dual policy. Hottentot morality (double standards): concept, examples

The expression "Hottentonian morality" about the principle of double standards has long been rooted in psychology. This principle of thinking is present not only among your friends and relatives, but also in politics. What it is and how it works, you will learn from the text below.

Who are the Hottentots?

The Hottentots are a South African Khoi tribe. The number of this nationality is about fifty thousand people.

The African tribe of the Hottentots got its name from the Europeans, who were the first to explore their way of life. The pagans, during the performance of their rites, quite often cast a spell that was heard by Europeans as "Hottentot".

Everyday speech also resembled the sounds of monkeys, so the Europeans considered them wild, similar to ancient people. From the Dutch hottentot is translated as "stutterer". It was stuttering that gave the name to this tribe.

Where did the expression "Hottentot ethics" come from?

Once a European missionary traveled to South Africa, where he studied the aborigines. In particular, he communicated with the Khoi tribe (Hottentots). To find out what kind of morality the locals live, what is good for them and what is bad, he asked one of them if he knows what is good and what is evil. The Hottentot replied that he knew what was good and what was bad, without any doubt. Evil, according to the Hottentot, is the case when your cattle and your wife are stolen from you, and good is when you steal someone else's cattle and wife.

The veracity of this story is debatable. Some researchers noticed that Khoi are very kind people. For example, the Christian clergyman Guy Tashar noted the good nature of the Khoi and wrote that they were very fond of sharing.

In Russia, the expression "Hottentot morality" became popular after S. Frank's article, which was addressed to Bolshevik immorality.

What is Hottentot Ethics?

The essence of the psychology of such thinking is as follows. Everything that we do and that is done to us, everything that leads to our own happiness and benefit is good. And everything that brings pain and harm is evil. In this case, it is important to take into account only personal desires and aspirations. What is good, only the subject of relations knows.

If an action benefits us, then it is virtuous. Everything is considered kind and good, which gives us satisfaction and happiness. But if another performs similar actions with us, then this is perceived as evil.

An African native thinks that his evil towards another is good if it brings him joy. It is a completely different case when the same "good" is done by a Hottentot - he does not like it.

The definition of Hottentot morality boils down to the formula: "All means are good" if they are useful to me. The Hottentot ethic is otherwise known as double standards. For those who act according to this morality, there is a standard of action that applies only to him, while a different standard of behavior applies to others. However, double standards also work at higher social levels.

So, Hottentot ethics and double standards are essentially the same thing.

The morality of double standards

Double standards are approaches to characterizing the actions and rights of broad sections of the population, states, and peoples. Officially, these approaches are not recognized by anyone, but their existence is ubiquitous.

Following the logic of double standards, it is possible to evaluate the same action, applying different interpretations of laws, principles, rules, and get several justified decisions (most often these are two opposite decisions).

In simple words, double standards are a biased attitude towards any events and their unfair assessment. These events should be evaluated by the same subjects. This is a discriminatory approach, deliberately covering events in a negative light for one object and in a positive light for another.

Double standards can be found in politics, journalism, economics and other humanities.

Double standards in international politics

Most often, double standards are used in international relations. In the 21st century, the method of Hottentot morality acts as a weapon in the fight against each other. The growth of international conflicts, aggression, terror - all this leads to wars, but not physical ones, but informational ones.

The means of covert war is precisely double standards. The politicians of the warring states act covertly, undermining the authority and strength of each other. In international relations, the subject is a state or a union of states that promotes a double standard in the international arena in relation to the object, that is, another state.

At the international level, the ethic of double standards is presented to everyone as if it defends democratic ideals and fights imperfections in other states and countries, thereby distracting from similar problems in a state using a double standard. Accusing other countries of non-observance of universal rights and freedoms, such countries are most often guided only by their own personal benefits.

A huge role in supporting such a policy is played by the media, which covers this or that event, according to the required standard. This applies even to such a serious issue as terrorism. If necessary, terrorism can act as a struggle for justice and freedom, which is completely unacceptable.

Terminology of double standards

How do double standards manifest themselves? The most common way of working is to use different words in relation to the same problem, object or action. At the same time, the terms become emotionally colored.

For example, the concept of "war" for some and for others can be interpreted as "battle for peace." For us, scouts are the heroes of the country, and for others they are spies.

