He literally just posted a picture. If anything, he's highlighting the hypocrisy, which he's allowed to do. He never argued Qatar is right or Germany is wrong. But b/c we all understand the implications of the picture, we scream whataboutism. It's lame as hell.I guess the annoying bit is that that is being used a way to counter arguments of people in this thread. I have never silenced ozil, no one in this thread ever silenced ozil or supported it, but somehow that is an argument to counter what people are saying in this thread?
It's just a cheap and obvious tactic to change the course of the conversation.
And here we are proving it works.
is this the word of the day? I am not mate. Compassion does not help the cause anyway! I respect the demonstrations for any noble cause. But is it enough? Is it loud enough? Is it as “aggressive”as what is happening now?
by the way, are you boycotting the world cup?
AmenA lot of people don't realise how damaging hypocrisy is to credibility, no one is saying you have to be squeaky clean to point out injustices, but when you have German treatment of Ozil and German clubs going to the middle East for warm weather training it does seem a bit baffling, . Then you have Denmark who are making changes to their kit to highlight human rights but played in Tel Aviv a year ago without a peep, you can't make it up. Its not whatabouttery as all these actions are football related and connected. And when push came to shove they wouldn't stand up for it because of threats of yellow cards, it just comes accross insincere and hollow.
So the point was not to change the course of the conversation from qatari human rights abuses (which is the point of this thread) to western organizations are hypocrites. Right... I bet you own a lot of bridges.He literally just posted a picture. If anything, he's highlighting the hypocrisy, which he's allowed to do. He never argued Qatar is right or Germany is wrong. But b/c we all understand the implications of the picture, we scream whataboutism. It's lame as hell.
So the point was not to change the course of the conversation from qatari human rights abuses (which is the point of this thread) to western organizations are hypocrites. Right... I bet you own a lot of bridges.
I’ve used it at a certain poster who can’t seem to discuss Israel in the Israel thread.I mean, I've seen you call out whataboutism in the palestine thread a few times. You even used the term.
The problem is that following that logic we arrive at the conclusion literally no organization can criticize another organization. No person is pure, so no one can criticize anyone. I mean, we can, but we'd be hypocrites, so what's the point anyway?The point could be:
"it is a shame German Football Association are hypocrites, hence untrustworthy which is bound to make their rightful pro-LGBT stance inaudible..."
All those issues related to qatar. No about china or germany.I’ve used it at a certain poster who can’t seem to discuss Israel in the Israel thread.
This is a fairly broad thread talking about a whole range of topics - going from LGBT issues, political armbands, migrant workers, Fifa as an organisation and what they stand for, human rights and organisational structures. And asking the question why Ozil was given so much shit for speaking out about Uighurs (not necessarily by Fifa, but by other football organisations) in this thread is quite valid.
The point is to post a counterexample is not automatically a whataboutism. Simple as.So the point was not to change the course of the conversation from qatari human rights abuses (which is the point of this thread) to western organizations are hypocrites. Right... I bet you own a lot of bridges.
The FAs of different countries have been discussed in this thread though, as well as a whole host of other topics. Someone bringing Ozil’s treatment at the hands of the German FA on the same day the German NT and FA make a political gesture is a valid thing to bring up.All those issues related to qatar. No about china or germany.
A counter example to the loads of posts saying western fa's are not hypocrites? Can you point me to these posts claiming european fa's are not hypocrites and a leading example? Because it looks like a counter example to something that wasn't said.The point is to post a counterexample is not automatically a whataboutism. Simple as.
I honestly see no difference to what fearless does bringing up hamas all the time in the palestine thread, but ok, let's disagree.The FAs of different countries have been discussed in this thread though, as well as a whole host of other topics. Someone bringing Ozil’s treatment at the hands of the German FA on the same day the German NT and FA make a political gesture is a valid thing to bring up.
It's a forum. He's allowed to point out the hypocrisy even if nobody posted they weren't hypocrites. He's allowed to share his point of view, correct? The fact that he wasn't responding to anything, in particular, makes the claims of whataboutism even more absurd.A counter example to the loads of posts saying western fa's are not hypocrites? Can you point me to these posts claiming european fa's are not hypocrites and a leading example? Because it looks like a counter example to something that wasn't said.
No I get what you’re saying. He loves bringing up Uighurs/China, Saudi Arabia, etc as well (which is what my point was).I honestly see no difference to what fearless does bringing up hamas all the time in the palestine thread, but ok, let's disagree.
In a way my point is proven, in that the last few posts are about anything but the original intent of this thread, so I'll stop here.
It depends. I believe that most people would find criticism from Amnesty and HRW to be valid and trustworthy, as they've been writing about Qatar for years without shying away from other issues. Their impurity is not disqualifying them.The problem is that following that logic we arrive at the conclusion literally no organization can criticize another organization. No person is pure, so no one can criticize anyone. I mean, we can, but we'd be hypocrites, so what's the point anyway?
Then it's not really a counter example, is it? He's allowed to post whatever he wants, just as I have the right to point out it's whataboutism.It's a forum. He's allowed to point out the hypocrisy even if nobody posted they weren't hypocrites. He's allowed to share his point of view, correct? The fact that he wasn't responding to anything, in particular, makes the claims of whataboutism even more absurd.
