Res Publica

pp 1–20 | Cite as

Political Integrity and Dirty Hands: Compromise and the Ambiguities of Betrayal

Article

Abstract

The claim that democratic politics is the art of compromise is a platitude but we seem allergic to compromise in politics when it happens. This essay explores this paradox. Taking my cue from Machiavelli’s claim that there exists a rift between a morally admirable and a virtuous political life, I argue that: (1) a ‘compromising disposition’ is an ambiguous virtue—something which is politically expedient but not necessarily morally admirable; (2) whilst uncongenial to moral integrity, a ‘compromising disposition’ constitutes an essential aspect of political integrity. In so doing, I question certain moralistic assumptions which fuel contemporary vilifications of compromise—that, in theory, democratic politics should be inhospitable to compromise and that political integrity should be akin to moral integrity—and which are shared by Walzer’s Dirty Hands thesis which professes to be sensitive to the realities of politics. These assumptions displace the complex realities of politics and misconstrue the standards of political excellence; they unsatisfactorily idealize political integrity and the messy context in which democratic politicians operate—a context characterized by a plurality of incompatible traditions, each with its own values and principles. Whilst commitment to a set of principles stemming from one’s tradition or pre-election promises implies commitment to realize these, leading a virtuous political life amidst such a grubby domain often requires abandoning some of these. An innocent, all-or-nothing pursuit of one’s principles in politics might prompt political disaster or defeat: an uncompromising disposition entails the entire abandonment of any hope of realizing all of those principles.

Keywords

Compromise Political integrity Dirty hands Democratic politics Moral conflict Betrayal 

