I say I don't like politics, but then I was ALL EXCITED to see this book at the library: Writing Politics: An Anthology.
(Well, liking to read about politics is different than doing politics.)
Because I like the publisher, New York Review of Books, and their Classics series, I guessed it would have great entries.
I checked it out, took it home, and immediately read the last essay:
"Personal Responsibility Under Dictatorships" by Hannah Arendt (1964, the year after her report Eichmann in Jerusalem).
You can read it online--it's only a few pages.
Upshot:
Arendt says you may get a legal pass for doing bad things under a dictatorship, but you don't get a moral pass.
Do I agree?
I should think about it more, maybe, but yes, I do.
I always thought the Catholic Church's teaching that you shouldn't choose bad things for good ends was wise.
(Arendt says that the Talmud says the same thing. The "lesser evil" is a trick.)
I mean, I’d say maybe you (we) do sorta "have to" do a lesser evil sometimes, say, the classic example:
You steal medicine for a child who needs it to stay alive;, (or, you don’t have money so you steal tampons for a friend so they don’t bleed all over)…
but that doesn't make it (stealing) morally right.
If we do such things, and we may, and for very compelling good reasons,
we still have to live with the wound to our moral conscience.
The right thing to do may be a bad thing, which doesn’t mean it’s not a bad thing.
Not said in this essay of Arendt, but this is one of the main reasons it's good to work to create healthy societies—so people (we) don't have to make such bad trade-offs.
Free menstrual supplies for all! (see post below)
No comments:
Post a Comment