when whataboutism can be ok

I've been thinking for a while about writing about whataboutism. In today's political environment, it seems like a relevant topic to keep in mind. I will attempt to keep this post as clear of specific politics as possible, because my argument is broader than any specific issue.

Without looking up the exact definition, whataboutism essentially the logical fallacy of responding to an accusation by pointing out that everyone does it. For example:

"You stole! That's wrong!"
"Who doesn't steal?"

Or, to put it into a political context:

Mike: "Smith, whom you like, is acting unethically by doing X, Y and Z."
Joe: "But his predecessor, Davis, also did X, Y and Z."

It's considered a logical fallacy because a whataboutist argument doesn't actually do anything to explain that the action is justified. So what if other people steal? It's still wrong.

But in some contexts, the whataboutist approach is illuminating. Suppose someone tells you that the Mets are a lousy baseball team. "They haven't even managed to go a whole game without striking out," your interlocutor says. In this case, noting that no team has ever played a complete game without striking out* is perfectly valid.

More importantly, though, a whataboutist argument can be getting at whether a person is arguing in good faith. Getting back to the exchange between Mike and Joe above, Joe could be noting that Mike is being disingenuous -- he doesn't really care about Smith doing X, Y and Z, as evidenced by the fact that he didn't care about Davis doing X, Y and Z. Mike is only bringing it up because he already hates Smith and is happy to seize any argument. And that can be a legitimate point to make.

Now, Mike may have a good counterargument. For example, there may have been mitigating circumstances that rendered Davis' actions justified (and which didn't apply to Smith's sitiuation). But in that case that's an argument for Mike to make; simply waving his hands and dismissing Joes' response as "whataboutism" is not a sufficient retort.



*To be honest, I have no idea if this is true or not, but that's not the point.