Hypocrisy in Politics

Citations Over TimeTop 10% of 2023 papers

Abstract

The charge of hypocrisy is a peculiar kind of accusation: it is damning and ubiquitous; it is used to deny the hypocrite standing to speak; and it is levelled against a great variety of conduct. Much of the philosophical literature on hypocrisy is aimed at explaining why hypocrisy is wrongful and worthy of censure. We focus instead on the use of the accusation of hypocrisy and argue for a revisionary claim. People think that hypocrisy in politics is bad and that calling it out is good. Our novel claim is that even if hypocrisy in politics is bad (and that is a big if), calling it out is worse. We give a feminist case as to why accusations of hypocrisy are problematic. We also go further and claim that hypocrisy is a ubiquitous and perhaps even a necessary and beneficial part of political debate in liberal democracies. We also consider and reject candour as a possible alternative solution to hypocrisy in public debate. We argue that requiring people to be candid is not necessarily a good solution because it will often require one to divulge what is private when there are good reasons not to do so.

Related Papers

• → Hypocrisy in Politics(2023)8 cited
• → Age‐related differences when measuring political hypocrisy(2018)2 cited
• → Terrorists Within: Leo Tolstoy and Hypocisry(2005)
• → Necessary Leaven: Hypocrisy and the Heptaméron(2020)
• → Hypocrisy and Moral Justification: Do Consequences and Reasons Make a Difference?(2021)