[glenstein]

I'm not sure I understand, but I like to think I was actually making a full-fledged point about the fallacy of covering for abuses by ignoring them and pointing to other abuses. Do you disagree? How can I state that point to your satisfaction without you labeling it as American exceptionalism?

[trasz]

Except nobody was suggesting to ignore them and point to other abuses - we are talking about the idea of how this kind of problems cannot occur in Western societies, because society can do things. They do, society can't do anything, and I provided an example.

[glenstein]

If that were the case, you've still misdiagnosed my point, which was still not a point about American Exceptionalism. That is, even if I was wrong to suggest this was an instance of ignore X, because what about Y, pointing out that such a thing is fallacious would not be an instance of imploring people to indulge in American Exceptionalism.

But, I don't believe I was wrong, I believe you're just confidently incorrect. You entered a thread about one subject, changed the subject to something else, and unless you were offering it as a complete non-sequitur (which you should be clear about), you were suggesting an appropriate response to criticism of China was to ask people follow you on an academic detour to a vague and largely nonresponsive point that left behind most of the previous subject, presumably because you believed that such an exercise represented forward motion in the conversation. So I do think you really are doing the "ignore that, what about this" exercise, and that is what people mean by whataboutism.