This week’s discussion topic, courtesy of Dino Ironbody: What historical villains weren’t hypocrites?

There’s a weirdly common tendency, both among pop historians and the general public, to assume that disreputable historical figures don’t actually believe the awful things they express, or act upon. This is especially true in democratic societies, where it’s assumed that the likes of Joe McCarthy or George Wallace or (insert modern politician) can’t actually believe the nonsense they spout, and are just pretending to be red-baiters, racists or general monsters for political clout. Heck, I’ve even heard this with more extreme figures like Hitler; every once in awhile you’ll see someone claim that he exaggerated his antisemitism, no matter how profoundly ignorant that is of the man’s life and worldview.

Perhaps it’s a natural assumption, based on our eagerness to believe in the decency of human nature. But it’s often used as an attempt to mitigate that person’s wrongdoing, as if Wallace is less of a monster, or less damaging to society, because he (supposedly) exaggerated his support for segregation. Or the false claim that Robert E. Lee did not care for slavery, which makes his support of the Confederacy seem like a principled (if perhaps misguided) stand for his home state. No one, I hope, would suggest that the Holocaust is somehow mitigated by Hitler’s (supposedly) not actually believing his antisemitic conspiracy theories. Does not actually believing the horrible ideology you espouse actually make one a better person? Or does it just help you sleep at night, knowing that you may do evil things but you’re not One Of Them?

Anyway, I suppose I digressed a bit from the original question.