I’m hard pressed to think of a place which has had it’s character extracted.
Sure, tourism can change places, excessive tourism can harm the culture of a place, but in all but extreme cases I think that’s a pretty hollow argument - culture is always transient. Conservatives always argue against change and external influences.
Whataboutism is to suggest that thing A isn’t really a problem because thing B has other similar characteristics. However, an assertion that A through Z all share the same characteristics is to suggest that an argument against the existence of thing A on those grounds is absurd.


This is a dramatic generalisation.
There are plenty of tourist destinations that people love because they are over-run with tourists - the very antithesis of your comment.
I’m not really sure how tourists are ruining the housing market on mount everest. As an aside, I suspect the locals are generally pretty happy with the tourism industry on and around mount everest.
Of course there are examples of tourism disaffecting locals, but these cases are really limited. In general, tourism is a great industry for regional centres.