Any words, sentences, expressions, events are subject to double standards. Absolutely everything can be turned in a favorable way for one country to the detriment of another.

Double standards policy

If we characterize the actions of the subject depending on who this subject is for us, then we will pursue a policy of double standards. Our friends will receive a more pleasant evaluation than strangers. This principle implies a stricter attitude towards one of the groups of people.

The policy of double standards in international relations consists in blaming the violation of universal principles, rights and freedoms by any state. At the same time, the accuser himself violates the same principles in the framework of his international and domestic activities.

Such an approach is not a novelty, it has existed for many tens or even hundreds of years, the system of double standards is actively used by politicians, leaders, and ordinary people.

Examples of double ethics in politics

Below are examples of the policy of double standards in international relations.

1. The pro-Western orientation of presidential candidates justifies a large percentage of those who voted. For example, M. Saakashvili, as a pro-Western candidate, wins the presidential elections in Georgia with a large percentage. In this case, one speaks of the victory of democracy. A significant percentage advantage and the victory of V. Putin from the Western point of view are rigged and anti-democratic.
2. A referendum is welcomed in one country and opposed in another. For example, the West agreed with the referendum on the secession of Serbia and Montenegro, but they did not agree with the referendums in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
3. Preferential prices for resources to brother countries. For example, during the collapse of the USSR, everyone was against Russia supplying its resources to post-Soviet countries at preferential rates. But when, after the Orange Revolution, Russia began to supply its resources to Ukraine at prices similar to those on the world market, it was called blackmail and undermining the economy.

There are many examples of double standards in world politics. Almost every event that happens is double standards.

Double standards at work

The policy of double standards is relevant not only in international politics. Its obvious manifestation is the dual sexual policy towards women and men.

A striking example of double standards is the system of recruitment. In no developed country legislation you will find evidence that men have priority in hiring over women.

However, behind the scenes, you will be convinced that the employer will be more willing to hire a man, even if both candidates are of the same age, have the same education and work experience.

The same applies to wages. The earnings of a man in the same enterprise may differ from that of a woman due to more efficient work of men than women, due to, for example, physical skills, etc.

Gender policy of double standards

A special role in this matter is played by the reproductive role of women. Many employers refuse to hire women because she can go on maternity leave, on sick leave because of children, and so on. Such an employee is less priority only because it is a woman.

The dual principle in relation to women and men exists not only in relation to work. Modern society is overwhelmed by gender stereotypes, when the same fact of a man's infidelity is perceived by many as a normal act. Men themselves tend to consider their unintentional betrayal commonplace, and the betrayal of a woman is perceived as something immoral and is condemned in every possible way by male cheaters.

These facts are confirmed by surveys. One in four men consider cheating on their wife abnormal. Four out of four consider cheating on a woman to be immoral.

This striking example is not the only one. The policy of double standards towards women is quite widespread.

Double standards in personal relationships

Everyone's life is filled with double standards. And this is not only politics, the media, art or science, it is also the personal relationships of people.

From the point of view of psychology, double standards are not something abnormal and incomprehensible. They are natural for any person who is much more favorable to himself than to others.

It's easier to understand yourself. Even when we do something wrong, we can justify ourselves, because we know exactly why we did this or that action. But in relation to another person, we behave differently - we are more strict with his actions, because we do not know and do not want to know what prompted him to commit this or that act.

It is easier to find the speck in another's eye than to see the beam in your own. All this is due to the fact that a person puts himself above others and believes that he has the right to a better life, while others do not. In the maximum degree of development, this develops into a narcissistic mental personality disorder.

Thus, Hottentot morality, or double standards, are literally inscribed in our daily personal life, in our relationships with each other. Mass media - newspapers, the Internet, TV - everything is replete with obsessive stereotypes of thinking. The actions of politicians in the modern world are not without double standards. The international information war widely uses the method of double standards. States vying to drag the blanket of their justice on themselves, constantly blaming others for what they themselves are wrong.

