Are hypothetical whataboutist arguments valid?

[John Dule]

This style of argumentation has become rather popular among partisan hacks for the past four years, presumably because they have no other way of advancing their worldviews. You know what I mean-- a liberal student makes a statement, and Republicans say "You wouldn't be praising her if she was a conservative making a completely different statement." Or police break up a BLM riot, and Democrats say "They wouldn't have done this if if was a MAGA protest full of white people." It has become fairly tiresome.

While these arguments do sometimes hold water, they have two main flaws. First (and most obviously), they are literally not engaging with reality. This kind of hypothetical argument requires the speaker to invent a fictional situation and then make guesses about how their political opponents would react to it. But secondly, I really dislike these arguments because they are often unnecessary. Usually there is a better comparison to make with a real-life event, which renders the hypothetical argument moot. Those comparisons are usually lazy whataboutisms, but they are still inherently more valid than conjuring up nonexistent situations and demanding that your opponents respond to them.

I selected "usually no."

[Terlylane]

Somewhere between it depends and usually not.

[Ferguson97]

It depends.

If the scenario they're describing is completely fictional and nonsensical (for example, the user who suggested there would be no outrage if the gay boat attacked the homophobic boat), then it's an invalid argument.

If the scenario they're describing is something that actually happens frequently but doesn't provoke a response (for example, police brutality against Black people and lax responses towards white people is something that exists) from them... then it can be useful for demonstrating hypocrisy, and can call into question the other person's motives.

[ultraviolet]

No, but this is just as bad as gay supporters harassing an anti gay boat with the pro gay boat blowing up and neading to be rescued by an anti gay boat.

[Del Tachi]

Inventing a hypothetical situation is lazy, since it is often quite easy to find real-life examples of ideological or partisan hypocrisy.  You can "whatabout" liberals' pearl-clutching over Jan. 6 by simply noting the real-life disinterest they had in "insurrection"  against government targets over the course of the BLM riots, for example.

More conceptually, whataboutery should be defended as a way to provide necessary context as to whether or not a particular line of reasoning or critique is consistent with its own standards and arguments.  Accusing someone of "whataboutism" is a way to lazily dismiss criticism by shifting focus away from the issue at hand, which is itself a type of whataboutery interestingly enough.

[Damocles]

Inventing a hypothetical situation is lazy, since it is often quite easy to find real-life examples of ideological or partisan hypocrisy.  You can "whatabout" liberals' pearl-clutching over Jan. 6 by simply noting the real-life disinterest they had in "insurrection"  against government targets over the course of the BLM riots, for example.

More conceptually, whataboutery should be defended as a way to provide necessary context as to whether or not a particular line of reasoning or critique is consistent with its own standards and arguments.  Accusing someone of "whataboutism" is a way to lazily dismiss criticism by shifting focus away from the issue at hand, which is itself a type of whataboutery interestingly enough.

Those aren’t valid comparisons. There were many Black Lives Matter protests (one of which I attended!), some of which did feature rioting, and some of that rioting did affect government facilities. That is very different from the January 6th incident, whose sole objective was to disrupt and subvert and destroy the certification of Democratic nominee Joe Biden’s electoral college victory.

You made some serious substantive errors in your own argument, and present a false balance that doesn’t actually exist.

[Chips]

It depends.

[CEO Mindset]

I'm unable to take people who use the term "whataboutist" seriously at all.

[Karenthecomputer]

I don’t think of these as arguments on their own. They seem more just like a way to test the sincerity of your opponent.