Whataboutism

{{logicnav}}
{{cquote|This tweet is to give notice that the argument "[[Not as bad as|there are bigger problems than this!]]" will no longer be an acceptable diversion unless you are personally working to stop the inevitable Heat Death of the Universe.|||Katie Mack<ref>https://twitter.com/AstroKatie/status/1031565426524872704</ref>}}
'''Whataboutism''' (also known as '''Whataboutery''' especially in the [[UK]]) is a deflection or [[red herring]] version of the classic [[tu quoque]] logical fallacy — sometimes implementing the [[balance fallacy]] as well — which is employed as a propaganda technique. It is used as a diversionary tactic to shift the focus off of an issue and avoid having to directly address it. This technique works by twisting criticism back onto the critic and in doing so revealing the original critic's [[hypocrisy]]. The usual syntax is "What about...?" followed by an issue on the opponent's side which is ''vaguely'', if at all, related to the original issue.

The tactic is an old favorite of the [[Soviet Union]],<ref>''The New Cold War: How the Kremlin Menaces Both Russia and the West'' by Edward Lucas (2009) Bloomsbury Publishing. ISBN 9780747596363.</ref>{{rp|307}} and political actors across the spectrum to shift focus from uncomfortable criticisms. The strategy was originally used in the form of "And at your place, [[Lynch mob|they hang black people]]."<ref>{{wpa|And you are lynching Negroes}}</ref> The term 'whataboutery' itself, however, only dates back to 1974 with its use in [[The Troubles]] in [[Northern Ireland]],<ref>whataboutery, noun. ''Oxford English Dictionary''.</ref> whereas the term 'whataboutism' dates back to 1978 with reference to the Soviet Union.<ref>whataboutism, noun. ''Oxford English Dictionary''.</ref>

In recent years, whataboutism made a comeback in Russia under [[Vladimir Putin]]'s regime (since they seemingly learned ''all the wrong lessons'' from the Cold War),{{cn}} and has also seen a rise in usage by [[Donald Trump]], his support base, and the rest of the [[far-right]].<ref>[https://www.npr.org/2017/03/17/520435073/trump-embraces-one-of-russias-favorite-propaganda-tactics-whataboutism Trump Embraces One Of Russia's Favorite Propaganda Tactics — Whataboutism]</ref>

Simply put, whataboutism refers to the bringing up of one issue in order to distract from the discussion of another. It does not apply to the comparison and analysis of two similar issues in terms such as why some are given more social prominence than others. Whataboutism can be found in many walks of life, not just the political arena, but among religious apologists, and even within rival factions of sports fandom.