Double standards policy

Double standards policy("contradictory policy", "dual policy", "inconsistent policy") - a fundamentally different application of principles, laws, rules, assessments to the same type of actions of various subjects (one of which may be the evaluator himself) depending on the degree of loyalty of these subjects or other considerations of benefit to the evaluator. Double standard - a term widely used in modern political science, journalism, economics, social science and other humanities, denoting a different attitude (often outright discrimination) and a different assessment of the same, and more often similar events and situations by the same evaluators in the strength of their bias, changed circumstances, personal self-interest, emotional state, etc.

Definition

The policy of double standards is a situation where the assessment of the same actions of subjects varies depending on the relationship in which each of these subjects is with the evaluator. At the same time, the actions of "their own" - loyal to the evaluator - are justified, while the same actions of "strangers" are condemned and considered unacceptable.

In international relations, it usually takes the form of accusing those who are objectionable of violating principles, conventions, obligations, “trampling on universal values”, “violating human rights”, “violating the norms of international law” while defiantly ignoring completely similar own actions or actions of allies.

The policy of double standards has been around since the beginning of human society. It is widely used as a means of putting pressure on opponents through public opinion and as a way to justify one's own actions against someone else. Equally widespread is the accusation of double standards, which is often used to deflect criticism.

Terminology of double standards

One of the widespread manifestations of the policy of double standards is the naming of the same or very close objects, actions, phenomena by different terms, the emotional coloring of which is significantly different. For example:

• Spy - Scout- depending on who he works for.
• planting - Implementation- depending on whether the evaluator approves of the innovation.
• occupy - release- depending on whose troops entered the country.
• Dictator - Leader- depending on the political orientation of the ruler or on whether his “hand” can reach the speaker (as well as on his political preferences)
• Dictatorship - Power vertical- depending on the loyalty of the speaker.
• Tyrant - Leader- Same.
• Snitch / Sexot - Informant- depending on the attitude towards those whom and about whom he informs.
• Companion - Epigone- depending on the relationship to the one he supports.
• Mutiny / Riot - Revolution / Uprising- depending on the result of the operation ("The rebellion cannot end in success. Otherwise, its name is different" - John Harington's stanza in Marshak's translation).
• Romantic kiss in front of everyone - Dirty display of their sexual inclinations- depending on whether we are talking about a man and a woman or a man and a man.
• Separatism - National Liberation Movement- depending on who and from which state wants to secede.
• Armed aggression - restoration of constitutional order- depending on the likes.
• Establishment of a puppet government - destruction of the dictatorship- depending on the likes.
• Terrorist/Action - Partizan- depending on the likes.
• Intervention - military aid- depending on the likes.
• Anti-Soviet - human rights activist- depending on the political views of the speaker and the country in which the rights are protected.
• Rawness - damp coolness- depending on whether the speaker is warm or cold (“The air conditioner blew with dank dampness”).
• Creature - little animal- depending on whether they bought a rat in a store, or it wound up on its own.
• Glass half empty - Glass half full- depending on the mood of the evaluator.
• New Russian - brother- depending on the relative financial situation of the speaker.
• Military campaigns - Predatory raids- depending on whose historical ancestors are meant.
• Cowardice - Caution- depending on the likes.

Notes

Links

see also

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010 .

The definition of a double standard today is one of the most common concepts in the field of political science and international relations. This is largely due to the aggressive policy pursued by the world media, namely the so-called information war- a very effective mechanism for influencing the masses and putting pressure on state elites.

As stated in the literature, the pattern derived by the famous historian Clausewitz: "War is a continuation of politics, but by other means"- implies the opposite: the fact that politics is often also a war waged by special means, one of which is the information war.

Double standards policy- this is a different interpretation and evaluation of the same or similar events, processes or legal facts, depending on who their subjects are and how the evaluating subjects treat them. At the same time, with the same essential content, the actions of some receive support and justification, while others are condemned and punished; some subjects are subject to certain requirements and rules, while others are completely different.

Double standards- the phenomenon is not new, they have always been. But at the current stage of development of human civilization, the practice of applying double standards has reached its apogee. It began to be applied not only individually (when one state purposefully replaces concepts), but also by entire blocs of states and international organizations (groups of states in the European Union and other organizations, WADA in sports).

