What about Whataboutism?

We continue to explore the deep cultural and philosophical roots of The Great Genocide Blood Libel. As always, book serialisations are available for paid subscribers.

Introduction: The Genocide of Truth

Chapter 1: Truth // Chapter 2: Ideology // Chapter 3: Religion // Chapter 4: Science // Chapter 5: Attention

What do we think about whataboutism? Legitimate rebuttal or the ultimate tool of diversion? Although it may be unfashionable, let us examine the evidence.

For those resting in blissful ignorance, whataboutism is the one word answer should one deign to speak about any foreign policy issue other than Gaza. What about the Afghan refugee crisis? Whataboutism. And the mass starvation in Yemen? Whataboutism. And the targeting of tribes in The Sudan? The reader will forgive me if I decline to furnish them with further examples. Essentially one is not permitted to test claims about the so-called Gazan “genocide” with reference to other global situations.

Now you will note my somewhat limited definition. I could have stated that whatboutism is a topic-non specific diversionary tactic; delicately moving from one topic to another be it to reason by analogy, to highlight hypocrisy, to raise awareness of unspoken issues or - occasionally - to avoid answering direct challenges which make one uncomfortable. Whataboutism need not be geopolitical in nature and to the extent it is, it need not relate uniquely and solely to the actions of the world’s only Jewish state.

Yet, and here the reader need not feign surprise, one only hears about it in the Gazan context. Not by those debating Africa or Burma; nor by those debating domestic policy; but merely by those that believe that all human problems run through a tiny strip of Mediterranean-hugging land.

And interestingly, it only works in one direction. So for example, should an interlocutor concerned about global events, rest their gaze on Papua New Guinea’s human right record, and particularly if said interlocutor is Jewish, the activist respondent will be sure to reply “whataboutism” —which is ironic, one may think, as they are guilty of the crime they accuse. Surely human beings have the right to discuss Papua New Guinea; perhaps not everyday but once in a while. Yet the activist respondent will assuredly divert the conversation to Gaza. Isn’t that a textbook case of whataboutism in and of itself?