Hacker News Reader

This is a good general point: it sometimes makes sense to be against X, while simultaneously participating in X. For example: in a country where you need to bribe people to carry on a normal life, you can do so while advocating for anti-bribery laws. It doesn't make you a hypocrite.

View on HN

That is the definition of a hypocrite. Reasonable hypocrisy remains hypocrisy.

From Oxford Languages:

> the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform

Sure, call it "reasonable hypocrisy", so long as we don't castigate people doing it.

How about wanting to legally abolish tips, because it's unfair and leads to subminimum wages for workers? Must you refuse to tip a waiter, lest you be called a hypocrite?

> because it's unfair and leads to subminimum wages for workers?

That’s generally not really true though? Especially in many states like CA, NY etc. where there is (almost) no tipped minimum wage.

Anyway, sounds like a hypocritical position because in general consumers would benefit more from abolishing tips than waiters/other tipped workers.

This is a strawman. OPs example was someone who held a belief that it isn't beneficial to the worker.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com