hypocrisy
hy·poc·ri·sy (hĭ-pŏk’rĭ-sē)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1.The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2.An act or instance of such falseness.
This word gets used incorrectly far too frequently. Hypocrisy is a charge that can be levelled only when the individual has been caught saying one thing and doing another – without apology. “You should never tell a lie” is a pretty common ideal. No one likes a liar. Many people would hold that, as an ideal, you shouldnt lie. But when the moment comes that the truth will hurt someone else more than a lie, aren’t you inclined to do it? And dont you still hold the ideal that one should never tell a lie? Then you cannot be called a hypocrite. You are INCONSISTENT. If you hold that everyone in your family should go to church on Sunday, but after dropping your kids off you sneak off to the Sports Bar, are you a hypocrite? Suppose your neighbor knows your rule and runs into you? If you are unapologetic, and you only tell your kids that so they’ll go, you’re a hypocrite. If you feel bad and dont do it again, you are INCONSISTENT.
In fact, hypocrisy is intensely personal. You have to know the inner mind of the person, that they say one thing and will do another and do not think what they said was the ideal, to use the term, in the first definition. And you have to know the mind of the person and witness the event in the second definition. The price of hypocrisy is insincerity to oneself. If one is to accept the use of hypocrite as the left today defines it, everyone is a hypocrite. The only one who espoused any ideal – at all – without being a hypocrite was Jesus when he walked the earth. And the modern leftist feels very secure in using this term with abandon, because they have no individual ideals to falter on. They only have “good intentions”. From a psychoanalysis point of view, the use of the term hypocrisy by the left in this way actually turns the definition on its head. Self honesty, for instance, is one of the virtues that are most important in helping people to act morally. If there is self honesty, then it is INSCONSISTENCY, as opposed to hypocritically supposing that good intentions are sufficient.
The title of this article is “What it is to be Anti American”. Herein, I will render that definition. Anti-American DOES NOT HAVE TO MEAN AGAINST AMERICA.
Definitionally, the word means: “opposed … to the United States of America, its people, its principles, or its policies.”
I will use the term as referring to its principles. That leads to opposing its policies and its people, in general.
Then we must define the first word in that definition. Opposed: “to set against in some relation, esp. as to demonstrate a comparison or contrast: to oppose advantages to disadvantages.”
So when I say Anti-American, FROM NOW ON, what I mean is: you are to the United States of America as disadvanatage is to advantage. In essence, the opposite, or as the case may be, the antithesis.
As an individual, you can live in the greatest, freeest, most racially harmonious, most giving, most concerned with stomping out injustice in the rest of the world, most inspired to believe in individual ideals and the fundamental pursuit of those ideals in search of a better world, society, and not accept any of those facts about your country and not pursue any individual ideals, and still love your country because of all that it gives you.
Howls of indignation and protest are starting to form. Just stay with me. You may not be able to argue with me when I am done.
If you are on the Left, lets be honest here. I cant think of a person on the left who can be called a hypocrite, except possibly the gray listing of conservatives in Hollywood, and there are exceptions. But given the previous definition, that also means that there isnt a single instance of leftist individual idealism.
Oh, you have ideals. Dont get me wrong. I could talk about the “hypocrisy” (using your definition) of:
1. Gay Marriage
Time and again, you speak of the pursuit of “equality” while ignoring the marital conditions that are acceptable in a majority of the worlds society such as polygamy, polyandry, forced arranged marriages, marriage to a family member, marriage to another species, and the list goes on… there are hundreds of historical variations. Every one of those is ignored.
If you pursue gay marriage in the name of equality, you are a hypocrite.
2. Taxes
It is pro forma for a leftist to speak of taxes as a way to “get the rich to pay their fair share”. But never in history has wealth been lawfully taken from the wealthy and changed their status. Since they are the primary generators of business, they merely shift their burden to their prices. All you have actually done is make it more difficult to ACCUMULATE that wealth. In fact, that is exactly your goal. People becoming wealthy puts them beyond the reach of the collective, and you dont like that sometimes the rules just stop applying.
If you pursue higher taxes in the name of equality, you are a hypocrite.
