What are you listening to?

Although I have always disliked hypocrisy I have come to accept that it’s a natural party of the communications related to human behavior, including my own.

I find it telling that the antonyms of hypocrisy are listed as actual, authentic, forthright, honest, just, real, reliable, righteous, sincere, truthful, upright.

Not a single umbrella term that describes the antonym of hypocrisy in its broadest context. Just a bunch of words that sketch around the concept.

I mention this because I’m now pretty sure that human collaboration that is positive (my take on it) and communicated honestly, but that doesn’t have a specific word to describe it (let’s call it anti-hypocrisy), can only exist when there’s hypocrisy around as well.

It’s as though hypocrisy and anti-hypocrisy are matter and antimatter, codependent and coexisting.

My argument in support of this? Even the most honest person would have to admit that there are times when a little ‘spin’ is far more efficient than trying to teach a pig to sing.

Indeed, the person that is honest to a fault would, for example, fail to become a leader of any sort in the presence of those that know when to spin and when to sing.

Thus I have come to wonder as to the optimum ratio of hypocrisy to anti-hypocrisy.

Most likely it is very case dependent. Perhaps the question is best asked in reverse; when does hypocrisy become counter-productive?

One answer is where subsequent decisions can substitute for action, or decrease the probability of the success of the proposed action that they call for.

But often hypocrisy extends beyond such simplicities. For example, when the called-for action is not the true goal and where the hypocrisy is deemed the simplest means to garner support that would otherwise be difficult to achieve.

What I do know is that hypocrisy is counter-productive when it’s primary goal is solely the self improvement of the position of the progenitor(s).

Sometimes such self-focused hypocrisy is so ingrained that the perpetrators don’t even know they are doing it. An exemplar would be our entrenched two party political system that seems to promote such people and their actions.

The result is perpetual meanderings until a system meets a crisis after which there may be a brief spring where anti-hypocrisy flourishes and restores prosperity (or whatever else is collectively desired), after which the self-interested types will yet again come to the fore.

The only reason that hypocrisy can’t reign forever is competition. Competing countries or organisations with less hypocrisy will always be more competitive.

The hypocrisy ridden entity will always be found out eventually because competition shows people what they haven’t got.

Even the deepest monopolies such as the Chinese Empire or Sydney Rail eventually succumb to competition, or its apparition.

Thus, over an extended period, hypocrisy and anti-hypocrisy must naturally balance to some unknown and unmeasurable ratio.

But at any moment it’s very probable that what you’re listening to is hypocrisy of one sort or another.