It is no coincidence that many experts have already called the 21st century "the century of information wars". In the life of modern society, in addition to the well-known concept of the Cold War, such concepts as "information weapon", "information terrorism", "information threat". Being an element of information wars and in many cases a means of implementing the geopolitical plans of individual countries, the policy of double standards can pursue a whole range of goals - from destabilizing the internal life in a particular country and changing power in it to inciting armed conflicts and their further escalation through distorted information support. . There are many cases in the history of mankind when false or misinterpreted information became the reason for the start of large-scale bloodshed.

In the 21st century, the flow of information has become so intense, and the methods of falsifying events and facts, taking into account the development of new information technologies and methods of psychological influence on people, are so diverse that it is becoming increasingly difficult to distinguish objective and truthful information from false. The well-known saying "Who owns the information, owns the world" today can be interpreted and supplemented with the thesis "Whoever spreads disinformation influences the world in order to take possession of it."

There are many examples of double standards. These are situations where direct aggression is called humanitarian intervention carried out in order to protect democracy, human rights and deliver peoples from dictatorial regimes, and the picture of events distorted by Western media during the period of the Russian-Georgian conflict, and de jure recognition by a number of Western countries of Kosovo and at the same time, the non-recognition of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, and the declaration by the Kyiv authorities of the inhabitants of the South-East of Ukraine as pro-Russian separatists, and those who protect them as terrorists.

A typical retro example of the use of double standards can be the Mujahideen and Osama bin Laden, who during the confrontation with the USSR were supported by Great Britain and the United States, and after the creation of Al-Qaeda and the entry of the United States into Afghanistan, these "freedom fighters" became terrorists. All these processes were widely covered by the media with one single purpose - to create a certain public opinion.

Disinformation was the reason for the US invasion of Iraq, which led to the overthrow of the government and the death of, according to various estimates, from 200,000 to 2,000,000 people. As you know, it has been argued that Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction. At first there was a "stuffing" of information that Iraq was able to create it in less than two years, after three weeks the period was reduced to six months, and in October 1991 to almost two. The presence of weapons of mass destruction, which was allegedly created by Iraq, became the prerequisite for unleashing aggression against it in 2003. However, no such weapon has ever been found.

The policy of double standards took place in the coverage and evaluation of events in Libya. Today, it often manifests itself when describing the situation in Syria.
This policy is contrary to a number of principles and norms of international law enshrined in acts of the universal and regional levels, in particular, in the Charter UN 1945 Declaration of Principles of International Law relating to friendly relations and cooperation between states in accordance with UN Charter 1970, Final Act of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe 1975

The 1978 Declaration on Basic Principles Concerning the Contribution of the Mass Media to the Strengthening of Peace and International Understanding, to the Development of Human Rights and to the Fight Against Racism and Apartheid and Incitement to War states that the mass media, by disseminating information, should contribute to the development by the states of the policy most conducive to the easing of international tension and the peaceful and just settlement of international disputes.

In 2012, Russia proposed to adopt the UN Convention on Ensuring International Information Security. Article 4 of the draft of this act states that the cross-border dissemination of information, contrary to the principles and norms of international law, as well as the national laws of states, is a threat in the information space.

It seems that it is necessary to intensify the foreign policy efforts of Russia and other states that stand on the positions of strengthening the international legal order and recognizing the primacy of international law in regulating international relations, to adopt this Convention, and supplement its text with the provision that the dissemination of false information by official representatives of states or journalists which caused the use of force by states or massive violations of human rights is an international offense that entails responsibility.

I would like to hope that the assessment of certain facts and events by representatives of states and the media will be more objective, pursuing not the goal of escalating informational and other confrontation, but the goals enshrined in the UN Charter and other international acts.

In words: “Honey, why are things scattered in the hallway?”, But in reality: “Why should I clean up my plate after myself ?!”

This phenomenon has a very long "beard". They were mentioned in the ancient philosophy of Rome and biblical texts. Does that surprise you?.. I don't. Another confirmation of how much a person values ​​​​his habits, and is very reluctant to part with them. Even when you bring him to the causes of failure, resentment, or depression, it turns out that he is not ready to part with it! And often the opposite happens - vehemently defends the benefits of what he suffers from!

What is double standards?

To begin with, I use my favorite trick - let's clarify what double standards mean? According to the dictionary definition, these are widely accepted DIFFERENT approaches to assessing the actions and rights of a person, group, country or race. Not quite clear? Then a simple example: a father smokes like a locomotive, while teaching his son that smoking is terribly harmful, and he himself will definitely quit someday. Now give your example, the first one that comes to mind...

