Whataboutism

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Whataboutism is a term for the Tu quoque logical fallacy popularized by The Economist for describing the use of the fallacy by the Soviet Union in its dealings with the Western world during the Cold War. The tactic was used when criticisms were leveled at the Soviet Union, wherein the response would be "What about..." followed by the naming of an event in the Western world loosely similar to the original item of criticism.[1][2] It represents a case of tu quoque or the appeal to hypocrisy, a logical fallacy which attempts to discredit the opponent's position by asserting the opponent's failure to act consistently in accordance with that position, without directly refuting or disproving the opponent's initial argument.

Overview[edit]

In 1986, when the Soviet Union belatedly announced a serious nuclear accident in Chernobyl, Ukraine after Western nations reported detecting unusually high radioactivity levels, it did so in one paragraph. The New York Times stated that[3]

The terse Soviet announcement of the Chernobyl accident was followed by a Tass dispatch noting that there had been many mishaps in the United States, ranging from Three Mile Island outside Harrisburg, Pa., to the Ginna plant near Rochester. Tass said an American antinuclear group registered 2,300 accidents, breakdowns and other faults in 1979.

The practice of focusing on disasters elsewhere when one occurs in the Soviet Union is so common that after watching a report on Soviet television about a catastrophe abroad, Russians often call Western friends to find out whether something has happened in the Soviet Union.

At the end of the Cold War the usage of the tactic began dying out, but saw a resurgence in post-Soviet Russia in relation to a number of human rights violations and other criticisms expressed to the Russian government.[1] The Guardian writer Miriam Elder noted how Vladimir Putin's government per Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov used the tactic, but also how most criticisms on human rights violations have generally gone unanswered. Peskov responded to Elder's article on the difficulty of dry-cleaning in Moscow with a whataboutism on the difficulty Russians experience in obtaining a visa to the United Kingdom.[4] In July 2012, RIA Novosti columnist Konstantin von Eggert wrote an article about the use of whataboutism in relation to Russian and American support for different governments in the Middle East.[5]

Although the use of whataboutism is not restricted to any particular race or belief system, according to The Economist, Russians often overuse the tactic. There are two methods of properly countering Whataboutism. The first is to "use points made by Russian leaders themselves" so that they cannot be applied to a Western nation and the second method is for Western nations to apply more self-criticism in its media and its governmental statements.[1]

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c Staff writer (January 31, 2008). "Whataboutism". The Economist. Retrieved May 16, 2012. 
  2. ^ Staff writer (December 11, 2008). "The West is in danger of losing its moral authority". European Voice. Retrieved May 16, 2012. 
  3. ^ Schmemann, Serge (1986-04-29). "Soviet Announces Nuclear Accident at Electric Plant". The New York Times. pp. A1. Retrieved 26 April 2014. 
  4. ^ Miriam Elder (April 26, 2012). "Want a response from Putin's office? Russia's dry-cleaning is just the ticket". The Guardian. Retrieved May 16, 2012. 
  5. ^ Konstantin von Eggert (July 25, 2012). "Due West: 'Whataboutism' Is Back - and Thriving". RIA Novosti.