Morality and Politics

Many people believe that morality and politics should go hand in hand. Like a president or leader basing his actions off of Christian principles. Niccolo Machiavelli rejected this idea and said that morality had little to do with politics. He argued that you do good when possible but evil when necessary. He abandoned morality as a basis for analyzing political activity and said that the ends justified the means. While Machiavelli said this about 500 years ago it still is a big question.

My question is Do you agree with Machiavelli in saying the ends justify the means? Can you give me an example of when the ends do justify the means in relation to politics? Or argue that moraliy and politics should go hand in hand.

 

First off, why are Christian principles necessarily moral? I think history has a few words to put up against that.

 

Morality should have absolutely nothing to do with politics. Politics should be only based on maximizing and protecting people's life, freedom, and security.

Keep in mind that morality is simply a bunch of opinions. In some religions it is highly immoral for women to show skin.

 

I took a thought at this a while ago, and decided that morality does play a bit in the role of leadership.

I guess, when it comes down to it, it's not a question of whether your leader has morals and ethics, but whether the people you're fighting have morals and ethics. You can't go into a battle with nothing but logic, when the other person is fighting with nothing but emotion. They'll always win.

However, I don't believe religion has any place in politics. That's just a masquerade for all the bible thumpers in the world. I agreed with Richard Dawkins when he said we need more atheists in office.

But, to be honest, the end does not justify the means. The end of all things is death, and how is that just?

 

Err, we're not talking about fanatical religions. If politics is not based on some sort of ethics and morality, then what you just listed (people's life, freedom, and security) will not happen.

 

Religion can't be fanatical, only people can be fanatical.

Also, absence of morals does not have to mean death and destruction. People naturally act in their own best interest. The only things that wouldn't be provided for in a political system free of morals would be public goods. So essentially you'd end up with a system much like the USA, minus the military and police force.

 

What? The USA provides public goods in the way of sewage, gas, electricity, water, money, etc.

 

Gas, electricity and water are not public goods. Money isn't even a good.

You're right about sewage though, so it would be a smelly USA without a military or police force.

 

To finish the title: Are like water and Oil.