I've seen whataboutism used whenever the IDF is criticized.

[Lunabell]

The exact term was first used in print by a reader named Lionel Bloch in 1978 in a letter to the Guardian. “Sir,” writes Bloch, “your leader [article], East, West and the plight of the warring rest (May 18), is the finest piece of ‘whataboutism’ I have read in many years.” He goes on to decry the use of this tactic as a “Soviet import” used by “progressive minds” to defend communism.

But Bloch’s usage derives from earlier uses of similar terms. In a letter to the Irish Times published on January 30 1974, reader Sean O’Conaill complains about the use of the tactic by IRA defenders, to whom he refers to as “the Whatabouts”. Three days later, the Irish journalist John Healy published a column in the same paper, on the same topic, dubbing the tactic “Whataboutery”.

Formally speaking, whataboutism is a fallacy most closely related to the ad hominem fallacy, wherein a person responds to an accusation by attacking the person making it.

It is a fallacy because even if the counter-accusation is true, it doesn’t defend whoever is being accused (the lying partner, the messy child, Donald Trump) in the first place. At best, it shows that both parties behaved shamefully. And, of course, two wrongs do not make a right.


https://theconversation.com/whataboutism-what-it-is-and-why-its-such-a-popular-tactic-in-arguments-182911

[OilemFirchen]

1. Nope.

You often imagine whataboutism. And that imagined whataboutism is often a mere deflection.

Interesting article, though. Thanks!

[Lunabell]

2. But, whatabout hamas?

Whatabout all the horrible things they've done?

That's whataboutism and a poor argument.

[OilemFirchen]

3. Probably not.

In the context of the current war, mentions of the IDF and Hamas are obviously pertinent.

Of course, you know that.

[Lunabell]

4. Why can't we agree that horrible actions have taken place on both sides?

I am not on netenyahu's (he is not Israel, just an elected figurehead) side or hamas or hezbolla. I am on the side of innocent people who just want to feed, clothe, house and educate their children in peace.

Of course I oppose ALL atrocities that hurt the innocent. Neither side is in the right when it comes to this war.

[OilemFirchen]

7. I see no reason why we can't agree about that.

But this is a war resulting from an offensive attack, where the response is a defensive one. So, for example, one can decry the IDF's accidental use of improper munitions (for which they've apologized) while noting that the action was in an attempt to kill Hamas soldiers... because they're the enemy... because Hamas killed, raped, maimed and kidnapped Israelis. That's simply the truth. Absolutely relevant and absolutely not a whataboutism.

[Lunabell]

9. Whataboutisms abound from both sides.

And both sides are equally evil in killing innocents.

[marble falls]

12. Exactly: when caught in the act, deflect.

[Chainfire]

5. The whataboutism that makes me shake my head is the defenders of the IDF who insist on trying to talk

about bombings in WWII to excuse the bombings going on in Gaza as we type.

Terror bombings were wrong from 1939-1945 and they are wrong today.

[The Magistrate]

6. This Is So Cute

Because every time someone points to some conduct by Israeli as being worse, or the cause of, atrocities by Hamas, what are they doing but engaging in whataboutism?

Nor is it a fallacy. It has worked in court when trying a charge of war crimes. The chief of the Nazi submarine service, on trial for ordering survivors of torpedoed ships be killed or left to die, won acquittal by pointing to similar orders given submarine commanders in the US Pacific fleet, by men not up on charges for it.

[Lunabell]

8. There's whataboutism from both sides.

And both sides are equally evil.

[The Magistrate]

11. Now That's Mere 'Both-Sides-Ism' Ma'am

And no more true in this instance then when the Times alleges both sides have a problem with radical Representatives, citing Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and Marge Green as examples.

What you do not like is not 'whataboutism', it is the old advertising technique of 'compare and contrast'. Deoderant X fails in two hours, our brand keeps you minty fresh all day long! That you do not like its employment is understandable, as one side comes out looking far worse than the other on dispassionate examination of events.


"The willfully ignorant can't be taught. The stupid can't be reasoned with. The moral cretin can't be rescued."

[OilemFirchen]

10. Super meta as well.

It's a whataboutism about whataboutism.

"But what about whataboutism!" is a strange complaint.

[The Magistrate]

13. The Claim It Was First Identified In The Early Seventies Does Make Me Grin

It's old enough for a Latin tag: Tu quoque....

[Lithos]

14. It was great to see you sir!

Hope you and yours are well. Those who have been here all rise - for The Magistrate has served on Samar!

For those who have watched the I/P debate for many years - well, to borrow a Dickensian meme:



Always think of these children -

Argumentum ad Misericordiam, and Tu Quoque