LogFAQs > #905677285

To change the subject a bit I've been annoyed about whataboutism lately. The word has been thrown around a lot since Trump started his campaign because people keep using it to defend him.

The thing about whataboutism is that it's not at all a bad thing to do sometimes, as far as I can see. It exposes double standards and agendas. Like are you really attacking Trump because you care about issue X, or are you just doing it because you want to attack Trump? And if so, what about when Bill Clinton or Obama did something similar - did you attack them then? And then the person admits their double standard or (more likely) explains how the two issues are different, clarifying why he thinks what Trump did is bad but what Obama did is fine. But that's good - clarifying your exact stance is great and part of why we have arguments.

I don't think it's inherently a bad thing, but obviously the danger is that the topic of conversation shifts away from the person currently being accused and obviously you can draw false equivalencies. But that can be avoided if you do it honestly.

People are up in arms to accuse people of whataboutism at the moment, sometimes with merit, but it's not absolutely wrong imo. It's not inherently a deflecting tactic, it exposes dishonesty or maybe subconscious double standards people have. The problem is it's being used as one, used dishonestly. But that doesn't mean the word should just be thrown around every time like it's the worst thing. I keep seeing people accuse each other of whataboutism and it's like...well yeah, they're trying to expose your double standard or to see if you have one.

Idk, am I wrong? It's such a popular word at the moment.
---

Not to be confused with XIII_Stones.