But does that mean it was wrong of me to create this documentary? Not necessarily. If people watch my film and take action to reduce worldwide emissions, it's likely to cancel out the carbon cost of making the film in the first place.
This is absurd in any practical sense, but it's being used to dismiss all kinds of people's arguments simply because they have to actually live in the real world, rather than some ideological fantasy land.
It's a good thing because if some countries went down a political path, it would be very adverse to our self interests and the interests of the world at large (Iran 1979, Cuba 1959, Germany 1939, etc).
Also, "the right thing to do," is a very relative term.
You should read some right winger stuff now and again. It's another world.
(I could give plenty of instances of liberal hypocrisy too, but that isn't the subject at hand.)
I think a more accurate model is that people pick their tribe emotionally, and then "their guy" can do no wrong while "the other guy" is the devil incarnate. All manners of hypocrisy are forgiven in the process.
Rhetoric such as the use of logical fallacies like tu quoque is most effective on people who haven't picked a tribe yet. Dyed-in-the-wool supporters have the job of repeating the fallacies aimed at the other guy. It doesn't matter if they believe them or not.
I suspect for our only two viable political parties, that's a feature, not a bug.