Zygmunt Bauman on Responsibility, Trust, Self-Deception, and More
Despite the title of his essay "What Chance of Ethics in the Globalized
World of Consumers?" <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zygmunt_Bauman" target="”_blank”">Zygmunt Bauman</a>
has some valuable things to say that are relevant to government ethics
(the essay appears in his 2009 book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Ethics-Consumers-Institute-Sciences-Lecture/dp/06…; target="”_blank”">Does
Ethics
Have a Chance in a World of Consumers?</a> (Harvard University
Press)).<br>
<br>
<b>The Purpose of Government Ethics</b><br>
Bauman talks about the fact that the value of morality is not something
that can be proven. It does not serve a purpose. People are not
supposed to act morally in order to gain profit, financially or
spiritually. This is another reason why government ethics is not simply
being ethical in government. Government ethics has a clear purpose. It
is intended to obtain the public's trust. It is intended to increase
fairness and the appearance of fairness in a political system that
cannot work if it is not seen to be fair.<br>
<br>
<b>Public Service as Being <i>For</i></b><br>
One thing Bauman notes is the distinction of being <i>with</i>, as part of a group
for example, and being <i>for</i>, including <i>for</i> those who are not part of
our group. He believes that our selves are born when we recognize
that we exist <i>for</i> others, not merely <i>with</i> them. This distinction holds
in public service as well, and the recognition of being <i>for</i> should be
the central impetus toward dealing responsibly with our conflicts. But
this recognition has to contend with the strong feelings of being <i>with</i>,
of being part of and owing strong loyalties to those who are like us,
our colleagues in our department or agency, in our profession, in our political party, in
our local government.<br>
<br>
<b>Going Beyond the Guidelines</b><br>
Bauman also notes that our society limits our experience of being <i>for</i>
by creating requirements and prohibitions. This can be seen clearly in
government ethics, where most officials and local government attorneys
stop at the words in the ethics code, forgetting why they are there and
that they are merely minimal requirements and prohibitions. We need to
have clear guidelines, but we equally need to realize that our being
<i>for</i>, in this case obtaining the public's trust, goes beyond these
guidelines.<br>
<br>
<b>Freedom from Constraint and Responsibility</b><br>
Bauman is especially struck by the way we are caught between the poles
of freedom and responsibility. We seek freedom from constraint, and
when we feel free, we seek freedom from responsibility. In government
ethics, being responsible is the constraint, and it is a difficult
burden for many people to shoulder. In historical terms, we are more
free than we have ever been. But can anyone expect to be free from both
constraint <i>and</i> responsibility?<br>
<br>
Bauman believes that the concept of responsibility, which was formerly
part of ethical duty, has "shifted to the realm of self-fulfillment and
calculation of risks." Since self-fulfillment can run counter to the
idea of putting the public interest ahead of personal interests, this
can be a problem in government ethics. The idea of calculating risk
depends on whose risks are being calculated, although in many cases
jeopardy to public trust ends up jeopardizing the career of officials
who do not deal responsibly with their conflicts. I recently wrote <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/managing-risk-and-tracking-unethical-…
blog
post</a> arguing that government ethics can be usefully seen as a
form of managing risk. But it is the government's risk that should be
managed, even though this might also benefit the official.<br>
<br>
<b>Distrust and Government Ethics Programs</b><br>
Most serious for government ethics is Bauman's observation that "the
world today seems to be conspiring against trust." The current
transitional period in local government ethics is occurring during a
time of distrust. More local governments have ethics scandals than have
good, full-fledged ethics programs. There is more disclosure and access
to damning information, but there is not more professional ethics
guidance. And ethics training, when it exists, is still very limited.
So there is more to instill distrust than there is to instill trust in
local government officials. This makes it look like things are getting
worse when the reality is that things are getting better, only too
slowly and in far too few jurisdictions.<br>
<br>
Internally, ethical decision-making is still not a regular, openly
discussed part of very many local government organizations. And most
officials are not attuned to government ethics. They do not understand
it, and they feel it is a problem rather than a professional tool. They
are not prepared to take the big step toward earning the public's
trust. They are instead part of the movement toward distrust, which is
extremely damaging to our democratic system. It leads to anger and an
anti-government mentality that refuses to recognize that government is
the way a community acts for the community, not the way to take
something away from people. The responsible practice of government ethics is especially important during this transition period that is marked by public anger.<br>
<br>
<b>Self-Deception</b><br>
Late in the essay, Bauman discusses self-deception, and he seems to be
talking about many politicians after they have been accused of
unethical conduct. He refers to "the self-deception designed to
disguise the genuine springs of action. For instance, the individual
has too high an opinion of himself to tolerate the thought of having
acted wrongly, and so imputation of an offense by [the accuser] is
called for to deflect attention from his own misstep. We take
satisfaction in being the wronged party ... and so we must invent
wrongs to feed this self-indulgence. ... the other party ... is cast as
the true actor in the drama. The self thereby stays wholly on the
receiving side ..... [U]nmasking and discrediting the self-deception ...
emerges ... as the preliminary, indispensable condition of giving free
rein to ... the expression that manifests itself, first and foremost,
in trust...."<br>
<br>
<b>Government Ethics and Persuasion</b><br>
Finally, Bauman notes that the political and social coercion of the
past has been increasingly replaced by seduction, or persuasion. This
is an area where the government ethics world has been completely
incompetent. There are some good training programs that seek to instill
the values of government ethics, but our society as a whole has been
almost untouched by government ethics. Few people know even the basic
concepts. What they know is primarily how they feel, and much of what
they see and hear is how government ethics can be used for narrow
political purposes or to fuel scandals about government officials
acting badly, rather than irresponsibly.<br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---