Abstract
While power is a secular affair these days, ethics and moral with their connection to religion seem related to what refers to activities associated with the governance of people and territories. Of course, neither of the two provides a comprehensive view of the complex notion of politics, yet both complement the concept with precious meaning. Thus, moral adds an important dimension revealing domestic politics as a set of activities prioritizing social welfare. Furthermore, the perception of governance through the prism of virtuous leaders, as done by ethics scholars, such as al-Farabi, allows people to perceive politics as a unique phenomenon that has room for ethical governance, in which fathers of the nation guide their subjects using the principle of meritocracy. Moral being used to interpret international politics clearly demonstrates that this type of politics has evolved with time possibly under the influence of moral. The codified principles of right and wrong conduct now reveal international politics as peace and defence-oriented. Without moral being used, it would be very hard to understand the modern international politics now that it has become this peaceful. The project thesis of ethics and moral utility in politics essence revelation will build on the ethical and moral interpretation of politics by philosophers like Muhammad al-Farabi, Hans Morgenthau, and Charles Beitz.
Keywords: ethics, moral, politics, welfare, domestic, international, leader
Politics as a set of activities associated with governance has its own principles, rules, and codes. Ethics and moral show that politics is far from being merely a mechanism of governance, as they reveal the ethical and moral aspects of the concept that ensure it is not as much about being the means of exerting influence and ruling a territory and a nation as ensuring social welfare and national interests in a way that will be morally acceptable. However, judging by Hans Morgenthau’s ethical model of political realism, violence may be justified if applied in the name of national interests that reminds of the old dictum “might makes right.” Moral clearly explains the domestic policy as being human-centered through welfare maintenance. Thus, without moral, it would be hard to understand domestic politics in its entirety. Moral and ethics explain domestic and international politics, reveal their specific aspects, and show the evolution of politics that influences people’s perception of the set of activities associated with governance. The way both ethics and moral view politics, whether domestic or international, influences people’s understanding of politics. The point is that both moral and ethics play a great role in allowing people to understand the essence of domestic and intentional politics, its specific aspects, and the evolution of the meaning of both categories of politics that have been anything but static over the years. The ethical and moral interpretation of politics by Muhammad al-Farabi, Hans Morgenthau, and Charles Beitz prove the presumption correct.
The concept of welfare state is believed related to moral duty. Food Stamps, Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and Medicaid are the US welfare programs designed to sustain the economically handicapped. President Reagan was the one to influence them negatively by trying to control social expenditure. These people have remained exposed for years since they do not constitute a cluster of voters that would be large enough to be beneficial to protect (Obler 1986, 213). It may be that the government develops a sense of moral duty to offer temporary support. It may be by concern for the underprivileged that governments may be motivated (OECD 2007, 63). To quote an example of recent welfare initiatives, said to have been amended in 2014, the Commodity Supplemental Food Program serves as a means to improve the health of elderly residents of 60-plus years falling under the low-income category by supplementing their daily diet with nutritious food from the US Department of Agriculture (“Food and Nutrition Service. Commodity Supplemental Food Program” 2016).
Moral manifesting itself through concern with residents helps understand domestic politics as being a mechanism of governing people that prioritizes their welfare. Social aid programs seem to show government’s concern with public welfare while Reagan’s cutbacks do not. The presence of the moral dimension in domestic politics allows concluding that the lack of welfare support testifies to the immorality of the leadership to a degree or the incompleteness of domestic politics that probably must include the moral aspect like welfare prioritization for it to be complete. Social welfare provision may be one of the key functions of domestic politics. Researchers seem to agree. Many a public finance theorist along with the majority of welfare economists claims the maximization of social welfare is a proper government function (Ferguson and Rogers 1984, 13).