==Examples==
*As mentioned, one of the most common examples of this fallacy was Soviet responses to criticism by pointing out the [[United States]]' own failings, such as the mob lynching of blacks. "And you are [[lynching]] Negroes" (or "And you are hanging blacks", as the term ''Negro'' fell into disrepute) was a common joke in the [[Soviet Union]] at the [[United States|United States']] expense,<ref group=note>In reference to organizations such as the [[Ku Klux Klan]].</ref> used when Americans accused the Soviets of violating [[human rights]]. While often just an informal joke, sometimes this argument was used seriously. It's a ''[[tu quoque]]'' argument and a type of whataboutism.<ref>It is in fact the first usage of the term "Whataboutism", [http://www.economist.com/node/10598774 used by the ''Economist''].</ref> Instead of attempting to justify the behavior of the Soviet Union, this argument is an easy way to deflect blame onto America by implying they're hypocrites.<ref group=note>This joke first began in the 1920s and carried on to the 1960s; after that, the US [[civil rights movement]] started to make the argument seem less and less relevant.</ref>
**[[Russia]] invading a country is okay because '''[[Iraq War|IRAQ]]''' and '''{{wpl|2011 military intervention in Libya|LIBYA|.}}'''<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20140304183144/http://theweek.com/article/index/257342/no-the-iraq-war-does-not-give-putin-the-right-to-invade-ukraine</ref>
**A complaint about the excessive bureaucracy involved in getting some clothes dry-cleaned was met with a complaint about the difficulty in getting a UK visa for Russian citizens.<ref>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/apr/26/russia-abuses-bureaucracy-putin-drycleaning</ref>
**In a rare reversal, Russia was accused of hypocrisy after highlighting the war crimes committed by Australian military personnel in Afghanistan.<ref>[https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-30/russia-condemns-afghanistan-war-crimes/12933224 Russia accused of 'hypocrisy' after attacking Australia over Afghanistan war crimes report]</ref>
** When the {{wpl|International Olympic Committee}} (IOC) suspended Russia's membership of its sub-committee in 2023 amidst the country's invasion of Ukraine the year prior, forcing athletes previously competing under the "Russian Olympic Committee" flag (after the country was previously sanctioned for its systematic doping programme) to represent themselves individually as neutral athletes under a specially designated banner, Russia saw a quick opportunity to accuse the IOC of [[double standards]] as they gave [[Israel]] a free pass despite them carrying out an invasion of [[Gaza]].<ref>{{cite web |last=Stynes |first=Trevor |date=6 November 2023 |editor-last=Radnedge |editor-first=Christian |title=CAS registers Russian appeal against Olympic membership suspension |url=https://www.reuters.com/sports/cas-registers-russian-appeal-against-olympic-membership-suspension-2023-11-06/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231113001630/https://www.reuters.com/sports/cas-registers-russian-appeal-against-olympic-membership-suspension-2023-11-06/ |archive-date=13 November 2023 |website=[[Reuters]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |author=Mann, Brian |date=8 November 2023 |title=Russia says International Olympic Committee is giving Israel a pass on Gaza |url=https://www.npr.org/2023/11/08/1211483883/olympics-russia-israel-gaza-sanctions-ioc |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231230083355/https://www.npr.org/2023/11/08/1211483883/olympics-russia-israel-gaza-sanctions-ioc |archive-date=30 December 2023 |newspaper=[[NPR]]}}</ref>
[[File:Jewbelong billboard.jpg|thumb|right]]
*Another similar term, whataboutery, was coined during [[The Troubles]] to describe deflection of criticisms of the [[Irish Republican Army|Provisional IRA]].<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20180506151633/https://blog.oxforddictionaries.com/2017/09/13/whataboutery-whataboutism/</ref>
*During the 1970s, American political satirist Art Buchwald coined the phrase "What about Chappaquiddick?", in reference to [[Richard Nixon]]'s supporters deflecting the Watergate scandal by bringing up Democratic scandals, namely the {{wpl|Chappaquiddick incident|Chappaquiddick incident.}}<ref>[https://www.kansascity.com/opinion/opn-columns-blogs/syndicated-columnists/article187662578.html Oh yeah? Well, what about Chappaquiddick?]</ref>
* [[Lost Cause of the South|Lost Cause]] proponents will often use some variation of "But what about the Northern states' crimes? What about Sherman's March to the Sea? What about Lincoln and Grant being racist? What about [[Not as bad as|Native American genocide]]?" to deflect from criticisms of the Confederacy.
*In the current era, a rather common use of whataboutism is seen from defenders of Israel.<ref>http://blogs.tribune.com.pk/story/23605/why-have-the-pakistani-liberals-forsaken-gaza/</ref><ref>http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/mehdi-hasan/israel-gaza_b_5591954.html</ref><ref>https://books.google.com/books?id=PHsOCwAAQBAJ&pg=PA44&lpg=PA44&dq=Israel+whataboutery&source=bl&ots=nrKHkSfVV9&sig=xYCirzr6mKTwY0n28bSaYUDYdZQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwim1cTI2afKAhVCQyYKHRC6DS84ChDoAQgnMAI#v=onepage&q=Israel%20whataboutery&f=false</ref> No matter what Israel does to inspire global protests and objections — such as the 2014 "Operation Protective Edge" that killed over 2,000 Palestinians in Gaza, a quarter of them children<ref>http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/2015/feb/13/ap-exclusive-high-civilian-death-toll-in-gaza/</ref> — many Israel-defenders try to change the conversation by asking "What about [fill in the blank with Iran, Ukraine, etc.]", in order to suggest that Israel's critics single out the country for criticism and do not care about any other atrocities in the world, a claim no more rational than suggesting people who work in animal shelters hate the homeless. Some even admit to the whataboutism, but think it is nevertheless at least partially justified: "It is whataboutery, yes, but a legitimate piece of whataboutery I believe."<ref>https://web.archive.org/web/20140814053835/http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/brendanoneill2/100282957/the-one-piece-of-whataboutery-that-israel-bashers-have-no-answer-to</ref>
*In response to criticism of China's human rights record at a meeting of the UN Human Rights Council, Chinese diplomat Fu Cong told the Council, “The US is notorious for prison abuse at Guantanamo prison, its gun violence is rampant, racism is its deep-rooted malaise. The United States conducts large-scale extra-territorial eavesdropping, uses drones to attack other countries’ innocent civilians, its troops on foreign soil commit rape and murder of local people. It conducts kidnapping overseas and uses black prisons."<ref>http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/mar/10/china-attacks-us-hypocrisy-un-human-rights-council</ref>
*Cuba will often criticize various (admittedly bad) United States domestic policies to direct attention away from its own domestic policy failures. One example comes in the form of a reprimanding of American treatment of Puerto Rico, an island with over a century of American control under its belt.<ref>http://en.granma.cu/mundo/2016-06-21/cuba-calls-for-an-end-to-the-colonial-status-of-puerto-rico-at-the-united-nations</ref>
*[[Augusto Pinochet]]'s secret police DINA took several photos of British prisons in Northern Ireland during [[The Troubles]], in order to deflect from British criticisms of the Pinochet regime's human rights abuses at the United Nations.<ref>[http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/ch02-08.htm Activities of Virgilio Paz in Northern Ireland during 1975], National Security Archive</ref>
*Whenever criticism of Islam comes up, its apologists typically tend to do the following.<ref group=note>A distinction between criticizing Islam and [[Islamophobia]] must be made, however. For instance, Islamophobia would be [[Cherry picking|picking a few violent verses from the Quran]] and then concluding that Islam and its followers are evil. Criticism would be how violent and cruel the Quran is and how it conflicts with modern society's morals.</ref>
*:1. [[Non sequitur|Randomly invoke US foreign policy]] (the textbook definition of whataboutism).
*:2. Appeal to the [[Crusades]] as if they were recent events (while [[handwave|handwaving]] ''contemporary'' [[Jihad|Islamist terrorism]]).
