Fascinating topic! I've been playing with a similar idea myself for a while now.
Depending on the level of development in your world, you might want to break up the perceptions the "honest" culture has of the dishonest one.
Perhaps socially, the dishonest culture would be viewed negatively by others, maybe making things like tourism and intercultural relationships difficult. However some might view members of the dishonest culture as more desirable mates/partners since they could, in theory, be easier to get along with and/or compete better against rivals.
In business, they might be viewed as risky or even treacherous, or they might be sought after as shrewd business partners. Are there lawyers in the culture/world you are making? Would it be fair to assume that they could make excellent legal councelors?
As for politics, I think it would depend on where the line is drawn in terms of the kinds of lies told. If it's limited to misdirection or omission of certain details, perhaps they could maintain constructive relations with other cultures. If they also include breaking treaties/oaths/contracts as permissible, I don't really know how that would work out in the absence of coercion.
The other point, of course, is how different the other cultures' views on lying are. If it's a culture with a strict moral code or honor system, they might be openly hostile towards people who live outside of their value system. Others might still work with them, but be more distrustful and controlling.
What might serve as an example of the latter is intercultural dynamics in terms of language and communication, specifically: "burden of communication" and "high vs. 140
low context cultures". Basically, a member of one culture might find himself "translating" everything said by someone from the "dishonest" culture in order to get to the cold, hard facts.They would then ask very direct questions to follow up. The other person might be aggravated by this if they feel threatened in some way due to the situation.
On the flip side, someone from the dishonest culture might have a hard time with an outsider that doesn't understand the subtleties of their communication style, such as catching on to and playing along with a bluff in a high stakes situation.
I know this is a place to provide answers, but I do have a question that's nagging at me hard. If the culture you're building values prowess in deception, how are the people supposed to evaluate that trait in others if being able to do so means that the deception failed? If the people of that culture are good liars, because that's what they are taught and encouraged to do, I assume they would also be good lie detectors.
How would people know that someone successful didn't become so by being honest? Would people just automatically believe that he/she had made it to the top by being an exceptional liar? If it were found out that someone had made it to a position of power in that culture, without the use of deceptions, would that person lose stature, popularity/respect, power?
As I said at the beginning, this is a fascinating topic and I'm probably going to lose a lot of sleep thinking about it. Thanks a lot.
Just for fun, you might want to check out "The Invention of Lying". It's a light romcom that sort of goes in the opposite direction of the culture you're building.
(This is my first post here, so I hope I haven't broken too many rules. My apologies for any damages.) 620