THE LAST DITCH An Englishman returned after twenty years abroad blogs about liberty in Britain
'Contaminated' fuel fury
At the British Embassy in Moscow tonight...

Green talk but no green walk? | Ethical living | Guardian Unlimited Environment

Link: Green talk but no green walk? | Ethical living | Guardian Unlimited Environment.

Raised_hand_1I honestly think this is the best confession I have ever read in Pravda  The Grauniad. One of its writers effectively admits, without a flicker of embarrassment, that he thinks his readers' principles are often just for show.

"Hands up anyone who isn't a hypocrite. Come on, own up. Who out there actually lives by every one of the principles they profess to uphold?"

For the benefit of any passing Guardianistas, please consider that a principle you merely "profess" to uphold is more of an affectation, really. Still, it probably impresses your "right on" friends down at the wine bar every bit as much as a real principle, so don't worry.

On the other hand, if you would like to start living a principled life, perhaps you should use more intellectual rigour when forming your principles? You might consider only adopting those you are able to live up to? You might reflect on the notion that, in professing principles for others to adhere to, while failing to do so yourself, you are following in some fairly unsavoury footsteps.

Just a thought.


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Welshcakes Limoncello

Yes, an interesting use of language in the quote. You either have a principle or you don't, agreed!


The following quote surely takes the prize

It is fine for BBC Newsnight's "ethical man" to be a tongue-in-cheek reporter, but if it is the head of Greenpeace who is totally pure and virtuous, then that is seen as just annoying.

Waht does it mean? Is it more acceptable for the head of Greenpeace to be a hypocrite?

The comments to this entry are closed.