*:3. Recite (admittedly horrible) quotes from the Old Testament, [[Jonanism|even when their opponent is neither Jewish nor Christian]], nor has even invoked the Bible to begin with and despite the fact that many Muslims actually tend to believe in the Old Testament too.
*:4. (Specifically when discussing Islamic antisemitism) Ask why the Jewish person asking isn't concerned about white Christian antisemitism, even if the Jewish person is.
*At home in the rationalism community, the "Dear Muslima" or "[[Elevatorgate]]" kerfuffle was an incident where [[Richard Dawkins]] used whataboutery to dismiss a woman's conference-creep experiences, implying that her complaint wasn't justified because Muslim women suffer more than her.
*[[Donald Trump]]: "What about the alt-left that came charging at the, as you say, the alt-right? Do they have any semblance of guilt?"<ref>Schwartz, Ian. [https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2017/08/15/trump_to_fake_news_what_about_the_alt-left_that_came_charging_at_the_alt-right_do_they_have_any_guilt.html Trump to "Fake News": What About The Alt-Left That Came Charging At The Alt-Right? Do They Have Any Guilt?] RealClearPolitics. August 15, 2017.</ref>
**While we're at it, basically anytime somebody invokes [[Hillary Clinton]], [[Bill Clinton]], or [[Barack Obama]] in a topic about Trump.
**Or bringing up China and [[Hunter Biden]] whenever someone points at [[Trump-Russia connection|Trump's Russian connections]].
*On the rare event in presidential debates when US imperialism is criticized, the politicians bring up [[9/11]] for no reason except to derail the discussion and have the mindless audience cheer.{{fact}}
*[[Feminism]] isn't needed in the first world because The [[Middle East]].
*On the same note, MRAs will oftentimes derail conversations on women's issues by screaming "what about men's issues?" when it's not relevant.
*[[Noam Chomsky]] has an occasional bad habit here, despite being the source of one of the most famous quotes regarding the issue — see his comments on the atrocities in Cambodia and Charlie Hebdo attacks in particular.
*[[Neo-Nazi]] {{wpl|American Front}} leader Bob Heick responding to Geraldo Rivera's evocation of the Holocaust [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FjNTq6w6xQ4 by literally shouting "What about Josef Stalin?!"]
*[[Ann Coulter]] defended [[Roy Moore]]’s alleged molesting of teenage girls by accusing [[John F. Kennedy]] of doing the same.
*Defenders/enablers of the [[2021 U.S. Capitol riot]] often deflect criticism by pointing to real or perceived (but mostly the latter) riots by [[Antifa]] and [[Black Lives Matter]] in an attempt to justify the riot without actually addressing the Capitol riot itself. This is also factually inaccurate, since almost all of at least the BLM protests were peaceful and the rioters generally did not associate themselves with the protestors. As for Antifa, the right has been known to overdramatize and overexaggerate the violence, which is usually just confined to things like setting wastebins on fire.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/|title=Demonstrations & Political Violence in America: New Data for Summer 2020|date=September 3, 2020|website=ACLED|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=January 21, 2021}}</ref> Additionally, neither of them have tried to take down a democratically elected government.{{nofact}}
* The USA's admittedly horrid for-profit prison system is often used by tankies and anti-American nationalists to justify their own mass incarcerations and abuses. For instance, "[[China]] is just doing standard counter-terrorism by incarcerating a few million [[Uighur genocide|Uighurs]]! If you have a problem with the usage of imprisonment, why don't you do something about the 3 million people in the '''''AmeriKKKan''''' prison system!"<ref>{{cite web | title=The View's Sunny Hostin Under Fire for Equating US and China's Moral Standards in Controversial Statement | website=Voice of Uyghur-UNN | date=2023-04-03 | url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230404015013/https://uyghurtimes.com/posts/1a562170-5fe7-44fc-ac19-1d13e26d47de/The-View's-Sunny-Hostin-Under-Fire-for-Equating-US-and-China's-Moral-Standards-in-Controversial-Statement | access-date=2023-05-17}}</ref><ref>{{cite web | last=Kruta | first=Virginia | title=Sunny Hostin Blows Off China’s Concentration Camps, Says It’s Worse That America Puts Black People In Jail | website=The Daily Wire | date=2023-03-28 | url=https://www.dailywire.com/news/sunny-hostin-blows-off-chinas-concentration-camps-says-its-worse-that-america-puts-black-people-in-jail | access-date=2023-05-17}}</ref>
* {{wpl|Robert E. Kelly}} and [[Brian Reynolds Myers]] attract North Korean war crimes issues that are not directly related to [[World War II]] to criticize South Koreans' anti-Japanese sentiment caused by {{wpl|Japanese war crimes}} and [[Historical revisionism#Denialists|Japanese historical revisionism]] during World War II. They argue that South Korea should abandon its anti-Japanese sentiment and be close to Japan, and instead show anti-North Korean hostility.<ref>Kelly, Robert E. (4 June 2015). [http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2015/06/04/why_south_korea_is_so_obsessed_with_japan_108014.html "Why South Korea is So Obsessed with Japan"]. Real Clear Defense.</ref><ref>See [[Brian Reynolds Myers#Japanese war crimes issues]]</ref> Similarly, when South Korean liberals make legitimate anger-based accusations of Japanese ultra-nationalist historical revisionism, [[Shin Ki-wook]] attacks South Korean liberals' anti-Japanese "Korean ethnic nationalism".
* In the wake of the racist mass shooting at a supermarket in Buffalo NY, connections were drawn between the shooter's belief in the [[Great Replacement]] theory which was echoed by [[Tucker Carlson]]. [[Glenn Greenwald]] and Tucker's defenders online brought up the shooting at a congressional baseball game by a [[Bernie Sanders]] supporter and [[Rachel Maddow]] watcher.
* America shouldn't have to do anything about climate change because China.<ref name="Monbiot 2015">{{cite web | last=Monbiot | first=George | title=Stop using China as an excuse for inaction on climate change | website=the Guardian | date=2015-06-12 | url=http://www.theguardian.com/environment/georgemonbiot/2015/jun/12/china-excuse-inaction-on-climate-change | access-date=2023-05-17}}</ref>
* China shouldn't have to do anything about climate change because America.<ref>{{cite web | last=Brown | first=Matthew | last2=Press | first2=Associated | title=China envoy defends emissions at climate summit, criticizes U.S. under Trump | website=PBS NewsHour | date=2021-11-02 | url=https://www.pbs.org/newshour/world/china-envoy-defends-emissions-at-climate-summit-criticizes-u-s-under-trump | access-date=2023-05-17}}</ref>
* Some defenders of [[Qatar]] hosting the 2022 FIFA World Cup, which was accused of exploiting laborers to death, bribery, and concerns for LGBT rights, have constantly invoked it was hypocritical that the U.S. was granted the 2026 tournament despite global and domestic human rights violations without being criticized for getting the hosting gig, or that Germany was still given the 2006 edition despite allegation of bribery.
* During a 60 Minutes interview about sportswashing in Saudi Arabia, the Saudi minister of sports invoked mass shootings in the U.S. as a concern for the 2026 World Cup and that the country was granted hosting of the event despite them as a response when he was asked about human rights concerns in the kingdom that has been using sports for economic gain and whitewashing its global image, including getting granted the 2034 World Cup.<ref> 
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iJDvyB1DLM Saudi Arabia becomes unlikely sports hub amid sportswashing accusations | 60 Minutes ]</ref>
* When Karim Khan, chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, was considering arrest warrants on [[Benjamin Netanyahu]] for [[crimes against humanity]] against [[Palestine]], Republican politicians like [[Marco Rubio]], [[Ted Cruz]], and [[Tom Cotton]] jointly threatened Khan with sanctions and randomly brought up [[China]]/[[Iran]]/[[Syria]] to deflect from [[Israel]]'s own crimes.<ref>[https://zeteo.com/p/exclusive-you-have-been-warned-republican EXCLUSIVE: “You Have Been Warned”: Republican Senators Threaten the ICC Prosecutor over Possible Israel Arrest Warrants]</ref> Ironically, their whining [[Horseshoe theory|parallels]] that of [[Vladimir Putin]] after he placed Khan on a sanctions list over an arrest warrant for war crimes in [[Ukraine]].

