2017-08-28 00:39:02 来源:参考消息网 责任编辑:陈雪莲

ince President Donald Trump's political rise, pundits and news junkies have learned what seems like an entirely new vocabulary to discuss his rhetoric: gaslighting, alternative facts, fake news. What about whataboutism?

During a press conference on Tuesday, Trump spouted a textbook example of the practice. In addressing his tepid, vague denunciation of the protests that led to fatal violence in Charlottesville, Virginia, over the weekend, he responded, “What about the alt-left that came charging at, as you say, at the alt-right? … You had a group on one side that was bad. You had a group on the other side that was also very violent.” That is to say, neo-Nazis and Ku Klux Klan members may be bad, but people on the other side have also done bad things. What about them?

Whataboutism refers to the practice of deflecting criticism by pointing to the misdeeds of others. Oxford Dictionaries defines it as “the technique or practice of responding to an accusation or difficult question by making a counter-accusation or raising a different issue.”

Essentially, it's an appeal to hypocrisy — a logical fallacy also known as “tu quoque.” Instead of proving that your opponent's claim is wrong on its face, whataboutism argues that it's hypocritical of the opponent to make that claim at all.

Fears of impending whataboutism do not appear to have been exaggerated. Pundits have been noticing Trump's proclivity for the “what about” defense for months. Even since taking office, the president has been quick to respond to accusations of collusion or corruption by pointing to the alleged misdeeds of his former opponent, Hillary Clinton.

He's also resorted, weirdly enough, to the inverse. In a February interview, Bill O'Reilly challenged Trump on his support for Putin, calling him “a killer.” “There are a lot of killers,” retorted Trump. “You think our country's so innocent?” In a Foreign Policy column, Jake Sullivan explained what he was doing: “The American president is taking Putin's ‘what about you’ tactic and turning it into ‘what about us?’” If we can do it, Russia can; if Hillary can, so can I. It justifies anything Trump or his allies might want to do, somehow or another.

To be sure, hypocrisy is bad. The Soviets were not incorrect in pointing out that the countries that criticized them often harbored their own systemic human rights issues. It's no wonder that whataboutism exists, to some degree, on (as Trump would say) many sides.

Political supporters of every stripe are eager to hold opponents accountable for their double standards, and that is a human and, to some extent, good impulse — especially during a campaign, when making clear the actual distinctions between candidates is useful. It is, however, unusual for an American political leader to engage in the practice so frequently and blatantly; deflecting accountability is for surrogates and supporters, not elected officials themselves.

The problem with whataboutism is that hypocrisy is a durable problem (humans being flawed and inconsistent), but it is not the only problem. Forever circling around each other's hypocrisies pulls us away from necessary conversations about how to reach for and enforce the values we aspire to and hold each other accountable for wrongdoing. This is particularly crucial when it comes to our leadership. With all the power of the American government behind him, the president has every responsibility to reach toward our most aspirational ideals. Whataboutism provides an excuse for our most powerful to evade self-reflection and self-improvement. That's not an excuse the American president needs — not now, not ever.






  1. 1摆脱马六甲困局?外媒传泰国欲求助中国修建克
  2. 2参考睿评|中国在马六甲海峡投下这枚棋子,新
  3. 3这是一条神奇的铁路,非洲人民都震惊了!
  4. 4境外媒体:中国就中印对峙采用舆论战、心理战
  5. 5俄在中印对峙中如何行事?俄媒:西方在煽动
  6. 6美刊称中印持久僵局或酿武装冲突:印度将再被
  7. 7内蒙古变化令蒙古国人感到“震惊”
  8. 8军情锐评:美军撞船谁的“锅”?轰-20或有“
  9. 9港媒称轰-20有望今年试飞:战力5倍于轰-6K
  10. 10日刊认为印度经济无法超越中国