CDZ Moral Foundations of Politics

[georgephillip]

When do governments deserve our allegiance? Political theory attempts to answer this question and others by studying the concepts and principles used to describe, explain, and evaluate political events and institutions.

"'Moral Foundations of Politics' starts with a survey of major political theories of the Enlightenment—Utilitarianism, Marxism, and the social contract tradition—through classical formulations, historical context, and contemporary debates relating to politics today. It then turns to the rejection of Enlightenment political thinking. Lastly, it deals with the nature of, and justifications for, democratic politics, and their relations to Enlightenment and Anti-Enlightenment political thinking. Practical implications of these arguments are covered through discussion of a variety of concrete problems."

The description above stems from Yale's free online Coursera offering taught by Ian Shapiro.

Coursera

Assuming the USMB Mods have no objections, all who are interested could register and take part in this course spanning Jan 12-March 11 2015, or if that isn't possible we can all take advantage of alternative sources and look for answers to the question when do governments deserve our allegiance?

Google

 

[Moonglow]

politics from a book is one thing, politics interacting with humans is another...

 

[georgephillip]

politics from a book is one thing, politics interacting with humans is another...

What's the minimum you expect from your government before pledging your allegiance?

 

[georgephillip]

"Political theory is the categorization of social thought by a group or by the persuasion or beliefs of a geo-political mass.

"Many political theories are founded as critiques toward existing political, economic and social conditions of the theorist’s time.

"Political theory can also be considered as a critical tradition of discourse that provides a reflection on collective life, the uses of collective power, and resources within a collectivity.

"The emphasis of political theory changes over time. As you will read, there are many different elements that create the foundation for theoretical analysis towards political science.

"From Thucydides to Chomsky, from the Hellenic to Australasian, from Hitler through to Che."

Political Theory - Wikibooks open books for an open world

 

[Asclepias]

politics from a book is one thing, politics interacting with humans is another...

What's the minimum you expect from your government before pledging your allegiance?

Moral and ethical consistency in the application of all policies and a real effort to facilitate education and growth.

 

[Sonny Clark]

When do governments deserve our allegiance? Political theory attempts to answer this question and others by studying the concepts and principles used to describe, explain, and evaluate political events and institutions.

"'Moral Foundations of Politics' starts with a survey of major political theories of the Enlightenment—Utilitarianism, Marxism, and the social contract tradition—through classical formulations, historical context, and contemporary debates relating to politics today. It then turns to the rejection of Enlightenment political thinking. Lastly, it deals with the nature of, and justifications for, democratic politics, and their relations to Enlightenment and Anti-Enlightenment political thinking. Practical implications of these arguments are covered through discussion of a variety of concrete problems."

The description above stems from Yale's free online Coursera offering taught by Ian Shapiro.

Coursera

Assuming the USMB Mods have no objections, all who are interested could register and take part in this course spanning Jan 12-March 11 2015, or if that isn't possible we can all take advantage of alternative sources and look for answers to the question when do governments deserve our allegiance?

Google

Governments deserve, merit, and command our allegiance when they do their duties as appointed, and fairly, equally, and justly represents those they have agreed to serve. The problem is, governments don't do that. Governments gain power, understand their control, and act accordingly. Our own government is a prime example of power and authority gone terribly wrong. Our government, "The Washington Brotherhood", has become an entity unto itself, answerable to no one except itself. Generally speaking, governments use their power and authority for self-gain, and over time, forget what their actual duties and responsibilities are.

Any government put in place by "the people", should honor the trust and belief that's been placed in them, and carry out their sworn duties standing on moral and ethical grounds. It is difficult to respect, give allegiance, and hold in high regard, those that knowingly take unfair advantage of the trust placed in them. As a general rule, once government officials are sworn into office, they exert their will, and not the will of the people. The power soon goes to their heads, the feeling of superiority sets in, and the corruption and favoritism begins.

"Taxation without representation" quickly comes to mind when I think of government. For the most part, the words government and corruption are thought of as being married, sleeping in the same bed. Allegiance is to be earned, and not a forced obligation. Governments should command respect and allegiance by their actions, and not by the position they hold. A title doesn't make one worthy of allegiance, nor does it make one deserving of respect. We are judged by our actions, and not by name or title. The same holds true of governments.

 

[georgephillip]

Moral and ethical consistency in the application of all policies and a real effort to facilitate education and growth

"Justice as Fairness" was offered as an attempt to solve the problem of distributive justice ("the socially just distribution of goods in a society"). The ethical consistency of some western attempts at distributing goods seems suspect in my mind.
A Theory of Justice - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Asclepias]

Moral and ethical consistency in the application of all policies and a real effort to facilitate education and growth

"Justice as Fairness" was offered as an attempt to solve the problem of distributive justice ("the socially just distribution of goods in a society"). The ethical consistency of some western attempts at distributing goods seems suspect in my mind.
A Theory of Justice - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

The problem is that our government is only in it for business purposes. Ethics and morals go out the window in a capitalistic society.

 

[georgephillip]

Governments deserve, merit, and command our allegiance when they do their duties as appointed, and fairly, equally, and justly represents those they have agreed to serve. The problem is, governments don't do that. Governments gain power, understand their control, and act accordingly

Do you believe every government ever incarnated has existed to serve its richest citizens first and foremost?

