But that's not a "fallacy", it's a legitimate argument -- in court it's called "standing".
If you are accusing me of something you yourself are guilty, then you have no "standing" in the court of public opinion.
And here's how you know I'm right: you yourself use "tu quoque" logic whenever that suits your own purposes.
Consider just one example of a Lost Cause tu quoque argument: "Northerners were slavers too!"
Trying to portray me as a hypocrite for quoting the "British Press" from 1862 is not "standing."
And here's how you know I'm right: you yourself use "tu quoque" logic whenever that suits your own purposes.
*THAT* is also tu quoque! Hillarious!
Consider just one example of a Lost Cause tu quoque argument: "Northerners were slavers too!"
That would be tu quoque if it were used as a pejorative or an accusation, but when it's used to point out the obvious fact that the war effort was not directed at "slavery", *BECAUSE* northerners also had slavery and were not attacked, it is *NOT* a tu quoque.
It is pointing out that people who claim the war was about slavery are mistaken, because nobody in the north was attacked for having slavery.