To start off, I would like to say Dr. Barry did a great job in our class and my subsequent class, International Law. That aside, today's discussion was very enriching for molding my political ethics. The main issue that I was wrestling with in class today was the idea of maintaining an absolutist stance on ethics versus shaping personal ethics with the context that an individual is subjected to.
For pragmatic reasons, I mostly sided with the stance that politicians must shape their ethics along with the political structure to create effectiveness. Is sacrificing an individual's ideal ethics for an attempt of efficacy the best way to conduct oneself in public office? Are certain actions 'morally acceptable' in some political institutions and wrong in others?
I personally agree to this statement with misgivings. This activity, however effective it may be, can be detrimental to the political structure itself. A perpetuating mentality of effectiveness leads to consolidation of power and corruption. In order to avoid a slippery slope of effectiveness and a sacrifice of morals, we must not create double standards for our politicians. I believe this is the main cause of many politically immoral acts. Saying something to the effect of 'well, since they're politicians, I guess its ok for them to manipulate us'. This mentality is prevalent, but can be defeated. To understand the careful balance between private and public acts, is to fathom what political ethics can be.
I suppose I am going to conclude with the argument that shaping political ethics according to political structure and public standards can be effective temporarily, but in the long run is detrimental to the system that the individual is trying to change through "pragmatic" means.
So politicians, beware. What you might think is an acceptable act by society or the political structure, you may just be pouring salt in the wound of ethics.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's interesting, I seem to be stuck between wishing to condemn our representatives to be more morally conscious while simultaneously agreeing that we should give them a break. It's definitely not okay with me for politicians to be excused simply because they're doing their jobs (a la Dennis Thompson's problem of many hands). My reply to that argument is simply, "Don't even." And of course we want to cut them some slack, because we elected them and gave them power, expecting that they'd try to refrain from complete abuse of said power. Alas, it's a slippery slope, as we've seen in our many case studies.
ReplyDelete