Is lying bad? - a political view

I lie. Every day. In the smallest of actions and with great intent, I fabricate many things throughout the day.

I'm a sinner.

But, what if lying isn't bad? What if, for a moment, you saw it as not dishonorable, but a measure of one's will to change the outcome of their external world. For, that IS the purpose of lying, is it not? Whether or not it is honorable, and honor being a fabrication of human collective intelligence itself, is not the point of this exercise.

If we seek to affect change in our worlds, both internal and external, why is lying not just another tool in toolbox to do so?

Now, if you're with me this far, please indulge me with your reason why lying, a tool of the mind, is not prudent and natural in the political realm? In fact, is it not a CORNERSTONE of politics?

If you can agree with me on that, why do we get so upset when politicians lie?


*just doing some soulsearching


Edit, I would add that this view could be said of anything against societal norms, and really falls under the realm of naturalism, true naturalism.

a reply to: Tempter

Lying is protected by freedom of speech. I'd say it is your Criminal-Harmful intentions, or lack of, that determine whether lying is a justified venture.

Therefore, by my reasoning, Political liars are unjustifiable.

a reply to: Tempter

Hmmm, let's try a simple exercise, shall we?

But, what if stealing isn't bad? What if, for a moment, you saw it as not dishonorable, but a measure of one's will to change the outcome of their external world. For, that IS the purpose of stealing, is it not? Whether or not it is honorable, and honor being a fabrication of human collective intelligence itself, is not the point of this exercise.

But, what if cheating isn't bad? What if, for a moment, you saw it as not dishonorable, but a measure of one's will to change the outcome of their external world. For, that IS the purpose of cheating, is it not? Whether or not it is honorable, and honor being a fabrication of human collective intelligence itself, is not the point of this exercise.

Yeah, it's still bad and the logic doesn't work.

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: Tempter

Hmmm, let's try a simple exercise, shall we?

But, what if stealing isn't bad? What if, for a moment, you saw it as not dishonorable, but a measure of one's will to change the outcome of their external world. For, that IS the purpose of stealing, is it not? Whether or not it is honorable, and honor being a fabrication of human collective intelligence itself, is not the point of this exercise.

But, what if cheating isn't bad? What if, for a moment, you saw it as not dishonorable, but a measure of one's will to change the outcome of their external world. For, that IS the purpose of cheating, is it not? Whether or not it is honorable, and honor being a fabrication of human collective intelligence itself, is not the point of this exercise.

Yeah, it's still bad and the logic doesn't work.

I don't see you addressing the main question, the crux.

It's more of a theoretical view if relative moralism.

Stealing is good, if you're dying of starvation.

Cheating is good, if it gets you out of harms way.

You're stuck on the moral road of absolution, which can never be the case as all things deserve varied reaponses.

Life, and all its actons under the stars, including lying, are natural, purposeful and relative to the situation.

Am I being clearer?

originally posted by: WanderingNomadd
a reply to: Tempter

Lying is protected by freedom of speech. I'd say it is your Criminal-Harmful intentions, or lack of, that determine whether lying is a justified venture.

Therefore, by my reasoning, Political liars are unjustifiable.

Yet it will always happen. You cannot remove it ever, the action of crime. It will always be here. It will outlast nearly every human on the planet. Save for that LAST guy or girl, who gets to die a truly free person.

a reply to: Tempter

Actually, I answered the question with my last sentence.

And no, stealing isn't good, even if you're starving. A "good" person would still try to repay what they took, ask for it as a gift instead of stealing it, or try to work or barter in exchange for the food. That's the "good" answer.

But since you can use hypotheticals to make your point, so can I. If I'm hungry and I steal from someone else, who's to say that person won't starve now in my place? Or who's to say their family wasn't already starving, and what I stole was the first food they'd acquired in a long time? How is it "good" if their children die because of my selfishness?

And no, cheating isn't good if it "gets us out of harms way" either. An individual may consider it "necessary", but that necessity doesn't negate the harm in what we're doing. Otherwise, I should hypothetically be able to kill every living thing that I think is a danger to me.

Or I should be able to steal someone else's car if my car doesn't work; after all, I will be in harm's way if I don't have reliable transportation, especially if an emergency pops up. And why shouldn't I be able to defraud other people and groups if I "need" their resources? Surely I can use those resources better than they could.

That is a tough question to answer.

Some would say that lying is something one should never do.

Others would say their are times where a lie can prevent a great wrong.

The former is black and white, no gray area, no room for compromise. The world simply doesn't work like that, never has, never will.

The world is gray. The world is complicated. Should one lie as little as possible? Of course, preferably not at all, but that's that black and white thing again...

