Honesty vs. Hipocrites

“Those who know not how to dissimulate, know not how to rule.” (Tacitus, pg.6)

Hypocrisy is often reached by ourselves in our social groups, as well as European rulers of the middle ages. The disputes expose this hypocrisy between the Scottish king James Stuart and his enemies. When I talk about disputes, I should pause there, since arguments led to changes. Arguments affected not only the king but the aristocrats, the lack of natural allies proves that. This is the main difference between the Scotland crown and the rest European crowns. Changes then were developed by disagreements and their interests. Hypocrisy then became their main interest as said, “To survive in this net of hostility, James had been forced to compromise and dissemble, to become cunning and to lie.” (pg. 6). In other words James was forced to wear another personality for him as a king to be able to move on. This was reflected in the weakness of the crown, which also was fed upon aristocrats disparities (social, political, religious, and economical). The country gave weight on its government and the government then turned to its people, who made the crown rely on its only opportunity, faith.

The king’s task became being God’s lieutenant, the same task that popes had, but with different interests. Now, the king had to deal with both the crown interests and the nobles’ issues. James reveals two faces, one for himself and another to the rest. This is plain hypocrisy, as the one compared to ourselves. Honestly, we live in a hypocrite society, one in which what we say is different from what we think. We even are hypocrite without thinking, we criticize and lie without knowing, it becomes one of those unconscious actions. Hypocrisy destroys, is part of what we know as social suicide. We by providing different faces forget honesty, an unconceivable value, one only remembered when needed.