Thus, social welfare as an aspect of moral helps understand the essence of domestic politics that must serve the social common wealth. Concern with social welfare in a typical American fashion may find its reflection in virtue and the concept of the democratic city as a model of domestic politics. According to researchers, virtue is an underlying element of ethics (Velasquez, Andre, Shanks, and Meyer 1988). According to al-Farabi, they who are governed by virtuous leaders are also virtuous, happy, and good people. If shaped under such leaders, a nation will be virtuous. The leaders in question do the guiding and employ people fit for specific occupations among other things. The philosopher considers the democratic city as the happiest and the most admirable city for its residents to live in. Living here is to everybody’s liking since the city brings all manners of human desires and wishes to fruition (Islam 2013, 66, 67).
Building their line of argumentation on structural distinctions between international and domestic politics, some researchers share an understanding that the political moralities of international and domestic communities do not have much in common if viewed from the qualitative perspective. If some realists are to be believed, there is enough room for moral judgements in domestic society due to typically moral and cultural values being widely shared. By contrast, in global politics showing the signs of moral and cultural pluralism prevalence, there are but few moral judgement believed possible. Following this logic, the international society is a source of limited moral, as opposed to the domestic society, in which substantive political morality is the case. As follows from the mindset of some realists, that which promotes and defends economic wellbeing of a country and its territorial security is the only morality (Amstutz 2013, 13). It seems that this stance is state-centered, with the major focus made on state safety and integrity. It seems the country embracing this moral position may do whatever it takes to ensure internal stability even though doing so could compromise international politics and its moral pillars. Back to scientific attitudes on the symbiosis of moral and politics, researchers other than realists view distinctions between international and domestic politics as exaggerated. Theirs is the view that moral values are far more important in the global society than believed by realists (Amstutz 2013, 13).
Two groups of thinkers admit the essential role of political morality in international politics. Cosmopolitans treat the individual rather than the country as the chief moral actor while communitarians are inclined to think countries to be essential moral actors in global society. A proponent of the second school, Michael Walzer provides a conspicuous place to international political morality. It is his considered opinion that states enjoy the duties and rights in the global society comparable to the ones they have in the domestic political society. To the philosopher, international political morality implies norms like the corollary right to self-defense, the right of political sovereignty, the forbiddance of aggression, the duty to settle disputes in a peaceful fashion, human rights protection, and the duty of zero intrusion in the domestic affairs of other countries. An advocate of the first schools of the cosmopolitanism, Charles Beitz designs a global morality resting upon the wellbeing and rights of individuals contesting the morality of the current political order of sovereign countries aka Westphalian (Amstutz 2013, 13). Other researchers point to him being a political philosopher focusing on human rights among other research issues (Liao and Etinson 2012, 2).
As per Beitz, the exclusion of external actors from national power institutions and territoriality are two underlying principles of the order. Determination of domestic power structures by foreign actors or the exertion of influence by them may be considered the breach of the Westphalian sovereignty (Straumann 2008, 173). The sovereignty of countries can be qualified by the moral claims of people since territorial border are morally insignificant. To all intents and purposes, human rights take priority over state sovereignty inasmuch as the rights of countries are dependent on the right of individuals (Amstutz 2013, 13). It follows from therefrom that keeping foreign actors from intervening in domestic affairs is immoral. Cosmopolitans have a somewhat boundary-sweeping philosophy while communitarians do a conservative view of statehood. Communitarians choose the stability of a larger mechanism over the wellbeing of individual smaller actors, the residents of states. The cosmopolitan interpretation of moral in international politics seems to have already allowed Russia in its latest act of aggression to intrude in the domestic affairs of Ukraine. Such position is easy to exemplify. On 27 March 2014, the UN General Assembly adopted Resolution 68/262 regarding the Territorial Integrity of Ukraine, which it did in the light of Crimea annexation. For some reason or other, 24 states were nowhere to be seen during voting. As many as 58 abstained. Around 100 UN members supported the resolution through voting while another 11 rejected, of which there was Russia (Klapsis 2015, 39). The majority of the UN member states have once again proved themselves communitarian while Russia clearly revealed itself cosmopolitan.