3. Iraq
Leftists have a problem with the fact that 29,000,000 now live in a newborn democracy, in that it took American action to do it. They talk about intentions, and cost, and judgement, and meanwhile, 29,000,000 have the right to vote without the burden of a minority fascist state watching over them. I’m beginning to miss what that felt like… And in the meantime, they will haul the military out for meals on wheels in Haiti and bomb Serbians trying to repel invaders, and act as if the UN remains a beacon of truth and justice. Or, better yet, they oppose the war because we “didnt go into North Korea, the Sudan, the Congo, East Timor and Tibet.” That is an exhibition of the falseness of their position.
If you oppose the war in Iraq but think the United States has good to do in the world, you are a hypocrite.
4. Slavery
The country was founded in part to expand liberty and eliminate the scourge of slavery. What existed was accomodated otherwise there would have been no complete country. Moreover, it was Americas actions that eliminated slavery in its forms around the world – from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli.
If you advocate the existence of America and maintain that America owes some apology for slavery, you are a hypocrite.
And the list goes on…
But these are COLLECTIVE IDEALS. SOCIAL IDEALS, if you will. They are not individual ideals. They are not ideals YOU YOURSELF have to live up to. It is an ideal for society. And if society doesnt reach it, well, its just not there yet. There are just a few more people we have to bring on board, we have to get on the same page, we have to re-educate, we have to convince, before it works right. Cause it wont work right if everyone isnt involved!
Authors note: THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF FAILURE.
And here is where the original American vision comes into conflict with your modern Leftist. Its because those personal, individual ideals were the key to making everyone work. They were the key to cooperation, to safety, security and prosperity. Not rules and regulations and, if they dont work, well, we’ll just make some more!
So the ideals of prudence, temperance, justice and fortitude dont dissipate because we dont reach them. E Pluribus Unum, Liberty and In God We Trust continue to be our guiding visions. Those who do not share them and think that anyone who does is a hypocrite – because, as I said, everyone will fall short except the lord – then they are the opposite of what made America great. They scream hypocrisy not because of the speaker of the ideal but the ideal themselves. They are your Anti American.
But its more than that. In fact, I believe it is that, if I am speaking to a Leftist, you lack the strength or the will to hold these ideals. And if you do, you lack the same to profess them. That would hold you up to the same specious charge, since you will, eventually, be INCONSISTENT.
So you would rather hold no ideals up to the individual, but to the state. And pursue your utopian fantasies ad nauseum.
Drivel: to talk stupidly and carelessly (ex.; see above).
Terry,
Are you referring to all those conservative Christian Republicans who lived on C Street and had weekly bible studies while they were cheating on their wives?
Yes, they ARE hypocrites! And to make it worse they are against gay marriage – supposedly to defend the sanctity of marriage, while they are at the same time banging broads who are not their wives!
What a bunch of creeps…
They scream hypocrisy not because of the speaker of the ideal but the ideal themselves. They are your Anti American.
#3,
What could be more anti-American than curtailing civil liberties, starting unwarranted wars, and destroying our economy?
That is the GOP legacy of the last eight years…
How sad.
Surely you have something better to write about, like the coming indictment of Bill Richardson, the Ethics Investigations of Charlie Rangel and Chris Dodd, the FBI Investigation of Jack Murtha, the pay for play of Cong. Jesse Jackson, and the kickback scheme of Obamas Car Czar?
No, under other peoples sheets is where you belong apparently.
there he goes again blaming everything on reps and not looking in the mirror. of course in wacky pedroza world the dems never do anything wrong . gee art what will you be saying now . congress are all dems the pres is dems and when they b.k this country and ruin it . im sure in your mind you will somehow blame the reps again .
#5,
Excuse me but this post led off with a definition of hypocrisy, did it not? What could be more hypocritical than Talibani Republicans who slam gay marriage while porking women they are not married to?
So there are corrupt Dems – guess what? Most politicians of either party are corrupt! I am never surprised, in particular, when Dems behave that way.
But who would have forecast that so many elected Reeps would be outed for their pervy behavior?
Number Seven
The White Mans Party of Sacramento, as they were known in the days of my Daddy, has always been more crooked than a stream. They are in control and nothing more can be said. New citizens who keep voting for them are nothing but galvanized Yankees without a wit and a prayer.
And its a sin to Moses and a sin to Crockett the way you absquatulate every time the City of Trees decides to abscond with more of our freedoms and turn our paychecks into shinplaster.
You are their Alibi Ike and you are bugs sir. Bugs.