References

  1. Allen, Danielle S. 2004. Talking to strangers: Anxieties of citizenship since Brown v. Board of Education. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arendt, Hannah. 1990. On revolution. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  3. Arnsperger, Christian, and Emmanuel B. Picavet. 2004. More than modus vivendi, less than overlapping consensus: Towards a political theory of social compromise. Social Science Information 43: 167–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beerbohm, Eric. 2012. In our name: The ethics of democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bellamy, Richard. 2012. Compromise and the representation paradox: Coalition government and political integrity. Government and Opposition 47: 444–465.Google Scholar
  6. Bellamy, Richard, Markus Kornprobst, and Christine Reh. 2012. Introduction: Meeting in the middle. Government and Opposition 47: 275–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bellamy, Richard. 2010. Dirty hands and clean gloves: Liberal ideals and real politics. European Journal of Political Theory 9: 412–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Benjamin, Martin. 1990. Splitting the difference: Compromise and integrity in ethics and politics. Kansas, KS: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  9. Berlin, Isaiah. 1980. The originality of Machiavelli. In Against the current: Essays in the history of ideas, ed. Henry Hardy, 20–73. New York, NY: Viking.Google Scholar
  10. Berlin, Isaiah. 1990. The pursuit of the ideal. In The crooked timber of humanity: Chapters in the history of ideas, ed. Henry Hardy, 1–19. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
  11. Blattberg, Charles. 2013. Dirty hands. In The international encyclopaedia of ethics, ed. Hugh Lafollette. London: Wiley. http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1968686. Accessed 10 Aug 2014.
  12. Bauman, David C. 2013. Leadership and the three faces of integrity. The Leadership Quarterly 24: 414–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Blustein, Jeffrey. 1991. Care and commitment. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Boudreaux, Donald, and Dwight Lee. 1997. Politics as the art of confined compromise. Cato Journal 16: 365–381.Google Scholar
  15. Butterfield, Roger. 1946. Mr Mencken sounds off. Life Magazine 21: 45–52.Google Scholar
  16. Churchill, Winston. 1986. The second world war, vol. III. Boston, MA: Mariner Books.Google Scholar
  17. de Wijze, Stephen. 2005. Tragic remorse: The anguish of dirty hands. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7: 453–471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de Wijze, Stephen. 2009. Targeted killing: A ‘dirty hands’ analysis. Contemporary Politics 15: 305–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. de Wijze, Stephen. 2012. The challenge of a moral politics: Mendus and Coady on politics, integrity and ‘dirty hands’. Res Publica 18: 189–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Elshtain, Jean Bethke. 1995. Democracy on trial. New York, NY: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. Freeden, Michael. 2012. Interpretative realism and prescriptive realism. Journal of Political Ideologies 17: 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fumurescu, Alin. 2013. Compromise: A political and philosophical history. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Galston, William. 2010. Realism in political theory. European Journal of Political Theory 9: 385–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Goodstein, Jerry. 2000. Moral compromise and personal integrity: Exploring the ethical issues of deciding together in organizations. Business Ethics Quarterly 10: 805–819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Graetz, Michael. 2007. Tax reform unravelling. Journal of Economic Perspectives 21: 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grant, Ruth. 1997. Hypocrisy and integrity: Machiavelli, Rousseau and the ethics of politics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gray, John. 2001. Two faces of liberalism. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
  28. Gray, John. 2005. Enlightenment’s wake: Politics and culture at the close of modern age. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  29. Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. 2010. The mindsets of political compromise. Perspectives on Politics 8: 1125–1143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. 2011. Is there room for political compromise in an era of permanent campaigning? The Christian Science Monitor. http://www.csmonitor.com/Commentary/Opinion/2011/0104/Is-thereroom-for-political-compromise-in-an-era-of-permanent-campaigning. Accessed 03 Aug 2014.
  31. Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. 2012. The spirit of compromise: Why governing demands it and campaigning undermines it. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Halfon, Mark. 1990. Integrity: A philosophical inquiry. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Hall, Edward. 2013. Bernard Williams and the basic legitimation demand: A defence. Political Studies 63: 466–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hamlin, Alan, and Zofia Stemplowska. 2012. Theory, ideal theory and the theory of ideals. Political Studies Review 10: 48–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Himelfarb, Richard, and Rosanna Perotti. 2004. Principle over politics? The domestic policy of the George H. W. Bush presidency. Westport, CT: Praeger.Google Scholar
  36. Hampshire, Stuart. 1989. Innocence and experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Hampshire, Stuart. 1993. Liberalism: The new twist. The New York Review of Books 40: 43–47.Google Scholar
  38. Hampshire, Stuart. 2000. Justice is conflict. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Hollis, Martin. 1982. Dirty hands. British Journal of Political Science 12: 385–398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Honig, Bonnie. 1993. Political theory and the displacement of politics. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Horton, John. 2010. Realism, liberal moralism and a political theory of modus vivendi. European Journal of Political Theory 9: 431–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Horton, John. 2011. Why the traditional conception of toleration still matters. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14: 289–305.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Jack, Linda. 2012. Nick Clegg is in too deep. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/aug/23/nick-clegg-liberal-democrat-party. Accessed 10 Aug 2014.
  44. Laden, Anthony Simon. 2007. Reasonable deliberation, constructive power, and the struggle for recognition. In Recognition and power: Axel Honneth and the tradition of critical social theory, ed. Bert van den Brink, and David Owen, 270–281. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Luban, David. 1985. Bargaining and compromise: Recent work on negotiation and informal justice. Philosophy and Public Affairs 14: 397–416.Google Scholar
  46. Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1985. The discourses, ed. Bernard Crick. Trans. Leslie Walker. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  47. Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1998. The prince. Trans. Harvey C. Mansfield. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  48. Machiavelli, Niccolò. 1996. Discourses on Livy. Trans. Harvey C. Mansfield, and Nathan Tarcov. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  49. Margalit, Avishai. 2012. Compromise and rotten compromises. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  50. May, Larry. 1996. The socially responsive self. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  51. May, Simon Căbulea. 2011. Moral compromise, civic friendship, and political reconciliation. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14: 581–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. McFall, Lynne. 1987. Integrity. Ethics 98: 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. McLean, Iain. 2012. England does not love coalitions: The most misused political quotation in the book. Government and Opposition 47: 3–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Meehan, Mary. 1984. In things touching conscience. Human Life Review 14–26.Google Scholar
  55. Mills, Claudia. 2000. Not a mere modus vivendi: The bases of allegiance to the just state. In The idea of a political liberalism, ed. Victoria Davion, and Clark Wolf, 190–203. New York, NY: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
  56. Mullins, Kerry, and Aaron Wildavsky. 1992. The procedural presidency of George Bush. Political Science Quarterly 107: 31–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Philp, Mark. 2007. Political conduct. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  58. Pollack, Sheldon. 1991. Tax reform: The 1980’s in perspective. Tax Law Review 6: 489–536.Google Scholar
  59. Rand, Ayn. 1996. The virtue of selfishness. New York, NY: Signet.Google Scholar
  60. Santayana, George. 1926. Soliloquies in England and later soliloquies. New York, NY: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  61. Shklar, Judith N. 1989. The liberalism of fear. In Liberalism and the moral life, ed. Nancy L. Rosenblum, 21–38. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  62. Smith, John W. 1990. How headline writers read Bush’s lips. Reading Eagle. https://news.google.com/newspapers?id=sOkxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=PuUFAAAAIBAJ&pg=1182,1989963&hl=en. Accessed 10 Aug 2014.
  63. Tillyris, Demetris. 2015a. ‘Learning how not to be good’: Machiavelli and the standard dirty hands thesis. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18: 61–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Tillyris, Demetris. 2015b. The virtue of vice: A defence of hypocrisy in democratic politics, Contemporary Politics 22: 1–19. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13569775.2015.1112958#abstract.
  65. Tillyris, Demetris. 2015c. After the standard dirty hands thesis: Towards a dynamic account of dirty hands in politics, Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs10677-015-9604-6.
  66. The Mirror. 2012. Tuition fees vote: Hypocrisy and betrayal by Pinocchio Nick Clegg and his lying Lib Dems. http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tuition-fees-vote-hypocrisy-and-betrayal-268141. Accessed 10 August 2014.
  67. Valentini, Laura. 2012. Ideal vs. non-ideal theory: A conceptual map. Philosophy Compass 7: 654–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. van Parijs, Philippe. 2012. What makes a good compromise? Government and Opposition 47: 466–480.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Walzer, Michael. 1973. Political action: The problem of dirty hands. Philosophy and Public Affairs 2: 160–180.Google Scholar
  70. Walzer, Michael. 2004. Arguing about war. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  71. Wilby, Peter. 2012. By his act of betrayal, Clegg will lose his greatest reward. The Guardian. http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/dec/14/betrayal-clegg-punish-alternative-vote. Accessed 10 Aug 2014.
  72. Williams, Bernard. 2002. In the beginning was the deed: Realism and moralism in political argument. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  73. Williams, Bernard. 2006. Ethics and the limits of philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  74. Wittman, Donald. 1995. The myth of democratic failure. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  75. Zanetti, Véronique. 2011. Justice, peace and compromise. Analyse and Kritik 33: 423–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Politics and International StudiesUniversity of LeedsLeedsUK

Personalised recommendations