The problem of double standards is everywhere: in everyday life, in politics, in family relationships, at work. People have become so accustomed to double morality that they no longer perceive it as something strange ... But it is not as harmless as it seems. The well-known expression “For whom is a terrorist, and for whom is a freedom fighter” speaks for itself.

Like any phenomenon, double standards have their advantages and disadvantages.

Benefits of double standards:

• no responsibility. He said one thing, thought another, did the third. “Dad, you said that you need to work on yourself ... - You never know what I said!” Always like water off a duck's back! Comfortable.
• a way to be better than you really are. A faithful family man and a fighter for the morality of the foundations comes off in the sauna with prostitutes.
• fueling your own ego. Emphasize your importance in the eyes of others - “Do you have children? - Three, my pride! ”, And alone with yourself -“ Wife is a fool, children are idiots!

Do not even dream about the psychology of good relationships. Constantly pretending, in fact, is difficult, requires a lot of energy. Therefore, sooner or later, double standards will reduce any relationship to zero ... and loneliness.

Consequences of double standards:

• no responsibility. Over time, people will stop dealing with the carrier of the DS, and he will remain out of work: in the profession, love and friendship. Who wants to associate himself with someone who cannot be relied upon.
• a way to be better than you really are. Do not think that everyone around you is fools and does not understand anything, does not feel anything. Insincerity always shines, in its space you subconsciously feel uncomfortable, and next time there will be no desire to return to it.
• fueling your own ego. In other words, a constant flow of energy into yourself. If you constantly fill a balloon with water, it will burst ... And this very flow of water - attention, care, help, love - will dry up sooner or later, with such a “double” approach to people.

It was not in vain that I gave several examples with children. Double standards in raising a child is one of the main reasons for his spiritual inferiority. When dad says one thing, mom another, grandmother third. At the same time, each of them does the opposite in his own words, and all this in the presence of a child - he is lost, bifurcated, loses his "I". After all, parents are stable examples for how to live and do! As a result, the child develops a behavior: the main thing is to say what they want to hear, but it is not necessary to do it. And then there are reproaches: “And who is he like?”, “How could you do this?”

How to get rid of double standards?

It is clear that all the useful psychology about the nature of double standards cannot be presented in one article. Get a consultation with a psychologist online if you feel the need for it, or you can

The term "double standards" is widely known in such fields of science as political science, journalism, economics, and social science. In English, it appeared in the middle of the nineteenth century, they denoted unequal moral requirements for men and women. In Russian, it denoted racial and class inequality under capitalism.

What is double standards?

Double standards - this is the difference in the assessment of similar or identical actions that were committed by different people. Thus, for example, some people judge others with prejudice and allow personal negative attitudes towards individuals to influence their assessment of their actions. Such a phenomenon affects all spheres of social life, some people consider different double standards to be immoral, others say that it is impossible to exist without them, while others completely deny the existence of double standards.

Double standards - psychology

In psychology, double standards cause the stratification of society, the emergence of a huge amount of hypocrisy and lies. In general, this behavior can be described as " I can do what others can’t, and I can do everything that they are also allowed to do". A person living by such standards tries to adapt to several people at the same time, trying to please them. Such double morality contributes to the creation of conflicting opinions within a person and double standards of behavior.

An example of a person living by such standards can be given: “ I can steal because I need a car and an apartment, but if they steal from me, it should be punishable". Those means that have been taken from others according to this principle will not make a person happy. Living proof of this is the financially wealthy people and the antipode - families that could not earn their capital, and this led to degradation, alcoholism, drug addiction. If such thoughts arise not in one, but in many members of society, then deep contradictions and neurosis arise in society itself.

What is double standards of conduct?

People have different standards in life. So, for example, if in a kindergarten or school a child behaves politely and prudently towards others, then in the family circle he allows himself to be rude and tactless. And here the question arises, what does double standards mean, why is such a different behavior developed? From the age of six, a child already consciously understands the difference between behavior in public and at home and builds his morality with double standards.

