The well known filthy tramp Jesus Christ famously said that ‘Hypocrites suck’ (Mathew 23:3 Raph Shirley’s 2015 translation). Therein lies the first argument in favour of hypocrisy. The Right is obsessed with hypocrisy for the obvious reason that one cannot argue against one’s current behaviour without committing hypocrisy. Slavery cannot end without someone being a hypocrite. Does the murderer who believes murder is wrong prove murder is right through his otherwise necessary state of hypocrisy? Does the man who once bought something undo himself by arguing against a privatised police force, since he has himself interacted with capital? He who has touched the coin must believe in the coin else he commits the ultimate sin of hypocrisy. And that leads us to the beautiful argument by contradiction at the heart of Christianity:
If the unhypocrite necessarily renounces all worldly possessions then since I have worldly possessions I would be a hypocrite to renounce worldly possessions. Therefore, since I am a hypocrite, I would be a hypocrite to argue in favour of unhypocrisy. Ergo, I must remain a hypocrite otherwise I would have to commit an act of hypocrisy in becoming the unhypocrite. And most of all you are a hypocrite for criticising my hypocrisy. What I preach is not to preach what I don’t practice and therefore all my practice is perfect and must never be changed.
One might think of this like the famous law of special relativity that the speed of light is the same for all observers. Hypocrisy is an equal evil to all observers regardless of the observer’s evil. Therefore since the Hypocrisy as Greatest Sin law of morality permits evil, then unhypocrisy is itself evil.
Finally, since I believe it is important not to practice what you preach, and since I preach that one should practice what one does not preach then I must begin by practicing what I preach in order to not practice what I preach, which is that one should not practice what one preaches. The antichrist has decided to argue against being immoral since otherwise he would have to be an unhypocrite which he disagrees with on moral grounds. Or is it ethical grounds?
Many happy returns,