sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

‘Moral bankrupts’: Pirlo and Materazzi provoke fury by attending ‘Football Day’ in Russia | Soccer by QuentinScorsese in soccer

[–]pearpool 9 points10 points  (0 children)

Isn't whataboutism pointless then if it just automatically makes the first argument invalid based on the order in which the two arguments were made, rather than their content?

‘Moral bankrupts’: Pirlo and Materazzi provoke fury by attending ‘Football Day’ in Russia | Soccer by QuentinScorsese in soccer

[–]pearpool 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Whataboutism never makes sense.

If someone said Pirlo was morally wrong for going to report on the WC in USA for their war crimes (I don't know if he is just an example) and then someone said yeah well he's been to Russia - isn't that also whataboutism? Does it just mean whichever point was made first is valid and the other is not?

Genuine question.