 

[georgephillip]

The problem is that our government is only in it for business purposes. Ethics and morals go out the window in a capitalistic society.

Government is the shadow cast on society by big business?

 

[Sonny Clark]

Governments deserve, merit, and command our allegiance when they do their duties as appointed, and fairly, equally, and justly represents those they have agreed to serve. The problem is, governments don't do that. Governments gain power, understand their control, and act accordingly

Do you believe every government ever incarnated has existed to serve its richest citizens first and foremost?

NO --- I certainly do not believe that. I'm sure at some point in time, somewhere, there has been a government, or governments, that honored the trust placed in them. I don't recall one, but given enough time and research, I could probably find one somewhere in past history. I remember reading years ago that there was an island, a small island, that basically ruled itself. It had a chief, a leader, appointed by the people, that fairly, justly, and equally ruled. I'm sure that somewhere in history, a government actually served the people without corruption or selfish motives.

 

[Asclepias]

Governments deserve, merit, and command our allegiance when they do their duties as appointed, and fairly, equally, and justly represents those they have agreed to serve. The problem is, governments don't do that. Governments gain power, understand their control, and act accordingly

Do you believe every government ever incarnated has existed to serve its richest citizens first and foremost?

NO --- I certainly do not believe that. I'm sure at some point in time, somewhere, there has been a government, or governments, that honored the trust placed in them. I don't recall one, but given enough time and research, I could probably find one somewhere in past history. I remember reading years ago that there was an island, a small island, that basically ruled itself. It had a chief, a leader, appointed by the people, that fairly, justly, and equally ruled. I'm sure that somewhere in history, a government actually served the people without corruption or selfish motives.

There have been plenty of governments right here in North America that catered to their people. Pick a Native American nation for instance.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Supporters of Islamic terrorism such as George should be automatically disqualified from any discussion about morality.

One cannot discuss moral politics without understanding the rational basis for the very concept of morality.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Let me get this right..... a person that OPENLY supports Terrorists wants to talk about a moral Government?

 

[georgephillip]

There have been plenty of governments right here in North America that catered to their people. Pick a Native American nation for instance

Thanks. I hadn't even considered tribal governments. I suspect there were more than a few in Africa, as well during the past five thousand years. I guess the question I should have asked is whether there has ever been an empire which didn't serve its richest citizens at the expense of its majority.

 

[georgephillip]

NO --- I certainly do not believe that. I'm sure at some point in time, somewhere, there has been a government, or governments, that honored the trust placed in them. I don't recall one, but given enough time and research, I could probably find one somewhere in past history. I remember reading years ago that there was an island, a small island, that basically ruled itself. It had a chief, a leader, appointed by the people, that fairly, justly, and equally ruled. I'm sure that somewhere in history, a government actually served the people without corruption or selfish motives.

That's a good point that never occurred to me. I was thinking about Adam Smith's observation on national interest during his time and failed to consider tribal governments.
"He (Smith) also made remarks which ought to be truisms about the way states work. He pointed out that its totally senseless to talk about a nation and what we would nowadays call 'national interests.'

"He simply observed in passing, because it's so obvious, that in England, which is what he's discussing -- and it was the most democratic society of the day -- the principal architects of policy are the 'merchants and manufacturers,' and they make certain that their own interests are, in his words, 'most peculiarly attended to,' no matter what the effect on others, including the people of England who, he argued, suffered from their policies.

"He didn't have the data to prove it at the time, but he was probably right.

"This truism was, a century later, called class analysis, but you don't have to go to Marx to find it. It's very explicit in Adam Smith. It's so obvious that any ten-year-old can see it. So he didn't make a big point of it. He just mentioned it. But that's correct. If you read through his work, he's intelligent.

"He's a person who was from the Enlightenment.

"His driving motives were the assumption that people were guided by sympathy and feelings of solidarity and the need for control of their own work, much like other Enlightenment and early Romantic thinkers.

"He's part of that period, the Scottish Enlightenment."

Education is Ignorance by Noam Chomsky Excerpted from Class Warfare

 

[georgephillip]

One cannot discuss moral politics without understanding the rational basis for the very concept of morality.

The Golden Rule seems like a good starting point, and I don't mean the version that claims those with the gold make the rules, but, rather, if you don't want someone illegally invading your country to control your natural resources, don't inflict a similar occupation on others or support those who do.

 

[Dogmaphobe]

The Golden Rule seems like a good starting point, and I don't mean the version that claims those with the gold make the rules, but, rather, if you don't want someone illegally invading your country to control your natural resources, don't inflict a similar occupation on others or support those who do.

If you followed the golden rule, you wouldn't be such an extreme supporter of murder based upon ethnicity like you are.

You support terrorism, as you have made abundantly clear.

 

[georgephillip]

Let me get this right..... a person that OPENLY supports Terrorists wants to talk about a moral Government?

If morality stems from compassion, what does that say about the morals of those who participate in illegal invasions and occupations that result in mass suffering for millions of innocent civilians?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

If morality stems from compassion, what does that say about the morals of those who participate in illegal invasions and occupations that result in mass suffering for millions of innocent civilians?

The fact that you are so willing to lie in order to try to frame the situation in such a way as to justify your lust for dead Jews removes you from any possible consideration that you are moral.