.
 

Chutney

Well-known member
I'm proud of Englands players for taking a knee, I'm even prouder of Irans players for refusing to sing their anthem. I think it's a shame the armbands weren't worn......but I think the op has a point.
Why is there a thousand times more scrutiny and criticism of this tournament, than sporting tournaments, tours and games held in places with arguably much worse human rights records? Like Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan.
This isnt whataboutery I'd genuinely like to know why.
Not to excuse it, but if we're talking about football in Russia or cricket in Pakistan, at least there's some heritage there. Whatever else is problematic you can at least justify a host from a sporting perspective. With Qatar it's shameless grift and hypocrisy - there's no football history and there'll be zero legacy.

On China and Saudi - well given China's size and significance, a global and universal event like the Olympics being there does make sense to me. Saudi though? We talking about F1? Erm, money, oil and a lack of any scruples whatsoever? Sounds like a marriage made in heaven.
 
Last edited:

Chutney

Well-known member
Agreed!

Those who do the "what about China / India / blah blah" actually mean - I dont understand the issues involved and wont acknowledge I / we have responsibility - and they stick their heads up their arzes or in the sand - or both.

We have to continue fighting and campaigning and doing what we can, and ignore those who cant see what they are looking at.
We are wasting our time with the wasters.✊
There's also the "emissions per head of population" metric. Not sure exactly how that changes the picture, but I'm sure it would make it less damning. Not to mention the fact that a lot of manufacturing emissions in those places will be for producing cheap shïte for the west that we don't need anyway. And then shipping it over...
 

r00fie1

Well-known member
There's also the "emissions per head of population" metric. Not sure exactly how that changes the picture, but I'm sure it would make it less damning. Not to mention the fact that a lot of manufacturing emissions in those places will be for producing cheap shïte for the west that we don't need anyway. And then shipping it over...
"Yeah, but its ok for them.
You`re just one of them extinction rebellion mob who dont care what happens to us.
Just pushing your agenda down our throat.
How can I go shopping and take the kids to school without my car?
We cant all afford electric cars.
And what about coal-mining in Poland?
Why dont you have a go at them !!
You remainer`s would have the World Bank tell us what to do.
Why dont you go and live in France then?!
Typical corn-flake."

Reply: Actually Sir, I`m from the Local Authority offering you a refund whilst we install new kerbstones.
:rolleyes:
 

The Card Cheat

Well-known member
Comparing and contrasting is fine, but 'whataboutery' is essentially not acting on something because others aren't, isn't fine. For example:

1. We should cut our carbon emissions because we are contributing to climate change. China are producing a lot of carbon and are doing little about it so we are right in trying hard to reduce ours by as much as possible.

Or

2. Why should we cut our emissions cos China are producing more and they aren't doing anything?

In one we are trying to address the actual problems - the other we are refusing to address problems. I know which is best.

Usually it is some ignorant righty who comes out with the 2nd argument - mainly as justification why they don't need to do anything because they are alright, Jack.

Comparing and contrasting isn't whataboutery. It is comparing and contrasting.
But that’s my exact point. People asking the question, why the incredibly strong reaction to Qatar, by people who ignore far far worse human rights abuses in other countries and regimes isn’t whataboutery. No body is saying we should ignore or condone what’s happening in Qatar, the question I keep asking is why the very obvious double standards?
 

Jedi boro

Well-known member
But that’s my exact point. People asking the question, why the incredibly strong reaction to Qatar, by people who ignore far far worse human rights abuses in other countries and regimes isn’t whataboutery. No body is saying we should ignore or condone what’s happening in Qatar, the question I keep asking is why the very obvious double standards?
Because as I said this was not what they agreed to. First off they campaigned for a summer games that changed ( despite Australia asking for a winter date and being told that it wasn’t possible.

Then they said it would be inclusive - it’s not.

They moved their game one day forward so as to not share with other games another rule changed.

They have moved the goal posts every step of the way since they stole the vote.
 

MolteniArcore

Well-known member
But that’s my exact point. People asking the question, why the incredibly strong reaction to Qatar, by people who ignore far far worse human rights abuses in other countries and regimes isn’t whataboutery. No body is saying we should ignore or condone what’s happening in Qatar, the question I keep asking is why the very obvious double standards?

The answer to your question is surely because it is a high profile event and will be receiving crazy worldwide media attention. The plight of the Uyghurs in China, for example, get a tiny amount of coverage in comparison.

So going back to my initial point the place to compare and contrast would be the levels of media coverage and the resultant outcry.

The whataboutery would be that it is a bad thing that people are angry about Qatar but not angry about the injustices the Uyghurs face and as such they are hypocrites for calling out Qatar.
 

Nano

Well-known member
It's obvious to me that the biggest problem is FIFA. Qatar have (more than) questionable records on human rights but it is FIFA banning anything being spoken about them that is the shameful thing. If they allowed players to wear the armbands and protest the human rights alongside the football then their rhetoric on how allowing them to have the World Cup will bring awareness and raise standards might have some weight to it. By trying to shut all dissent down it is pandering to them. It is obvious that nothing will change for the within Qatar and FIFA couldn't care less. They've had their cash so it's job done.
 
Top