What-about-ism Points to Hypocrisy

Will McKelvey’s 1/2/2021 opinion piece titled, “What-about-ism can not explain away the Capital riot” is an expose of precisely what frustrates conservatives and disparages the unity we all hear about from the newly installed administration.

What-about-ism is not intended to explain away Capital riots. What McKelvey did is called setting up a scarecrow argument as an easy vacuous target. Instead, claims of what-about-ism are intended to point out hypocrisy.

McKelvey declares his conclusions as fact or premises, and then majestically concludes what the left does is not the same as what the right does. He declares that actions are justified (or not) by what the protestors are trying to achieve. He would issue a-prior permits to destroy if (and only if) you agree with his policies or conclusions. That’s hypocrisy, not noble American democracy at work.

I hear your argument welling up, “but others are hypocritical; what about…” I’ll save you that moment of hypocrisy considering the title of the article. I’ll posit that hypocrisy is present on both sides of the political aisle, but that doesn’t make it acceptable as a pillar of McKelvey’s liberal opinion piece.

When allowed to run free without challenge, hypocrisy leads to inane statements as, “rallies in support of BLM were defending the safety of their fellow countrymen.” What? The Portland protestors/activists/rallies/riots (you pick) declared themselves anarchist overthrowing the government, claiming independent jurisdiction while attacking physical property of the government. They destroyed property and livelihood of others for weeks. Attacks on DNC buildings continue even after Biden is in office.

McKelvey wants to blame “systematic degradation of trust in public institutions led by the Republican Part and right wing media.” That’s a claim. I understand you want it to be true. I would ask you “what about the left wing media actually BEing untrustworthy?” Yea, I guess that would be crass what-about-ism. I’ll be more accurate: McKelvey’s piece is simply hypocritical.