In Hypocrisy and the Politics of Politeness, Jenny Davidson considers the arguments that define hypocrisy as a moral and political virtue in its own right. She shows that these were arguments that thrived in the medium of eighteenth-century Britain's culture of politeness. In the debate about the balance between truthfulness and politeness, Davidson argues that eighteenth-century writers from Locke to Austen come down firmly on the side of politeness. This is the case even when it is associated with dissimulation or hypocrisy. These writers argue that the open profession of vice is far more dangerous for society than even the most glaring discrepancies between what people say in public and what they do in private. This book explores what happens when controversial arguments in favour of hypocrisy enter the mainstream, making it increasingly hard to tell the difference between hypocrisy and more obviously attractive qualities like modesty, self-control and tact.

This is a fresh examination of the letters exchanged between Cicero and his correspondents, during the final decades of the Roman Republic. Drawing upon sociolinguistic theories of politeness, it explores the distinctive conventions of epistolary courtesy that shaped formal interaction among men of the Roman elite.

A critical assessement of the problems of sincerity and truth in politics argues that we should accept hypocrisy as a fact of politics without resigning ourselves to it or embracing it, drawing on the lessons of such thinkers as Hobbes, Mandeville, Jefferson, Bentham, Sigwick, and Orwell.

Comparing law to the American practice of common courtesy, this book explains how our courts not only survive under conditions of suspected hypocrisy, but actually depend on these conditions to function.

What kind of hypocrite should voters choose as their next leader? The question seems utterly cynical. But, as David Runciman suggests, it is actually much more cynical to pretend that politics can ever be completely sincere. Political Hypocrisy is a timely, and timeless, book on the problems of sincerity and truth in politics, and how we can deal with them without slipping into hypocrisy ourselves. Runciman draws on the work of some of the great truth-tellers in modern political thought--Hobbes, Mandeville, Jefferson, Bentham, Sidgwick, and Orwell--and applies his ideas to different kinds of hypocritical politicians from Oliver Cromwell to Hillary Clinton. He argues that we should accept hypocrisy as a fact of politics--the most dangerous form of political hypocrisy is to claim to have a politics without hypocrisy. Featuring a new foreword that takes the story up to Donald Trump, this book examines why, instead of vainly searching for authentic politicians, we should try to distinguish between harmless and harmful hypocrisies and worry only about the most damaging varieties.

“[This] thoughtful meditation . . . begins an important conversation about how our discourse can be moral and robust without sacrificing truth or freedom.” —Dahlia Lithwick, Slate Is civility dead? Americans ask this question every election season, but their concern is hardly limited to political campaigns. Doubts about civility regularly arise in just about every aspect of American public life. Rudeness runs rampant. Our news media is saturated with aggressive bluster and vitriol. Our digital platforms teem with trolls and expressions of disrespect. Reflecting these conditions, surveys show that a significant majority of Americans believe we are living in an age of unusual anger and discord. Everywhere we look, there seems to be conflict and hostility, with shared respect and consideration nowhere to be found. In a country that encourages thick skins and speaking one’s mind, is civility even possible, let alone desirable? In How Civility Works, Keith J. Bybee elegantly explores the “crisis” in civility, looking closely at how civility intertwines with our long history of boorish behavior and the ongoing quest for pleasant company. Bybee argues that the very features that make civility ineffective and undesirable also point to civility’s power and appeal. Can we all get along? If we live by the contradictions on which civility depends, then yes, we can, and yes, we should. “[This] slim and artful treatise . . . suggest[s] we continue to fight for civility, but learn to think of it less romantically.” —The New York TimesBook Review “Keith Bybee has delved into the literature of civility and emerged with a clear-eyed and helpful account of politesse. Let us bow.” —Henry Alford, author of Would It Kill You to Stop Doing That? A Modern Guide to Manners “This important book shows us why pursuing [civility] is as necessary as it is difficult.” —John Inazu, Comment