One of the benefits of exploring hypothetical situations it
that it can highlight through a devil's advocate approach some areas where
improvement can occur. In our running example, there was a default in justice
and intentionally few to no backstops due to presence of hate and corruption. People
connected by employment and social networks to a few officials (not
representing all or the majority) were able to misuse institutions in order to
enrich themselves. Targeted group behaviors revealed a network of corruption
that ran unchecked for years creating numerous victims that could have been
protected/avoided.
What makes this example so interesting is that despite the
harm, the open awareness of such corruption, and community understanding of clan-like
preferences there were no backstops in local courts nor was there much attempt to do the right
thing (closed system). Investigations into friend/clan networks were blocked while investigations
into whistleblowers were opened. Instead of standing for certain values shared
by all of society there was a willful choice to not only reward the people who
caused the problem but also ensure that victims had no recourse (open and implied threats of violence common).
Some of the behaviors were based on financial incentives,
some in hate, but all related to social corruption where people made choices,
knew about and intentionally undermined trust in our institutions. Numerous
signs were brought forward but each was eventually ignored and the local system
continued forward running against those values that people (and generations before) hold to be sacred.
Freedom of religion, freedom of speech, human/civil rights, and even the Constitution
were not of particular value to some decision makers.
(We have seen these things during the dark side of human
nature such as courts being used in the deep south to extract wealth, oversees
where ethnic cleansings are normalized, when discussing certain religious
minorities, eradication of tribal/minority populations, etc. People who look back on these
things are horrified at human choice. All of those incidents started with
certain undermining of societal values, scapegoating, and moral bankruptcy.
People may have known it was wrong but due to pressures did it
anyway!)
Patriotism and societal values were not seen through merit
or loyalty but through the lens of hate and the open acceptance of corruption.
That same lens also allowed for major crimes that ranged to sexual exploitation
of underage females (allegedly eventually committing suicide) all the way over to
secret "hit lists" for widespread targeting’s. Open knowledge of such
misuse of authority was not a deterrent and the risks to the community due to
the poor values of some decision makers led to even more harm against other
victims (...negligence on official complaints that were brought forward to help the community).
In these instances, people must make choices. Protect the
community from unchecked hate and corruption that has caused so much chaos or
risk serious physical, social, and human/civil rights violations. The community stood up where some officials could not. Those who swore
loyalty to a higher cause continued to stand for their principles, protect
people and encourage adaptations to the closed system to bring it back in
line (It is not about jail time it is about institutional integrity and values). Trust declines and perpetrators are rewarded. It limps along because of
the lack of moral conscious of some decision makers. Ones beliefs in our social
contracts are highly dependent not on the meaning of the words but on what
position one holds, what religion they follow, their skin color, their politics, and who is friends
with whom.
Public Service Motivation and Willingness to Report Unethical Behaviors
*This is a hypothetical philosophical thought experiment so take with a grain of salt. It is meant to discuss certain topics so feel free to have a different opinion.
