Integrity in a post-truth world

Last updated on: July 17, 2014 at 2:36 pm by Morgan Guyton

Integrity in a post-truth world 2014-07-17T14:36:03-05:00 Morgan Guyton

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I’m worried about our country. A few years ago, I read a book called The Origins of Totalitarianism by Hannah Arendt that described the century of ideological groundwork which set the stage for the Third Reich in Germany. If it’s silly to compare our country today to Germany in the 1920’s, that’s because we don’t have millions of displaced Eastern European refugees and the 30% unemployment rate that created enough desperation and messianic need to clear the way for Hitler’s rise to power. But what scares me is that our national political discourse over the past two decades has developed the same contempt for integrity and embrace of hyperbole and paranoia that Hitler exploited. The more we acclimate to thinking that our political opponents are not just wrong but are servants of Satan and that the race or religion of our enemies is sub-human, the easier it will be to accept a totalitarian fuhrer one day if our economic conditions ever get desperate enough to justify “extreme measures” like the abandonment of democracy.

We live in a post-truth world today. Few people are invested in defending the truth itself, since most people would rather argue on behalf of whatever ideological tribe they’ve chosen. This reality is somewhat created by the nature of the information age. In order to stand out in a sea of information, public figures have to attract peoples’ attention by casting their positions in terms that are as extreme as possible. Being reasonable and having integrity is boring. Nobody wants to retweet you. No reporter is going to write an article about your press conference. That’s why you have to say at your press conference, “Those commies/fascists/racists/etc that I’m here to stand against have brought our nation to the brink of disaster” instead of saying something banal like “Their proposal has some good points which I appreciate, but here’s where their logic is insufficient.”

In addition to our public figures using controversy as a publicity stunt, our culture has developed an “outrage industrial complex” of writers, pundits, and talking heads whose livelihood depends on keeping their audience perpetually whipped up into a state of hysteria and instilling the paradoxical paranoia about persecution that gets used to justify persecuting others. There is little that is more purely satanic than to be a deliberate instigator of outrage. It’s actually very close to the original Hebrew meaning of the word Satan, which is “accuser.”

Another aspect of our post-truth world is that no public figure will ever admit to wrongdoing when they are accused of it, because there is no incentive to be publicly truthful. This is partly the product of the awful gotcha-minded political discourse that we have. We assume that if a public figure gets caught doing something scandalous (cheating on his/her spouse, saying something racist, etc), then that means a giant X can be drawn over that person’s general credibility. Their ideas and talents are completely discredited because they sinned in one area of their lives.

Personally, I think you can be an important leader, even one anointed by God, and a scoundrel at the same time. Martin Luther King, Jr. cheated on his wife dozens of times (yeah, I know, that part of the story doesn’t usually get told). He was also horribly guilt-ridden by it, as some of his closest friends shared after his death. If King had been organizing in the media climate today, he would have gotten slaughtered and the civil rights movement would have been discredited as a result. So I can understand why politicians feel like they can’t possibly admit to marital indiscretions even after four or five women have stepped forward to confront them. But every time they project their own dishonesty onto their accusers or the media, our culture’s sense of integrity is crucified yet again.

What takes the place of integrity in our world is loyalty to our own ideological tribe. Because the truth is too complicated and difficult to discern in a sea of manipulative opinions, it’s easier to subscribe to a black and white overarching metanarrative about the world and regurgitate the talking points that this metanarrative gives us for defending its infallible accuracy. Our country’s two basic ideological metanarratives give us a choice between defending the world from racist, filthy rich fundamentalist Christians or atheist homosexual socialists. There’s no possibility that the people on the other side could share some of our values or even be decent human beings, because when ideology replaces truth, we choose the more wildly extreme explanations for the other side’s behavior in order to prove our ideological loyalty, since integrity no longer has any currency.

This is where it gets scary to me, because some people say things online that would cause blood to be shed if they acted on them. Right now, there’s a big gap between what people are willing to say online and what they’re willing to do in the physical world. To some degree, the monotony of our physical lives which we spend in mostly spirit-numbing surroundings may be part of the reason that people overcompensate with online extremism. Rage is a fairly natural byproduct of the oppressive uneventfulness of modern life (at least in the white middle-class world that I live in). But after decades of allowing hysterical, paranoid views about other people to be normal conversation that goes unchallenged, what will we be willing to accept and do in the future if a charismatic populist leader with a perfect set of scapegoats rises up? Even if we’re not part of the 2% that smashes shop windows and beats up the scapegoats in the street, will we be part of the 98% who just want to go about our business without stirring up controversy or saying things that cause others to question our patriotism (or whatever other word they will use in the future)?

If integrity has as little value then as it does now, then we will be in trouble. That’s why I think one of the greatest civic responsibilities that each of us has as individuals is to yank ourselves out of the seductive gravitational pull of our supposedly infallible ideologies and make a genuine effort to understand whichever people we have been told to oppose as enemies. We should not assume that our system of government will protect us forever from the consequences of a post-truth world. For the same reason that non-violent political protest only works when dealing with people who have a conscience, a democracy is only as good as its society’s respect for integrity.

Previous Post

January 21, 2012

Vulnerability and leadership

Next Post

January 24, 2012 Helplessness: the foundation of prayer

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Advent Beauty Will Save the World Bible Big Picture: Ephesians Bloggers Book Christian salvation and the Beautitudes Culture Daily Office Danceable Homiletics Deadly Sins Deep Roots: Genesis Devotions Dominican Republic May 2011 El Principio Misericordia (The Mercy Principle) Five verses God tattooed on my heart Fundraising FutureGospel Good Biblical Words Henri Nouwen Interview Jennings' Christian Imagination Jesus inside the beltway Jesus Is My Candidate Jesus vs the Pharisees Jesus vs. Plato Journey to Eternity Looking Back on 2012 Love Actually Monday Merton Monday Merton Music Occupy the manger On Earth As It Is In Heaven Original Sin Podcast Poetry Politics Prayer Psalm 119 Radical Jesus 101 Reviews Sermon on the Mount Sermons Spanish Bible study Special Series Spiritual but not religious Synchroblog Theology Things that made me think Thomas a Kempis Ugliness Into Beauty Uncategorized Viaje Dominicano 2013 Walking in the Valley (Lent) Welcome: It's More than a Mat Wild Goose 2013 Wrestling

Select a Month March 2022 January 2022 December 2021 September 2021 April 2021 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which tribe did NOT ask for land on the east side of Jordan?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Issachar Reuben Gad Manasseh