Ethics and Politics
1



Politics is the process of making and implementing
decisions binding upon society
Politics is about accumulating and using power
Ethics is a set of beliefs and customs shared by members
of society with regard to:





what is right and what is wrong
how things ought to be
what one ought to be, how one should live
These beliefs are normative: people are expected to abide
by them
Some of these norms become laws (that is, they are
backed up by the power of the state)
2
Relations between ethics and politics
THE CONFLICT IS OBVIOUS:
 Use of power often violates ethical norms (rulers feel
compelled or tempted to act in ways which cannot be
morally justified).
Ethics constrains rulers.
What options do they have?
Ethical behaviour (power is legitimate only when it is just)
Open cynicism (power does not need moral justification: it
justifies itself)
Hypocrisy


Ethics poses challenges to power, works like an engine of
social change (reform or revolution)
JUSTICE! Is a great battle cry
3
The “realist” argument:
Politics and ethics belong to different realms.
 Ethics is primarily for private life.
 In politics, what counts is power.
 At best, ethics is useful to cover up the uglier faces
of power.
 Real rules of power have little to do with morality.
 Therefore, if a ruler uses power only morally, he/she
will be beaten by the others who don’t restrict
themselves by moral norms. Nice guys finish last.

4








The “idealist” response:
The very existence of the conflict between ethics and
politics reflects a deeper reality:
Ethics and politics are inseparable. Politics must be ethical;
ethics is a key mechanism which holds society together;
power not bound by ethical rules can only damage the
social fabric and undermine the state
Politics is supposed to be ethical; rulers are expected to be
just
Since the state is an association, the rulers’ behaviour
should reflect the dominant values held by the members of
society
The rulers cannot effectively rule without at least some
degree of consent of the ruled – however expressed
To be effective, power must be legitimate
Laws made and enforced by the rulers must be rooted in
the ethical norms existing in society: otherwise they won’t
be effective
5
“REALIST” OBJECTION no.1






Don’t idealize the people: every nation has the kind of
government it deserves
Yes, the state is an association, and as such, it does reflect
the dominant customs and beliefs of its members
But why assume that human beings are necessarily good
and virtuous?
People can be selfish, greedy and wicked by nature: why
should their rulers be any different?
If people are naturally inclined to act in evil ways, their
politics will be evil, too (Germans and Hitler)
So, politics can be unethical, while reflecting the qualities of
the people who make it
6
“
REALIST” OBJECTION no.2:






Who cares about the people?
The people may be virtuous and ethical, but the rulers may,
and often do, act in highly unethical ways – and get away
with it
They may be forced to act in such ways because of
perceived necessity (desperate times call for desperate
measures)
Or they may act in such ways, motivated by unethical goals
(power aggrandizement, personal enrichment, etc.)
It is unrealistic to expect rulers to be ethical (Bismarck).
Power corrupts (Acton)
And the people may tolerate this gap for long periods of
time
7





Argument No.1 recognizes that politics is inseparable from
ethics (bad ethics produce bad politics)
Argument No.2 recognizes that ethical standards need to
apply to the use of power, but considers this unrealistic
Human capacity for evil is obvious
Both rulers and the ruled may violate moral norms
But: historically, a key condition on which person would be
vested with public authority (right to order others about)
has been the belief that he/she was capable of justice,
served as a model of ethical behaviour – and thus
possessed moral authority
8
There is nothing inherently immoral about power as such.
Why then the conflict between ethics and politics?
1. Society can be divided on basic moral norms (what some
view as ethical, others may view as unethical)
2. Society can be divided on the meaning of the basic moral
norms and their application in politics
3. Society may lack the tools to compel the rulers to behave
ethically – can the rulers be compelled at all?
4. So, at issue is the organization of social power – at all levels
5. Social evolution is driven by the pursuit of justice
6. Democracy as a way of resolving the conflict
7. But democracy cannot eliminate this conflict: what it can do
is channel its energy in the direction of social progress
9








Every society needs a moral code
Moral codes are key instruments of social coordination and
control, they keep societies together and give them
purpose
Moral codes can have both religious and secular forms
Religion has traditionally provided the main forms of moral
codification
Invoking a higher authority, a universal order which all
humans must obey
Religion governing both personal and political behaviour
Religion and the state: from theocracy to militant atheism
Religion and society
10