| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 8:34 AM
Location: D-brane
|
 Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:05 am Post subject: Moral dilemma |
  |
|
You are the leader of a political party. In your party there is a member who contributes heavily monetary wise -- call him M. But he is a jerk, and most people in your party can’t stand him, for his tactics and often for his dubious principles. OTOH, there is another member who is highly esteemed mainly because of his knowledge on the issues and the moral principles, which he holds dearly -- call him P. For a long time, M and P have been feuding, and now they have reached a breaking point.
You must decide who you will keep in your party: M, without whom, your party cannot survive financially; or P, without whom many members of your party will leave and those who stay, will stay grudgingly, constantly calling on your leadership for putting the party’s principles in jeopardy.
What say you? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
|
hillbillyatheist
Administrator
Joined: 29 Jun 2004
Posts: 15987
Local time: 8:34 AM
Location: Denver Colorado.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 10:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
keep the person who you stand with on principal.
what good is money if the party no longer is deserving of financial support?
a party that puts money and its goal of gaining power over its principals is a betrayal and such a party should die. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 8:34 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hillbillyatheist wrote: | keep the person who you stand with on principal.
what good is money if the party no longer is deserving of financial support?
a party that puts money and its goal of gaining power over its principals is a betrayal and such a party should die. |
That POV is commendable, HBA. However, in real life politics, it rarely happens. So, the next question is why? Is it possible that survival -- which is the case if you would choose M, the money guy -- trumps morality?? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FlatEarth1024
Hey, Everybody!
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 4152
Local time: 1:34 PM
Location: Dippin' my balls in it.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | Is it possible that survival -- which is the case if you would choose M, the money guy -- trumps morality?? |
Possible? It's inevitable. Survival always trumps morality. But for most people that stage only comes after all over avenues have been exhausted. So the first option would be to canvass and solicit in an effort to replace M's contributions while sticking to the qualities of P, which are probably what drew supporters to you in the first place.
In the end, you will probably be forced to choose M over P. And in the short term, you will probably glean success for the monetary power M will bring you. But the seeds of your demise will already have been planted, and as you transmogrify from "Hope For The Future" to "Greasy Scumbag Politician", you will become indistinguishable from rest of the myriad glad-handing, empty-promise mongrels in the political arena.
It's a Kobayshi Maru. You go broke with P or you lose your soul with M. You lose quick or you lose slowly.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 8:34 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 1:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| FlatEarth1024 wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | Is it possible that survival -- which is the case if you would choose M, the money guy -- trumps morality?? |
Possible? It's inevitable. Survival always trumps morality. But for most people that stage only comes after all over avenues have been exhausted. So the first option would be to canvass and solicit in an effort to replace M's contributions while sticking to the qualities of P, which are probably what drew supporters to you in the first place.
In the end, you will probably be forced to choose M over P. And in the short term, you will probably glean success for the monetary power M will bring you. But the seeds of your demise will already have been planted, and as you transmogrify from "Hope For The Future" to "Greasy Scumbag Politician", you will become indistinguishable from rest of the myriad glad-handing, empty-promise mongrels in the political arena.
It's a Kobayshi Maru. You go broke with P or you lose your soul with M. You lose quick or you lose slowly. |
So now that your pleaded so well in favor of M -- the lose slowly option, I gather -- does the grease on the "Greasy Scumbag Politician" slides off a little better? Are you willing to be more forgiving for politicians who were weak and could not resist the temption that corruption lured them in, in the first place? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FlatEarth1024
Hey, Everybody!
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 4152
Local time: 1:34 PM
Location: Dippin' my balls in it.
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 2:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| josephpalazzo wrote: | | FlatEarth1024 wrote: | | josephpalazzo wrote: | | Is it possible that survival -- which is the case if you would choose M, the money guy -- trumps morality?? |
Possible? It's inevitable. Survival always trumps morality. But for most people that stage only comes after all over avenues have been exhausted. So the first option would be to canvass and solicit in an effort to replace M's contributions while sticking to the qualities of P, which are probably what drew supporters to you in the first place.
