94. Integrity is about the design of society
Integrity is essential for the proper functioning of society, because citizens have (1) a right to their own integrity, and (2) a duty to respect the integrity of others. A society should also have (3) goals that show integrity, (4) a design with integrity, and (5) sovereignty. The implications of this are that SPs (1) truly serve society, (2) promote harmony in society, and (3) engage in dialogue with society.
Integrity is not only about people, policy, decision making, and organizations. It also relates to society.
“Integrity is the lifeblood of democracy,” according to US senator Edward Kennedy.536 If integrity is of such essential importance for the proper functioning of a democracy or even society in general, what is it based on?
Politics and government is based on the idea that there are opposing interests in society and that there are different opinions on how these interests should be handled. There is nothing wrong with the existence of opposing interests and different opinions. In fact, in principle it is good that people have individual interests and opinions. This indicates that they are autonomous and authentic. Citizens standing up for who they are and what they want is one side of integrity.
At the same time society is about minimizing the way in which these opposing interests and opinions infringe on the integrity of others. Participating in society means people taking one another into account, respecting one another, and honoring one another’s integrity. This is a second aspect of integrity. People have the right to their own integrity and a duty to respect that of others.
In addition to the way people live together, integrity can also be seen at the societal level. This is a third side of integrity, the question of what constitutes a society with integrity. This is first and foremost a question of the aims of society. When does society come into its own, when is a society good, what should a society strive to achieve? Aristotle, for example, speaks of a just society, while others speak of a sustainable, committed, or peaceful society, one of hope and prosperity.537
The question of what constitutes integrity in society can also be considered from the perspective of its design. How can integrity be achieved, what would constitute such a society, and what would the design involve? The philosopher Charles de Montesquieu, for example, speaks of the trias politica, involving a split between the legislature, executive, and judiciary. This separation of powers comes from the idea of purity (preventing mixing of interests and absolute power) and harmony (if every power acts as it should, this leads to balance in government and society).538
Finally, the question of what constitutes integrity in society can be considered from the perspective of the independence of society. The Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov, for example, expressed concern as to the integrity of Syria: “We are concerned with keeping Syria in one piece, territorially integral, sovereign, independent and secular, where the rights of all groups, ethnic and others, are fully respected.”539 President Alija Izetbegović also pointed to the integrity of society when he said, “We Bosniaks would for sure fight for integrity of Bosnia.”540 Before taking office the president and ministers of Egypt swear that they will “safeguard the territorial integrity of the motherland”.541 The integrity of an area is clearly something of value, to be defended by the sword. This notion of integrity was a fundamental idea for a polis among the early Greeks. Every polis or community strives for independence and sovereignty. This side of integrity was also the main aim of the advice of Machiavelli to the monarch of the time: the restoration of the unity of Italy.542
What are the implications of these aspects of integrity for SPs?
A first implication is that a society in which SPs are separate from everyone else cannot be seen to have integrity.This situation arises, for example, when SPs are turned in on themselves and society shows great mistrust of them. It is important for SPs to realize that their positions are all about people in the end. SPs are there for people. “Politics is a people business. I like people,” as Laura Bush said as first lady.543 People are not the means but the end, as Immanuel Kant argued.544 For this reason SPs are servants of the people, not the other way around, nor servants of themselves or one another. As minister Chanakya of the Mauryan empire wrote of the king, “He shall not consider as good only that which pleases him but treat as beneficial to him whatever pleases his subjects.”545 This is why dishonest SPs are so disastrous to the authority of SPs: these so-called “sleazeballs” make a pretense of serving the people, but in reality they serve their