That is sort of the definition of the informal red herring fallacy whataboutism. It doesn’t mean the US hasn’t. It means it’s not related to China being wrong to use military power to bully countries. An awful lot of folks here agree it’s wrong for anyone to bully anyone in any context, especially nations bullying the people of another country. We are all, after all, people. But people citing a fallacy when a fallacy is used is fully appropriate, even if you really wish it wasn’t a fallacy.
I don't have a problem with the US bullying others. My problem is that people here on HN and in the west in general, demonizing China for doing the exact same thing when the US has done worse. They think it's ok to boycott Chinese products, but they won't boycott product from their own country. They will say that the Chinese government is evil, but is completely ok with the government of their own. They will say China has no right to bully Vietnam, but they will vote in politicians who advocate for war with just about anyone.
It's hypocritical. Don't demonize China unless you're willing to demonize yourself.
Hell, don't demonize China unless you read their point of view too. I'm sure you're only getting one POV.
> My problem is that people here on HN and in the west in general, demonizing China for doing the exact same thing when the US has done worse
Er, no. Far more ink is spilled on the US being bad, or Western countries in general being bad, by people in the West. What you're saying is not true for HN, nor for the West in general.
Because China's government is the CCP, which is the sole political party of China, which is headed by a dictator, whose endgame is to ultimately have all power concentrated into his hands, forever.
We're not demonizing Chinese people, Chinese culture, Chinese land or Chinese industry, but the forceful alignment of those things to serve a single entity over any other concern.
The West, no matter how bad it can be, doesn't have _that_ problem. Elites come and go, grassroots revolutions have happened and will keep happening without major bloodshed.
> through incentives and pressure on consortium members.
No doubt this would be "bribes and threats" if it were done by a geopolitical opponent.
Second, posts critical of the US tend to get many less votes or flagged quickly, with people calling it whataboutism in posts about China or Russia. That leaves no space to properly discuss those things.
Finally, it’s good to have things in a realist context. It’s idealist thinking if we get upset when a geopolitical enemy does something which is commonplace in out own country and that if allies.
Poster: But the US does it too and has done it for far longer and more often.
Average HN reply: Omg, whataboutism.