Hans Morgenthau stressed the relevance of international morality singling out three principal dimensions thereof (Ghosh 2013, 360). Hans Morgenthau was one of the most respected political philosophers during his lifetime (Hatcher 1990, 27). The first aspect is the protection of human life in peace. The UN Charter contains provisions as regards the use of force by countries as the League of Nations Covenant did in its time. As decreed the documents, the application of force can either be an outcomes of the collective decision of the United Nations Organization or a unilateral decision of a state for self-defence (Ghosh 2013, 360). The self-protection provision makes itself seen in the recent actions of the ongoing conflict between the Turkish Republic and the ISIL. It was when the ISIS attacked Turkish soldiers that Ankara decided to fight back in the July of 2015 authorizing US aircraft to make use of Turkish air bases to conduct aerial attacks against the extremists (Mansbach and Taylor 2016). Turkey acted in a way that showed moral plays one of central roles in the understanding of politics by the state of Turkey. If it did not, the country would have attacked the Islamic State.
The second aspects comes in the shape of protection of human life in war. In the period of war, different declarations and conventions impose moral restrictions. At some point, the international community came to realize that military conflicts conducted were between warring armies, not the entire populations. Differentiation between combatants and non-combatants became central moral and legal war-governing principles. The Geneva Conventions of 1864 later replaced by those of 1906, 1929, and 1949 along with extra protocols and The Hague Conventions regarding the Laws and Customs of War on Land of 1899 and 1907 reflect a shift towards human life protection (Ghosh 2013, 361). There is the evolution of human perception of wars, an element of the international politics, and moral gained prominence as a guiding principle modifying the human understanding of global politics that has grown more anthropogenic and humanistic.
Morgenthau has also considered ethics with regard to international politics. The political philosopher seems skeptical about the role placed by ethical discourse in international politics. He approves the moral value of the national interest as Machiavelli does. Political ethics judges actions based on their political consequences (Kamminga 2016). Boucher (1998, 141) claimed that there were no universal ethical standards by which countries ought to direct their actions. Although guided in its ultimate objective by moral considerations, such as the common good of leader’s country, the domain of politics cannot let itself be restricted by ethics of the ordinary resident (Kamminga 2016). Thus, ethics in the interpretation of the researcher allows people to understand international politics as less ethical than the life of ordinary people due to it needing to serve the common good of the nation ruled by a leader. The following is the opinion that will show ethical concessions leadership can make if only to retain that good in the face of danger.
There is an opinion that the correlation between politics and ethics at the international level may seem nonexistent, which may create an impression as though this politics were immoral. Defense against and victory over the enemy may be the only worthy directive, which is considered the practical outcome of political realism, the theory most in line with the international politics. Morgenthau is the most influential and prominent proponent of the vision suggesting that the realist state is the only state model to pursue the national interest. The application of force or armed violence does not demonstrate the innate evil of the country. Rather, it is indicative of the natural human blood lust or aggressiveness along with the deficit of the integrated international community. The political philosopher confidently rejected the comparison of political realism with immorality (Bonanate 1995, 7).