==Criticisms==
Several commentators have also noted that whataboutism accusations themselves can be used as a method of deflection in debates.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180801170539/https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2018/08/theres-no-such-thing-as-whataboutism.html|title=There's No Such Thing As "Whataboutism"|last=Rhode|first=Jason|date=August 1, 2018|website=Paste Magazine|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=August 16, 2018}}</ref> Professor of journalism Christian Christensen argued that whataboutism accusations can enable double standards by dismissing criticisms of one's own behavior by focusing on those of others, while whataboutism itself can be useful in pointing out double standards and contradictions present in society.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150128080444/http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2015/1/whataboutism-charlie-hebdo-king-abdullah.html|title=We need ‘whataboutism’ now more than ever|last=Christensen|first=Christian|date=January 26, 2015|website=Al-Jazeera English|archive-url=|archive-date=|dead-url=|access-date=August 16, 2018}}</ref> Christensen cited the example of Noam Chomsky being accused of whataboutism when Chomsky pointed out the double standards in Western leaders' condemnation of the [[Charlie Hebdo]] attacks by Islamic extremists, and their eulogies for [[Saudi Arabia]]'s King Abdullah, in spite of their shared views in Islamic fundamentalism and disregard for human rights. In such cases, state violence and human rights violations by "them", i.e. opponents of the Western world, are often framed as innate and systemic, while similar violence by "us" i.e. the Western world and its allies, are framed as necessary evils to defend the democratic system.