In the end, you will probably be forced to choose M over P. And in the short term, you will probably glean success for the monetary power M will bring you. But the seeds of your demise will already have been planted, and as you transmogrify from "Hope For The Future" to "Greasy Scumbag Politician", you will become indistinguishable from rest of the myriad glad-handing, empty-promise mongrels in the political arena.
It's a Kobayshi Maru. You go broke with P or you lose your soul with M. You lose quick or you lose slowly. |
So now that your pleaded so well in favor of M -- the lose slowly option, I gather -- does the grease on the "Greasy Scumbag Politician" slides off a little better? Are you willing to be more forgiving for politicians who were weak and could not resist the temption that corruption lured them in, in the first place? |
You misunderstand. I do not plead for M whatsoever. I merely concede that choosing M is the overwhelmingly inevitable decision that most people will make given the choice of M and bankruptcy. But please do not think that I champion that choice, because I don't.
I don't believe forgiveness is a relevant issue. Like I said, the entire exercise is a Kobayashi. There is no successful outcome. One enters the game with the understanding that ultimately they will end up with the same stain as the rest of them or perish in their purity. It cannot end any other way. That doesn't mean we have to like it, its just the facts we face.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 8:34 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 06, 2008 2:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Perhaps the word "forgiveness" was a bad choice of words. Concede means an understanding of the interplay of different forces/ideas/opinions, which is often accompanied with empathy. In that case, would you revise your label, "Greasy Scumbag Politician", if not, why? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jutter
Quixotic Cloggy
Joined: 26 Jul 2003
Posts: 6674
Local time: 2:34 PM
Location: Den Helder, the Netherlands
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 7:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would think that between the two, the 'wallet' is easier to replace.
_________________
~ Let us be reasonable ~
Congratulations: you are paracorrect about the supernatural.
*"If there were nobody listening to gods anymore, there would be nothing left for us to do,...
... then to finally start listening to each other."
*As any gamer will tell you: God-mode is a cheat-code. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FlatEarth1024
Hey, Everybody!
Joined: 18 Sep 2006
Posts: 4152
Local time: 1:34 PM
Location: Dippin' my balls in it.
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jutter wrote: | | I would think that between the two, the 'wallet' is easier to replace. |
I agree from a 'moral dilemma' standpoint. From a practical standpoint, I totally disagree.
I can think of 25 people off the top of my head who could act as my moral compass. They all also happen to be piss poor. If I want to fund this endeavor, I'm going to be forced to take the money from a shylock and pay 5 points vig a week and probably sell my soul in the bargain. Finding someone who is morally upright and can contribute a couple of mil to the committee to re-elect? Good luck with that.
It ain't pretty, but its the sad and simple of how the game is played. Or do you think George Bush has been president for 8 years because he has surrounded himself with the morally upright?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
josephpalazzo
Illusion Master
Joined: 30 Aug 2006
Posts: 8036
Local time: 8:34 AM
Location: D-brane
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 07, 2008 11:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FlatEarth1024 wrote: | | Jutter wrote: | | I would think that between the two, the 'wallet' is easier to replace. |
I agree from a 'moral dilemma' standpoint. From a practical standpoint, I totally disagree.
I can think of 25 people off the top of my head who could act as my moral compass. They all also happen to be piss poor. If I want to fund this endeavor, I'm going to be forced to take the money from a shylock and pay 5 points vig a week and probably sell my soul in the bargain. Finding someone who is morally upright and can contribute a couple of mil to the committee to re-elect? Good luck with that.
It ain't pretty, but its the sad and simple of how the game is played. Or do you think George Bush has been president for 8 years because he has surrounded himself with the morally upright? |
Pssst, Bush is a born-again Christian. He has God on his side.
On a more serious note, I agree totally with your post. Morality , like religion, is for the masses. And following what is in my sig, I would add: with power, who needs to have morality, just the appearance of morality is sufficient. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Live Video and Chat Room
Freethought Videos
FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Register