References
Amstutz, Mark R. International Ethics: Concepts, Theories, and Cases in Global Politics. 4th ed. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2013. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=trXmRYHyjIoC&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=moral+in+domestic+and+international+politics&source=bl&ots=_wsY-44r0G&sig=e5DRT9lZIBT1q89yUIaoVxOY44M&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=moral%20in%20domestic%20and%20international%20politics&f=false
Berko, Anat. The Smarter Bomb: Women and Children as Suicide Bombers. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2012. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=_1l05eqCCs8C&pg=PA29&dq=Gilad+Shalit+exchanged+for+1027+Palestinians&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Gilad%20Shalit%20exchanged%20for%201027%20Palestinians&f=false
Bonanate, Luigi. Ethics and International Politics. University of South Carolina Press, 1995. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=jVJmDC7gx14C&pg=PA6&dq=morality+in+domestic+politics&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=morality%20in%20domestic%20politics&f=false
Ferguson, Thomas, and Rogers, Joel. Eds. The Political Economy: Readings in the Politics and Economics of American Public Policy. M.E. Sharpe, 1984. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=94G2VY_lLHMC&pg=PA13&lpg=PA13&dq=the+function+of+politics+is+to+provide+social+welfare&source=bl&ots=Y3DijOs-vT&sig=TtV7icddMCghekjNmCwf0654iSk&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=the%20function%20of%20politics%20is%20to%20provide%20social%20welfare&f=false
Ghosh, Peu. International Relations. 3rd ed. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd., 2013. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=5v3ROJSG91QC&pg=PA360&lpg=PA360&dq=Three+Dimensions+of+Role+of+International+Morality:&source=bl&ots=-Dqwy2AaJp&sig=gRsUcNTJy8PDWa0M7FIgOIbEync&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Three%20Dimensions%20of%20Role%20of%20International%20Morality%3A&f=false
Hatcher, Patrick Lloyd. The Suicide of an Elite: American Internationalists and Vietnam. Stanford University Press, 1990. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=_paaAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA27&lpg=PA27&dq=philosopher+Morgenthau&source=bl&ots=W1K7nDvfRV&sig=JhwqwljXysdO53tWFIvUgS4CMAM&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=philosopher%20Morgenthau&f=false
Islam, Muhammad Rafiqul. “The Ideal State/Society of Plato and al-Farabi: A Comparative Analysis.” International Journal of Islamic Thoughts 2 (2013): 61-80. https://ru.scribd.com/doc/161626502/The-ideal-State-Society-of-Plato-and-al-Farabi-A-comparative-analysis-by-Muhammad-Rafiqul-Islam-IJIT-V-2-N-1-2013
Kamminga, Menno R., 2016. “Against the Beitzian Consensus: Why International Political Theory is not beyond Realist Skepticism.” University of Groningen: International Relations and International Organization. http://philica.com/display_article.php?article_id=538
Klapsis, Antonis. An Unholy Alliance: The European Far Right and Putin’s Russia. Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, 2015. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=va6rCQAAQBAJ&pg=PA39&dq=UN+General+Assembly,+russia+voted+against+territorial+integrity+of+Ukraine&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=UN%20General%20Assembly%2C%20russia%20voted%20against%20territorial%20integrity%20of%20Ukraine&f=false
Liao, S. Matthew, and Etinson, A. “Political and Naturalistic Conceptions of Human Rights: A False Polemic?” New York University and McGill University. (2012): 1-36. http://www.smatthewliao.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/LiaoEtinsonPoliticalAndNaturalisticConceptionsOfHumanRights.pdf
Mansbach, Richard W., and Taylor, Kirsten L. Challenges for America in the Middle East. CQ Press, 2016. Accessed May 28, 2016. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=CH_HCgAAQBAJ&pg=PT249&dq=ISIS+attacked+Turkish+military&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=ISIS%20attacked%20Turkish%20military&f=false
Obler, Jeffrey. “Moral Duty and the Welfare State.” The Western Political Quarterly 39, no. 2 (1986): 213-235. http://www.jstor.org/stable/448295?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
OECD, 2007. OECD Sustainable Development Studies Subsidy Reform and Sustainable Development Political Economy Aspects: Political Economy Aspects. OECD Publishing, 2007. https://books.google.com.ua/books?id=kanNGQLWQ7gC&pg=PA63&dq=social+welfare+is+the+moral+duty+of+politicians&hl=uk&sa=X&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=social%20welfare%20is%20the%20moral%20duty%20of%20politicians&f=false
Straumann, Benjamin. “The Peace of Westphalia as a Secular Constitution.” Constellations 15, no. 2 (2008): 173-188. http://iilj.org/aboutus/documents/Straumann.Westphalia.pdf
“Food and Nutrition Service. Commodity Supplemental Food Program.” United States Department of Agriculture. 2016. http://www.fns.usda.gov/csfp/commodity-supplemental-food-program-csfp
Velasquez, Manuel, Andre, Claire, Shanks, Thomas, and Meyer, Michael J. “Ethics and Virtue.” Markkula Center for Applied Ethics. 1988. https://www.scu.edu/ethics/ethics-resources/ethical-decision-making/ethics-and-virtue/
