system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
Why is “whataboutism” frown upon and how else should one argue if not by analogy and comparing?

A lot of political arguments are about one side saying something is bad, and the other side saying “but you’re doing the same thing”. And then the argument against that whole debate is “stop with the whataboutism”. To me, a large part of discussing and understanding is to find metaphors and analogies. A “if what you do is right then what I do can’t be wrong because it’s the same thing” is a valid argument to me, yet it is “whataboutism”.

Are there any philosophers who discuss right and wrong, where the reasoning is completely disconnected from the outer world?
gpt
Using metaphor and analogy is not the problem for whataboutism or *tu quoque* fallacies in general. 

Using comparison is fine, but it becomes fallacious when it's used as a red herring tactic to deflect criticism. The existence of wrong-doing elsewhere does not justify specific cases of similar wrong-doing.