This behavior is repeated in adulthood and occurs for several reasons:

• home is a place where a child can feel free, where there is no need to follow any generally accepted norms of behavior;
• after the age of six, the child's character and behavior change, such extraordinary behavior looks like a protest and unwillingness to follow the instructions of the parents;
• the cause may be a transitional age;
• the child adopts standards of behavior from adults, if rudeness and disrespect are acceptable in your family, then the child will behave in the same way towards you.

Double standards in relationships

Stereotypes between men and women have existed for a long time, but this does not pose any danger until a person begins to live with them and think not with his own head, but with someone else's. There are many examples of what double standards are in a relationship:

1. Everyone is used to the fact that a man must make the first step when meeting a woman, otherwise he will be considered notorious.
2. A woman should be clean and tidy, and she is not forgiven for what is excusable for a man.
3. A man is not allowed to beat a woman, but a woman allows herself to raise her hand against her companion, justifying this situation by saying that she is weaker.
4. It is generally accepted that friendship between people of different sexes does not happen, unless the man is a representative of a sexual minority. Although this stereotype is wrong.
5. A rich sexual experience in men is considered the norm, a woman with the same experience will be called a whore.

Double standards in education

The system of double standards has not bypassed educational processes. Here are some notable examples.

1. You can hear a lot about the need to remove children from the streets and captivate with something useful, but along with this, sections and circles are closed, and at best they move from the category of free to paid ones. Moreover, those in power are forcing directors to force parents to pay for these same circles and attend them without fail.
2. When voicing the salaries of teachers, they take the highest, which takes into account the category, incentive payments and other allowances, but in fact, 90% receive much less than the announced amounts. Along with this, they start talking about attracting young professionals, but they create conditions that few agree to.
3. The state allocating funds for, for example, the signaling, which is necessary for the school to be accepted by the new academic year, does not finance the related repairs and recommends that schools look for money "on the side." The directors begin to ask for help from their parents, but as soon as some dissatisfied parent writes a complaint, the same organization that recommended finding money on their own brushes it aside, talking about the illegality of such actions and promising to punish those responsible.
4. At conferences, you can often see figures that reflect positive trends in equipping schools with multimedia devices, passing it off as achievements of the state, but in 80% of cases all this equipment was bought with the money of attracted sponsors, philanthropists and all the same parents of students.

Double standards in human rights

In any human society there is a principle of double standards. There will always be people among us who will believe that they can do more than everyone else. Women's double standards lead to disagreements in a couple, cause injustice. And if equality between people exists, then only as a theory. In fact, a man has more responsibilities than a woman:

1. If a man is obliged to serve in the army and sacrifice himself during the war, then a woman does not bear any obligations to the state, her civil rights are not limited.
2. The pension for men is accrued after the age of sixty. Their average life expectancy is minus one and a half years, which means that most men have practically no right to a pension. For women, the pension is accrued upon reaching the age of 55. After that, she lives an average of another 15 years.
3. Reproductive rights, the right to control the expenditure of child support funds, the choice of fatherhood in men, unlike women, are absent.

Double standards in the economy

In Russia, for a long time there has been such a thing as "lawlessness", which means a massive violation of the rules without consequences for violators. At the same time, the practice of double standards divides Russia into two parts:

• sub-elite layer, consisting of the ruling elite;
• middle protolayer and lower layer.

Such a double morality in society contributes to the deformation of consciousness, causes in people the desire to fall into the category of the elite, who have more favorable living conditions. Over time, the reasons and methods for applying double standards may change: discriminatory tariffs and fees, visa restrictions, blocking of financial assets.

Double standards in politics

The policy of double standards is a contradictory, dual policy, different principles, laws, rules regarding subjects, depending on their loyalty and considerations of benefit. That is, when assessing, real circumstances and facts are not taken into account, the main role in this case is played by the attitude of the appraiser to the assessed. The actions of “ours” are justified, and the actions of “strangers” are condemned and considered unacceptable.

Double Standards in the Bible

Many people think that there are no double standards in the spiritual life, but this is not at all the case. Religion for many centuries used the postulates of Jesus in the literal sense, while the true meaning was distorted. For example, all believers consider themselves servants of God, although such an idea is initially blasphemous, since God created people so that they could be equal among equals. Such distortions occur all the time. The problem of double standards in the Bible leads to the formation of deceit and duplicity in society.