Daily Times

The Gulf of Tonkin incident was a significant escalatory event during the Vietnam War. It involved two separate confrontations between the United States and North Vietnam in August 1964. First on August 2 – when the USS Maddox, a US Navy destroyer, was attacked by North Vietnamese torpedo boats while conducting an intelligence patrol in the Gulf of Tonkin. In retaliatory fire the Maddox damaged many of the attacking boats. Second on August 4 – when an alleged attack was said to have occurred but later investigations revealed that this was neither true nor accurate. Despite doubts about the second incident, the US government used it to justify the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, which allowed President Lyndon B. Johnson to escalate US military involvement in Vietnam. Since then it is often cited as an example of how misinformation and misinterpretation along with a perpetuation of stable lie can lead to major political and military decisions. It begs the question: if lying is all bad then is there any value of a stable lie? Consider the following postulation.

In order to truly understand the value of a stable lie, first it is helpful to distinguish it from a casual lie. While the latter may be told to avoid short-term discomfort or to manipulate a situation temporarily, the former is more foundational – it is something that serves a longer-term purpose, has staying power, remains unchanged over time and provides consistency in the narrative. Stable lies are often rooted in complex social, political, or personal motivations, and their stability depends on their alignment with existing beliefs, narratives, and systems of power. As such, a stable lie goes beyond the mere act of deception! For a lie to be stable, it must be well-crafted, resilient to scrutiny, and integrated into the broader narrative in such a way that it becomes difficult to disprove.

A stable lie is still a lie and when the truth finally emerges, the plummet in trust can be of catastrophic proportions.

One of the biggest applications of a stable lie is in the realms of politics. Go figure! This is mostly because politics is deeply entwined with personal emotions and thus almost always all stable lies in politics play on common fears, desires or insecurities. Throughout the Cold War, the US government in particular and the Western world in general, peddled the stable lie “red menace is a threat to freedom”. A physical manifestation of this was seen in the McCarthy “witch hunts” of 40s and 50s. The “socialism = tyranny” myth became even stronger not only because it resonated with American ideals of individual liberty and capitalist success but also because it was repeated throughout political campaigns, media, and governmental rhetoric.

Social cohesion is another arena where the virtue of a stable lie is impressive. Many societies create idealized versions of their past, focusing on particular heroes, triumphs, or ideologies that may ignore uncomfortable truths. Their function? Provide citizens with a sense of shared identity, pride, and purpose. The “American Dream” for example, is built on the legend of meritocracy – an incorrect notion that anyone, regardless of background, can achieve success through hard work.

In the ambit of national security too, a stable lie plays an important part. In modern times, the use of “actual or imagined external enemies” or “invisible hands” has been used heavily as a stabilizing narrative. The portrayal of an enemy – a foreign nation, a terrorist group, or even an internal ideological opponent – creates a clear and stable lie in the “us versus them” dynamic that strengthens national unity and justifies governmental power.

Economics has also seen its share of stable lies. Consider the Reagan era of the 80s where the phrase “trickle-down economics” was almost in constant use throughout the decade. This refers to the idea that tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations will ultimately lead to economic benefits for everyone, including the poor and middle class. This is underpinned by the misplaced belief that if the wealthy – people and corporations – have enough cash to spend, it will incentivise them to invest more and grow the economy. Even without any empirical evidence supporting the theory that wealth disproportionately benefits the broader population through tax cuts for the rich, this stable lie has been continually promoted as a solution to economic growth.

At the national level, one of the greatest stable lies every propagated is that of falling “victim to global conspiracies”. This narrative often revolves around the idea that a country’s troubles – economic challenges, insurgency, terrorism and their ilk – are the result of conspiratorial actions by foreign powers seeking to undermine national sovereignty. Although foreign involvement and external factors certainly play a role in any country’s geopolitical and security situation but the consistent framing of any nation as the sole victim of international conspiracies is an oversimplification.

While there is indeed value attached to a stable lie, the long-term cost of relying on such lies can be overwhelmingly detrimental. One, stable lies often obscure the truth and hamper the development of learned, logical political discourse. When the public is fed a continuous stream of deception, critical thinking becomes more difficult, and individuals may become less inclined to question authority or seek out alternative viewpoints.

This can undermine democratic institutions and erode the capacity for citizens to hold political leaders accountable. Two, the stability of a political lie can create divisions and lead to social polarisation. This polarisation can not only destabilise society but also hinder compromise and consensus building. Three, a stable lie is still a lie and when the truth finally emerges – by whistleblowers, investigative journalism, media leaks, perceptual shift or others instruments – the plummet in trust can be of catastrophic proportions. The public’s realisation that they have been deceived may spark protests, demands for accountability, and even regime change!

History has been replete with examples of stable lies providing dividends early in their inception but losing steam and lustre later in their life. Moreover – the ethical, psychological and human implications of such constant deception cannot be ignored. And in the end, there will always be a cost to be paid and a balance to be settled. The challenge lies in navigating the complex terrain of truth and deception, recognizing the value of stability while remaining vigilant about the consequences of distortion. In a world that increasingly demands transparency and accountability, the importance of honesty and the pursuit of truth cannot be overstated.

The writer is Director Programmes for an international ICT organization based in the UK and writes on corporate strategy, socio-economic and geopolitical issues.