Lying in politics. Not sure you can have a political system that doesn't have some form of untruth in it...I certainly can't think of one. Ideally? Again, of course a totally honest system would be best, or so we think... Something tells me, we wouldn't like it.

a reply to: seagull

We've never had a truly honest system to find out. Good or bad, I'd love to see it, just to know what it was actually like rather than a hypothetical.

Kind of like I'm curious to see how socialism would do without having to deal with capitalistic trade partners working to undermine it. It's easy to destroy a socialistic system in which it has to deal with capitalism to get most of it's trade goods. We've never actually seen how socialism would do in a vacuum.

a reply to: seagull

Again, of course a totally honest system would be best, or so we think... Something tells me, we wouldn't like it.

That is the price you pay for true freedom. Once you allow those in charge to control your information they control your thoughts and therefore your perceptions.

No one said liberty was easy, But as Samuel Adams said:

“If you love wealth greater than liberty, the tranquility of servitude greater than the animating contest for freedom, go home from us in peace. We seek not your counsel, nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you; May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”

With the truth .... You can work with solid foundations

With lie's .... You are working with shifting sands


I know when my back's against the wall which one I would rather work with!

a reply to: seagull

It's really not a tough question though. Fraud is also a form of lying. So is it acceptable for politicians and other officials to defraud citizens? Is it ok if an official lies about where taxpayer money is being allocated? Or to tell lies about the safety standards at a nuclear facility; lie about the justifications for a war that will kill many of our citizens; or lie about the threat caused by specific demographics in order to justify oppressing them?

Remember the catastrophe at Fukushima? Or the Iraq War & occupation? Or 9/11? Is it really acceptable for politician leaders and powerbrokers to lie about these disasters? And the same goes for lying about the effects of specific chemicals or substances like tobacco smoke, asbestos, and DDT (or the vaccines given to our children, etc).

Most people lie around 1–3 times in every 10 minutes of conversation. Lying is something humans do. But in politics, the lying is hidden beneath a costume of public relations, tailored speeches, and political triangulation, that they are rarely held accountable.

a reply to: enlightenedservant



You're the only person to answer this OP with perfect truth. Lying, cheating, stealing...they're all used to manipulate for our selfishness.

a reply to: Tempter

Lying is not acceptable from a politician. They can be any kind of sinner they like, but unless they are prepared to be honest and either thrown from office or forgiven by the people, to give the people power over them by providing the truth, they have no business doing the job.

We are all sinners, but thankfully many human beings are still honest about it. An honest sinner is much better than a lying Angel.

a reply to: Aedaeum

(-bows graciously-)

I have a very simple belief w/this type of thing: If people decided right now to stop committing crimes or sinning, we could end those problems today. But as you can probably tell, people like to justify & rationalize doing things that we know are "wrong". And that's the very reason those problems still exist.

Lying is gain by deception. It is a choice you make to put your own desires or benefit above that of whomever you are deceiving.

It is fraud and the epitome of selfishness, be it in emotional fraud in a relationship or passing a bad check for your shopping. It has had a devastating effect on our society as we now must question everything to ascertain whether we are being told the truth or not.

There is no "benefit of the doubt" any longer. It is assumed that if there is benefit to be had by lying, most people would indeed lie to us. We factor this into our daily lives. Imagine for a moment where we would be if we could trust one another..

Bad? Hell yes.

a reply to: Tempter

You're describing the pillars of popular politics - mendacity and dissembling.

mendacity (mɛnˈdæsɪtɪ)
n, pl -ties
1. the tendency to be untruthful
2. a falsehood

.Dissembling (verb)
to give a false or misleading appearance to; conceal the truth or real nature of:
to dissemble one's incompetence in business.
2.
to put on the appearance of; feign:
to dissemble innocence.

Yeah we all lie at times and for reasons that suit us at the time. Most of them are white lies; those little social kisses that protect us from hurt - "Yes that dress looks great!" "Sure sweetie, you're the best footballer in school."

They're socially acceptable and mostly never discussed. The power of the white lie is in the way it's a consensual quality of social interactions. Do you agree? It brings more good than bad and comes from a 'good place.'

The political 'lie' can be a different beast altogether. "I won't invade Poland" or "We won't raise taxes" are good examples. Other examples, "We seek no wider war" and Blair's performance at the Chilcott Inquiry. These are lies that tanked the quality of people's lives or launched major wars.

Despite most of us accepting the fact that politicians are innate and habitual liars, they insist on portraying themselves as more ethical and greater role-models than the rest of us sorry bastards. That dictates an emotive response when they're repeatedly caught in a bold lie. If they stop getting on the moral high horse, we'll stop laughing or criticising when they fall of it so hard.