Climate whataboutism at work: How Danes discursively redirect responsibility for action

This study contributes to research on climate delay discourse with a scrutiny of climate whataboutism using membership categorization analysis. It builds upon a corpus of written and oral Danish conversations and debates about climate action and policy. The corpus includes actors representing the political sphere, interest groups, and private individuals. Climate whataboutism is designed by comparing two adaptable membership categories with one another: higher-emitting members of category X versus lower-emitting members of category Y, which speakers usually identify with. Speakers deploy various discursive and conversational resources to maximize the contrast between the two membership categories. Overall, climate whataboutism is produced to convey that local climate action is pointless, either in friendly situations where participants confirm one another, or in more antagonistic situations where participants defensively respond to arguments for taking action to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The paper discusses why it is important to understand the mechanism of climate whataboutism and other kinds of delay discourse, not least when used among populations with very high carbon footprints per capita.