I'm sure you missed how amnesty was obliterated a few months ago regarding ukraine, with people saying "yeah but what about russia". This reasoning is everywhere and just dilutes the point that should be the focus in that moment.It depends. I believe that most people would find criticism from Amnesty and HRW to be valid and trustworthy, as they've been writing about Qatar for years without shying away from other issues. Their impurity is not disqualifying them.
The impurity of most Western MSM and football organizations is far more problematic. And it is a credibility killer in the eyes of many around the world.
Counter to the narrative in this thread, but you can just call it an example if you want to be precise. Regardless, if it's not countering anything as you say how can it be whataboutism? You do understand what that word means right?Then it's not really a counter example, is it? He's allowed to post whatever he wants, just as I have the right to point out it's whataboutism.
Agree. The 2nd Amendment is probably most well-known example of how shit things end up being when an ancient law is still being taken as gospel.
"germany player protested in qatar by covering their mouths"Counter to the narrative in this thread, but you can just call it an example if you want to be precise. Regardless, if it's not countering anything as you say how can it be whataboutism? You do understand what that word means right?
As a person whose people have been abused and are now getting daily murdered by the state, I can tell you, I dream of the day our country has 2nd amendment. Maybe then, the 10-15% who run the country wouldn't be able to mass murder and silence the majority, just because they have all the guns.
I think it was Lenin who said, a single person with a gun can control 100 without a gun. It's hard to fight dictatorships and brutal state-sponsored murder with rocks and molotov cocktails
Your location is Canada.. Unless you are a native American your statement makes no sense.
That's not what happened and the side you agree with doesn't get to monopolize expressing opinions."germany player protested in qatar by covering their mouths"
"yeah what about that time they silenced ozil"
Not whataboutism at all.
I honestly see no difference to what fearless does bringing up hamas all the time in the palestine thread, but ok, let's disagree.
In a way my point is proven, in that the last few posts are about anything but the original intent of this thread, so I'll stop here.
That makes sense. Hopefully something changes soonI am Iranian. Living in Canada most my life, because I can't return home due to political reasons.
yes I won’t watch a single game. I’ve watched every World Cup since 1974. I typically watch every game, groups and all. I’m not watching because fifa is so corrupt and Qatar should never have been awarded this ex in the first place. My problem is with fifa primarily. The issues with Qatar are one of the reasons they shouldnt have been awarded this World Cup but it’s on fifa for this decision.
No need to start another thread on the Uighurs as there's already one, unfortunately it only has a few pages as no one gives a feck.
I dont have any problem with people watching the games or going to Qatar for the games and I also dont have any problem with anyone who disagrees. Im happy and comfortable in that decision. I know Im going to miss a huge amount of great football and for me the WC is the best, I prefer it over club football and the EPL, its always been what I most look forward to. I already have an issue with the next WC but thats not likely to lead to me boycotting it. I hate the new 48 team WC thats happening next time. Football is losing its soul and FIFA is to blame.fair play. Probably the first person i spoke to who actually does what he preaches for with respect to this topic. I might not agree with you, but respect.
Which is 'the side' that poster agrees with? The one that doesn't approve of migrant worker rights abuses and human rights abuses? Are these things you disagree with? Otherwise, I'm not sure what side you're referring to.That's not what happened and the side you agree with doesn't get to monopolize expressing opinions.
Don't start crying pedantry because you're imprecise in your posting. Try harder. Whataboutism is a diversionary tactic and a cheap one at that. It's not an attempt to counter the substance of the points made against Qatar.Counter to the narrative in this thread, but you can just call it an example if you want to be precise. Regardless, if it's not countering anything as you say how can it be whataboutism? You do understand what that word means right?
I imagine that thread would be significantly more active if China were hosting a world cup at the moment, but you'd likely be in it posting about how nobody gives a feck about human rights abuses in the middle east.No need to start another thread on the Uighurs as there's already one, unfortunately it only has a few pages as no one gives a feck.
A lot of people don't realise how damaging hypocrisy is to credibility, no one is saying you have to be squeaky clean to point out injustices, but when you have German treatment of Ozil and German clubs going to the middle East for warm weather training it does seem a bit baffling.
The entire shtick of hypocrisy is so laughable when the vast majority of whataboutism is used to defend some of the most hypocritical people on earth.It is better to be a little hypocritical while increasing net good than to be perfectly consistent at doing jack shit.
That is the problem with the accusations that get called "whataboutism" here. When people here say "why don't you support this and not that?" they are not actually asking you to support this and that. They are just asking you to shut up.
The entire shtick of hypocrisy is so laughable when the vast majority of whataboutism is used to defend some of the most hypocritical people on earth.
It's like evangelicals complaining that a certain criticism of Trumpism is untactful
It is better to be a little hypocritical while increasing net good than to be perfectly consistent at doing jack shit.
That is the problem with the accusations that get called "whataboutism" here. When people here say "why don't you support this and not that?" they are not actually asking you to support this and that. They are just asking you to shut up.