The German philosopher who fights against morality as a spectacle

There are prophetic books, and the most recent work by German philosopher Philipp Hübl falls into that category. It cautions readers that the label of “morality” does not always reflect what lies inside, and delves into the concept of morality becoming a status symbol. Applied to the realm of politics, Hübl’s analysis of the public display of this virtue is truly impactful. “When self-presentation of morality takes precedence over addressing real issues, we have a problem,” he emphasizes in his interview with Süddeutsche Zeitung. Although he refrains from naming specific politicians who have made morality their calling card, recent examples are not hard to come by.

Furthermore, these observations are made within societies that tend to collectively moralize, without being excessively moralistic. Hübl argues that in today’s political and cultural battles, we witness a prevalence of high-pitched but ineffective moral rhetoric across the entire political spectrum – from progressive identity politics to the conservative-religious camp. To illustrate this point, he cites the outrage and insults hurled by hashtag activists towards celebrities for things they tweeted years ago while under the influence or for opportunistic reasons. “The objective of such criticism is to signal loyalty to one’s own group or to weaponize morality against competitors, rather than genuinely striving to create positive change,” Hübl argues. “This approach hinders societal development, promoting superficial symbolic policies and even distorting research and anti-discrimination measures.”

According to Hübl, this phenomenon is rooted in anthropology. “Our moral standing is important to us. Everyone wants to project a certain image of themselves in the public sphere. Even when organizing a child’s birthday party, part of us wants other parents to recognize the effort we put into it,” he explains.

Hübl believes that the spectacle of morality gained particular momentum about a decade ago, when social media platforms introduced features allowing public reactions to others’ behavior. This era saw the rapid proliferation of terms associated with social justice, such as “sexism,” “racism,” and “inclusion.” Individuals began to realize that everything they said online would be morally judged by others. Consequently, reputation management became a priority. Negative reactions and criticism began to shape debates on issues that neither improved nor worsened society, regardless of how they were addressed. This gave rise to suspicions that the focus was more on staging grievances rather than driving genuine progress.

Politics is an infinite theater of sorts, and with the advent of digitalization, politicians have taken the spectacle of morality to new heights. In a small town, if someone boasts about being helpful but is never present when help is actually needed, they would be labeled a liar. In the realm of digital media, where personal acquaintance is absent, thousands of people pass moral judgment. This landscape serves as the perfect breeding ground for satisfying the thirst for status, establishing moral prestige, and showcasing blameless morality or victimhood at the hands of the presumed “wrong side.”