October 16, 2007
GOOD ENOUGH FOR GOD...:
In defence of hypocrisy (Martin O'Neill, 16 October 2007, New Statesman)
The theft of good ideas in politics isn’t particularly objectionable, as long as the ideas are good. After all, it would be strange if any particular party had a complete monopoly on imaginative policy ideas, or on legislative proposals that meshed deeply with the hopes and aspirations of the electorate.Refusing to co-opt the best ideas of the opposition would involve a sort of puritanical intellectual preciousness, that prized ideological non-contamination above the virtues of enacting the best possible political programme.
My suggestion is that theft and insincerity are not always the sign of political vice, but can, on the contrary, be signs of considerable virtue. Given this, it is rather odd quite how powerful the charge of political hypocrisy can seem.
Everyone knows that politicians won’t always tell the truth, or at least won’t tell the full truth, and that there are things that they may do which they will not themselves be in full agreement.
And everyone knows that everyone knows this. Given that everyone knows that everyone knows this, accusations of insincerity or hypocrisy – or of being a “phoney”, to use the term with which David Cameron baited Gordon Brown at last week’s Prime Minister’s Questions – can themselves be the very epitome of hypocrisy.
For such charges of hypocrisy or phoniness can carry with them the suggestion that the accuser is himself above these sorts of failings, or denies the need for himself or others to operate within the world of political accommodation and compromise, with its attendant rejection of pristine political sincerity.
Nor ought this analysis be limited to politics. As a general matter, people who act offended at hypocrisy are not merely raging at the humanity of their opponents but implicitly claiming to be sinless themselves, and, therefore, not just inhuman but greater than divine.
Posted by Orrin Judd at October 16, 2007 4:00 PM
Sort of related to this -- I really enjoyed your assessments of Graham Greene's novels, and how people misintrepreted his odd take on Christianity.
Greene believed he should be able to go to confession and keep confessing the same sin over and over again, because he was merely a sinful human, ignoring the exhortation of Jesus to "Go and sin no more."
Of course, Greene abandoned his wife and family, so it is silly to hold him up as a Roman Catholic author. He was an excellent author who was a marginal Catholic, at best.
Politics is full of such men: Giuliani anyone? How did he get an annulment to a marriage after having two children? Were they annulled too?
We are all hypocrites because we are all born into sin. But to claim we are forgiven when we actively continue in our sin is disgraceful, especially in a politician.
Posted by: Randall Voth at October 16, 2007 6:53 PM