Machiavelli has coined the expression 'A good end justifies every means' suggesting that a dictatorship of the GOOD can be an acceptable manner to attain a noble goal. Today we don't have this type of dictatorships in Europe. However what we have is the reversed image. We have societies conducted by the good intentions as means to attain not always appropriate or noble goals. One unwanted effect is the use of positive loaded principles against their rationale, because the implementation of rules departs from the noble pursuit, from the good moral core and operates sometimes exactly in the opposite direction, like discrimination in the name of non-discrimination, injustice in the name of justice etc. There are many straw men to blame: multiculturalism, globalisation, pluralism, social polarisation ....What is your opinion?
I want to mention that Machiavelli does not actually justify the means, but only excuses them by pointing out towards EXCEPTIONAL circumstances, almost a type of FORCE MAJEURE situation, while we do not live today under the clause of exceptional circumstances. An argument based on exceptional circumstances will be accepted only exceptionally. What happens today is based on a conception of the normal society based on rule of law, not under FORCE MAJEURE. Today it's more about who is invoking a well- settled principle, in which manner and in which context. Today everything is read against the background of a complex set of public policies. But despite the apparent well-established organisation, some gaps in the system appear and these loops and gaps can have devastating consequences for the individual. We do not know how often it happens, because not every person reacts in a visible accountable manner. A certain tension is present and in periods of change like the present one, the tensions become a bit more obvious. However the tensions are not always disclosed, explained and understood, because of often the public story is only one version of the actual state of events. The other side of the story is often untold, silent, covered. It's not only the law exercise that employs the method of verifying the legitimacy of the end, the accuracy of the remedy and its proportionality, even in daily lives we need justifications (sometimes just for ourselves).
http://books.google.se/books?id=zodHfdzHDLkC&printsec=frontcover&dq=Machiavelli&hl=en&sa=X&ei=JbFFUbvaAuKi4gS-loHABw&ved=0CCkQ6AEwADgK
The term 'intentions' must be interpreted from the perspective of public policies, not of an individual. The good intentions of a democratic state as Sweden where I live, or a democratic supranational organisation as EU is, are written in the constitution. They are well known, well established and undeniably valuable, crucial for any democracy. This is not at all questionable, I mean their good, moral character is not subject to any doubt. Therefore it's essential to distinguish between the principles and their interpretation and implementation. If some distortion happens it occurs in the implementation phase. No one doubts that the idea to respect the principle of non-discrimination relies upon a good intention.
I have a problem with the term of "intentions" - good or bad. In my experience -concerning Latin America- EVERY dictatorship claimed to have good intentions. Take for example the Argentinian dictatorship 1976-1983 under a government that understood itself to be "national revolutionary". Those guys saw themselves -and were seen by a large part of the population- as dictators in the classical sense of the word: leaders in a temporal situation of exception. They had the expressed plan to right some social wrongs and win a low-intensity-war against communist guerilla. Nevertheless, seen from the actuality, this was one of the most brutal, criminal and corrupt dictatorship in the region with lots of casualties. It created more problems than it could solve. From their perspective (you can see that nowadays, just some days ago, one of this guys had be put to trial), they just saved their motherland. From the perspective of other people, they destroyed this same motherland. So, do this good intentions make this dictatorship better or worse?
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Social Science