Whataboutism

Kfir Eliaz and Ran Spiegler

Papers from arXiv.org

Abstract: We propose a model of whataboutism -- a rhetorical strategy that deflects criticism by citing similar misconduct that goes uncriticized on the critic's side -- and study its implications for social norms governing offensive speech. In an infinite-horizon psychological game with two rival camps, agents weigh the intrinsic benefit of offensive speech against the risk of condemnation. External criticism can be deflected via an equilibrium-based whataboutism rebuttal. We characterize the unique dynamically stable Psychological Subgame Perfect Equilibrium and show that the availability of whataboutism exacerbates offensive speech, to the extent that civility norms can break down entirely, especially in polarized societies.

Date: 2026-03, Revised 2026-03
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/2603.08098 Latest version (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:2603.08098

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().