The general rule of thumb is that it's OK to point out hypocrisy if there actually are double standards being applied rather than just a diversion tactic, though the demarcation is not well defined. For instance, if Alice steals a lawnmower from Bob, and Bob takes Alice to court, Alice would not be in the right for pointing out that Charlie stole Denise's car without repercussion, because stealing a lawnmower is still a crime even if a lesser crime than car theft, nor is the law being applied unfairly when it comes to Alice. But if Bob had stolen Alice's snow-blower a few months prior without any repercussions, Alice would indeed have a legitimate grievance as the law is clearly only being applied in one direction. The question arises whether that grievance remains legitimate if it was Charlie instead of Bob who stole the snow-blower from Alice; one crime is being pursued over another to Alice's disfavor, but Bob is not being treated unfairly by the law in this case.

So let's say Russia placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, to which the US responds rather aggressively, it could indeed be a legitimate complaint to say "what about your missiles pointed at the USSR in Turkey?", as it's virtually the same scenario with the parties reversed. It would become less legitimate of a grievance if the defense was "what about China pointing missiles at the USSR?" as it's a similar scenario but doesn't involve one of the parties, a much less legitimate argument if it's "what about India's missiles pointed at Pakistan" as they are both separate parties, and completely illegitimate if it's "what about racism in Brazil" as it's both a completely different scenario with no connection to either original party.

In summation, the same problem can exist in multiple cultures or organizations at the same time to varying degrees, so drawing attention to a problem in one culture or organization to deflect attention from the same problem or a similar problem in another culture or organization is little more than a dirty debating trick.

==See also==
*[[Red herring]]
*[[Stalin apologetics]]
*[[Flying carpet fallacy]]
*[[Not as bad as]]

==External links==
*{{wpa|And you are lynching Negroes}}
*[http://www.economist.com/node/10598774 The Economist article that popularized the term]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20180801170539/https://www.pastemagazine.com/articles/2018/08/theres-no-such-thing-as-whataboutism.html Article criticizing overuse of the term]

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2|80%}}

{{logfal}}

[[Category:Whataboutism| ]]
[[Category:Denialism]]
[[Category:History of communism]]
[[Category:Authoritarianism]]
[[Category:Ad hominem]]
[[Category:Fallacious arguments]]
[[Category:Totalitarianism]]

Categories: Whataboutism, Denialism, History of communism, Authoritarianism, Ad hominem, Fallacious arguments, Totalitarianism