Madame Liberty, I am ESL and had to refer about 10 times to my dictionary to understand your language…. I gave up!
I am sure that you have something important to say however I do not know what it was.
Please explain.
An old preacher once told me that the louder one is protesting about a problem the longer and deeper that problem they have is.
For example he was alway preaching to watch out for con artists and thieves. He was very good at both.
So when I hear a political speech from someone about a moral flaw that somebody should do something about, I assume that they are having a problem with it in the own life. Since they cannot stop on thier own actions they are hoping telling others not to do it will help them stop.
Hear! Hear! to all the “hypocrisy” town criers!
“The country was founded in part to expand liberty and eliminate the scourge of slavery.”
Who believes this? The United States was founded by a society built on slavery (north and south). Slavery was enshrined in the Constitution and supported by stringent federal laws for 65 years.
Slavery built the colonial American economy, and allowed the early United States to industrialize. Slavery was only ended in the U.S. after a civil war, and then only after a fierce political debate in which even the North was deeply divided. There simply was no strong impulse to reject slavery in this country until many long years after its founding.
James. It depends on your definiton of slavery?
Look at the relationship from parent to child, employer to employee, teacher to student and a long list of other illustrations. Hey. Simply look at your paycheck to find evidence that we are slaves to our government where every dollar earned for the first 4 to 5 months of the year go for taxes. The “tax freedom” date for 2009 was April 13th.
I saw evidence of slavery dating back to 2560 BC.
Yes, I was inside the pyramid at Giza that was constructed using slave labor long before the slave trade. Look in the Bible under Galatians 4 v 3 where you will find scripture reference to where “we were in slavery under the basic principles of the world.”
Larry. Don’t mix politics with religion. Who said so?
Larry Gilbert –
Comparing the relationship between enslaved Africans and their enslavers to the relationship of parent and child, or employee and employer is laughable and grossly over-simplified. Your parents don’t kidnap you. If they abuse or neglect you, they commit a crime punishable by imprisonment. You can quit your job whenever you’d like. In neither the parent/child or employee/employer relationship is the child or the employee condemned for his/her life and for the lives of their offspring. Don’t be ridiculous.
I have heard the cry of people who want to undermine the dehumanizing impact of the TransAtlantic Slave Trade on kidnapped Africans – the cry that says, “other people did it too.” I find the argument weak and akin to a child who, caught in some wrongdoing says, “Other people did it too.” So what! Shame on them AS WELL. It also seems like an attempt to undermine the impact with the underlying argument, “Your pain isn’t special. Others have suffered too. Get over it.” Why must we compare and rank pain before deciding whether or not it warrants empathy? Compassion? Is there a shortage on empathy or compassion that it needs to be rationed? Why is it difficult for some to admit that slavery in the United States was immoral and criminal, period? What harm does that admission bring one? Why must people attempt to undermine that truth?
Slavery was horrific and dehumanizing in Egypt, I presume. It was also horrific and dehumanizing in the United States, a nation who had the benefit of history to know that slavery was horrific and dehumanizing, but participated despite that knowledge because they wanted the economic and infrastructural benefits of free labor. Slavery robbed PEOPLE of their “inalienable rights” to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness – foundational principles of this country. That’s hypocrisy. If the men who crafted the founding of the United States actually believed in freedom and justice for all, how could they deny those rights to PEOPLE? Thus, judging by their actions, they didn’t believe in freedom and justice for all. They believed in freedom and justice for THEMSELVES at the expense of others who they didn’t intend to have citizenship. They justified their hypocrisy with childish excuses and baseless science that literally made it permissible to deny that Africans were PEOPLE created by God like them.
The only saving grace this country’s founding creed offers was the fact that our founding language was more poetic than specific — that it didn’t clarify the beliefs of most of the men who founded the nation in the founding documents. Leaving the language open left a crack in which unintended beneficiaries were able to gain the footing they would need to fight for their inalienable rights as citizens in the United States. Rights no one (citizen or not) should have to fight for in America, if we truly believe in liberty and justice; life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
What American would fight AGAINST every American having the experience of those rights we Americans say we believe are inalienable? People who don’t really believe they are. Therein lies the conflict.
But, as if in some strange irony, in America one is even free to be hypocritical. To say you believe something, but consistently display actions (write laws, support policies, maintain attitudes) that indicate otherwise. That is not a crime. Yay.