So what. Even if you take it as given some level hypocrisy here in the coverage of the events by the mainstream media (which of course never includes the massive right wing media sphere for some reason), which fair enough there is argument to be made there, but it doesn't do anything to respond to the fact this riots were entirely an ina…
So what. Even if you take it as given some level hypocrisy here in the coverage of the events by the mainstream media (which of course never includes the massive right wing media sphere for some reason), which fair enough there is argument to be made there, but it doesn't do anything to respond to the fact this riots were entirely an inappropriate reaction to a lot of false narratives in UK. It is worth highlighting the hypocrisy here in the desire to engage right wing apologetics while maximizing your rhetoric against left wing riots. This is empty what about isms. It should be easy to condemn this behavior on both sides and it does say something that you're compelled to engage in this what about ism when it comes to someone condemning right wing riots. It is like when right wing partisans want to bring 2020 riots every time someone tries to pin them down January 6th. Granted that is much less appropriate comparisons because two events have obviously important differences. Regardless it is bs rhetorical tactic.
It is a point worth raising if, for no other reason, than to remind people the frameworks recently used to analyze rioting and looting. In the States, we heard endless coverage here about how "oh well these businesses are insured" or "well *insert corporation* is still profitable and the magnitude here is immaterial" when the rioting was favored by the mainstream media's favored groups. Instead of "these people are taking advantage of unrest to vandalize and steal, and their positions should be discarded out of hand" we got endless coverage legitimizing and steelmanning the least-applicable reasons for the rioting observed.
"Whataboutisms" are not de facto inapplicable. In fact, comparing comparable events is objectively valuable. "Whataboutisms" are weakest when they dilute, confuse, and obfuscate the issue (e.g. "donald trump still doesn't accept that he lost in 2020" getting a response of "WHATABOUT Hunter Biden's cocaine usage??"). Here, instead, we are comparing like-for-like. Rioting, violence, looting and the like under the veil of a social/cultural political conflict.
I condemn the behavior in the UK. As we all should. But I want everyone condemning the behavior to accept that this *SHOULD BE* the standard, and the next time certain other political riots break out, we should not hand-wring and spend endless hours debating the merits of some underlying political statement.
I'm simply, in general, seeking accountability for the future, and drawing attention to the hypocrisy as observed.
First of I think you're confusing "endless coverage" of the very self selected outrage inducing cultural commentary you chose consume during that time and within subsequent years. Also it assumes this idea a of a singular establishment narrative that takes on a partisan lens, but completely misses the fact media system is more fracture than ever and that there is a huge right wing media system that routinely gets a ton of eyeballs and talked about this topic more than another media outlet in order to drum up outrage. But of course that doesn't count as establishment because why complicate a good narrative.
I take your point that what about ism has place when you're legitimately critiquing an obvious hypocrisy in someone's analysis. However, where was the obvious hypocrisy in the comment you were critiquing? How was 2020 riots relevant? It is entirely moving off of one topic to your preferred pet topic and trying run it through the lens of while now of course we can finally now talk about this now that is a right wing riot. Conveniently forgetting that right wing info sphere and certain heterodox podcast endlessly talking about 2020 riots for years now. As far as I can tell the uk riots, at least foriegn coverage goes, was blip in the news sphere comparatively. But people need to constantly to beat this narrative into their psyche of the left wing establishment trying to control the information systems.
So what. Even if you take it as given some level hypocrisy here in the coverage of the events by the mainstream media (which of course never includes the massive right wing media sphere for some reason), which fair enough there is argument to be made there, but it doesn't do anything to respond to the fact this riots were entirely an inappropriate reaction to a lot of false narratives in UK. It is worth highlighting the hypocrisy here in the desire to engage right wing apologetics while maximizing your rhetoric against left wing riots. This is empty what about isms. It should be easy to condemn this behavior on both sides and it does say something that you're compelled to engage in this what about ism when it comes to someone condemning right wing riots. It is like when right wing partisans want to bring 2020 riots every time someone tries to pin them down January 6th. Granted that is much less appropriate comparisons because two events have obviously important differences. Regardless it is bs rhetorical tactic.
It is a point worth raising if, for no other reason, than to remind people the frameworks recently used to analyze rioting and looting. In the States, we heard endless coverage here about how "oh well these businesses are insured" or "well *insert corporation* is still profitable and the magnitude here is immaterial" when the rioting was favored by the mainstream media's favored groups. Instead of "these people are taking advantage of unrest to vandalize and steal, and their positions should be discarded out of hand" we got endless coverage legitimizing and steelmanning the least-applicable reasons for the rioting observed.
"Whataboutisms" are not de facto inapplicable. In fact, comparing comparable events is objectively valuable. "Whataboutisms" are weakest when they dilute, confuse, and obfuscate the issue (e.g. "donald trump still doesn't accept that he lost in 2020" getting a response of "WHATABOUT Hunter Biden's cocaine usage??"). Here, instead, we are comparing like-for-like. Rioting, violence, looting and the like under the veil of a social/cultural political conflict.
I condemn the behavior in the UK. As we all should. But I want everyone condemning the behavior to accept that this *SHOULD BE* the standard, and the next time certain other political riots break out, we should not hand-wring and spend endless hours debating the merits of some underlying political statement.
I'm simply, in general, seeking accountability for the future, and drawing attention to the hypocrisy as observed.
First of I think you're confusing "endless coverage" of the very self selected outrage inducing cultural commentary you chose consume during that time and within subsequent years. Also it assumes this idea a of a singular establishment narrative that takes on a partisan lens, but completely misses the fact media system is more fracture than ever and that there is a huge right wing media system that routinely gets a ton of eyeballs and talked about this topic more than another media outlet in order to drum up outrage. But of course that doesn't count as establishment because why complicate a good narrative.
I take your point that what about ism has place when you're legitimately critiquing an obvious hypocrisy in someone's analysis. However, where was the obvious hypocrisy in the comment you were critiquing? How was 2020 riots relevant? It is entirely moving off of one topic to your preferred pet topic and trying run it through the lens of while now of course we can finally now talk about this now that is a right wing riot. Conveniently forgetting that right wing info sphere and certain heterodox podcast endlessly talking about 2020 riots for years now. As far as I can tell the uk riots, at least foriegn coverage goes, was blip in the news sphere comparatively. But people need to constantly to beat this narrative into their psyche of the left wing establishment trying to control the information systems.