Anthony Weiner’s Necessary Lies: Let’s Get Honest About Deceit
I believed Anthony Weiner even as everyone else saw through his whopper of a lie.
Now we can all agree that his actions were smarmy. The emerging consensus is he should resign or he’ll be redistricted out even as we must also know that on the scale of slimy behavior by politicians, Weiner’s offenses are no greater — or even far less offensive — than those of Arnold, John, Dominique, Silvio, Eliot, John, David or Bill, to name only a few.
Why is that?
If you answer, “it’s the photos,” I’m with you. If you answer, “because he lied,” I say no way! You’re deceiving yourself. We all like to believe that the lies we tell are innocent “white lies;” it’s the lies of others that are so terrible.
I spent a recent afternoon listening to an RSA lecture by Ian Leslie, author of Born Liars: Why We Can’t Live Without Deceit. I urge you to listen, too. Drawing on research from neuroscientists, psychologists, anthropologists and others, Leslie argues that we are all liars.
He recounts the research of one psychologist finding that all of us tell one or two lies a day. Another researcher finds that two strangers will tell three lies within ten minutes of meeting each other.
Leslie believes that lying is no bug in the human software; it’s a feature, a defining characteristic of our species found in all human societies. We can’t live without it; we just don’t like to admit it. He explains that lying and truth-telling must exist in equilibrium.
Attempts to eradicate lies usually result in more lying. Research conducted by Victoria Talwar of McGill University finds that the strict punishment for lying in a Catholic school serves mainly to make the kids “highly proficient little liars.”
Leslie’s discussion of politicians is especially on point. “We don’t want to hear the truth about politics, because we deceive ourselves about what’s possible.” Politicians, he says, “lie less than most people because they are under such scrutiny and their lives are so public.”
His discussion of the etymology of the word “politician,” first used in 16th and 17th century France to describe those who mediated between Catholic and Protestant tribes trying to kill each other, illustrates the assertion that “one reason to have politicians in the first place is to allow us a margin of dishonesty in our dealings with each other.”
Politicians are practiced in telling us what we want to hear. By punishing their every deceit and gaffe (remember here Michael Kinsley’s aphorism, “a gaffe is when a politician tells the truth”) we are, like the Catholic nuns and the school children, turning our pols into expert liars.
Says Leslie, “If we really want politicians to be more honest, we have to start treating them like grown-ups.”
Study after study shows that most of us think we are a little bit smarter, more moral and more attractive than we actually are. We probably think we lie less than we do, too. Leslie concludes:
Lying is in our DNA. Our ability to get on with each other depends on it. Our sense of who we are and what’s possible depends upon it. This isn’t an argument for more lying. Lies can corrode trust and wreck relationships. But we ought to accept that a measure of lies is everywhere necessary. It’s time to be honest about deceit.
Anthony Weiner is going through the necessary charade of a leave for treatment — though God certainly knows that with what he’s going through he could use some time with a good shrink. I hope it works for him. He’s a good politician. And after this he’s bound to be a better liar.
LATER: NYDailyNews Rep. Anthony Weiner finally considering he may have to resign amid sexting scandal, says source. Via.
11 Responses to “Anthony Weiner’s Necessary Lies: Let’s Get Honest About Deceit”
His actions weren’t smarmy, but scummy, Joe.
Sarah Palin’s emails are not news – Anthony Weiner’s wiener is not news – The Caylee Anthony murder is no longer news. Welcome to tabloid nation.
I agree with Ron. And Joe. His “fall from grace” is a tragedy — in the classic sense of the word. I firmly believe that this “news” is not in the public interest: it’s the 21st century version of Roman circuses.
It’s in the public interest, certainly that of his constituents, for starters.
A liberal Democrat behaved very badly — and now observers and reporters are being attacked? I guess it shouldn’t be a surprise. Late Roman decadence would be the correct historical analogy here.
(After all, we’ve seen people like this buy votes and campaign in quite bread-and-circuses fashion, as well as behave badly and make a name for themselves, as Weiner did as a trademark.)
That he lied….. maybe that’s understandable but I do think there is a difference between those little lies we all tell and when you are called on something and you tell a bald faced whopper. The other side of the situation is when he was found out he showed the worst character possible. That he lied may pass muster to some but how about him using friends to unwittingly do the same? That he didn’t just deny but attacked and made accusations that he knew where untrue. He never showed any sense of character or the slightest inclination to accept any responsibility until he had no choice. By then his Mea culpa meant nothing, it was just another way of avoiding his responsibility for his actions. I personally think if he came clean he may have survived, but instead his lies make it worse than it already was.
Bad judgement? Yes. A lie? Yes. Poor character? Yes. So… who were the victims? Well let’s see… No blood was spilled, no economy was tumbled, no war was started, no gridlock was created, no jobs were moved overseas, no torture was either committed or apologized for, no carbon footprint issues, no taxcuts were made for rich, no founders rolled in their graves. Heck, this guy wasn’t even a presidential or VP candidate! What are we left with? Mostly something for dems to be disappointed by, reps to get all giggy about, and comedians to have fun with. Beyond that? Ho hum… zzzz
GC, you haven’t been paying attention. I’ve already gone on record with criticism of Weiner, and it’s fine with me if he reaps the rewards of his idiotic behavior, so save your highminded BS for someone else. My point is simple: Not all sins are equal and not all response to sins are appropriate to the degree of the sin. It’s a sad comedy made all the more sad by the weighing in of hypocrites.
Gc, in one sense you’re preaching to the choir. In another sense it’s theater of the absurd. Democrats have been on top of this problem since the beginning and were calling for Weiner’s resignation before republicans started warming up the hypocrisy machine. As for your contention that everyone is a hypocrite and a liar? I don’t share it and wouldn’t presume to know what your point in saying that is. Sure, none of us is squeeky clean, but to the extent matters of degree matter, then you comment is a throw away. Weiner will soon be out (as he should be) and hopefully some important bizz of govt can be done before the next stupid distraction.
Don’t worry, Weiner will go. Just a matter of time…
Try to relax pardner. We might actually be more in synch than you suspect. And yes, I appreciate as to how that might be a less than comfortable thought.
Unfortunately, Weiner still has defenders (including those who attack those critical of multiple kinds of behavior by Weiner).
Meanwhile –
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/12/weekinreview/12women.html