The Servant of the People: On the Power of Integrity in Politics and Government by Muel Kaptein - HTML preview

Notes

(Endnotes)

1      B. Obama (2008), The Audacity of Hope. Edinburgh: Canongate, page 103. Speaking of his colleagues in the Senate, he added on page 104, “Even when talking to those colleagues with whom I most deeply disagreed, I was usually struck by their basic sincerity.”

2      B. Clinton (2004), My Life, London: Cornerstone, page 956.

3      Lindsay was mayor of New York. See: http://news.yahoo.com/political-confessions--a-mistake-to-admit-mistakes-.html.

4      Cited in: J. Monasch (2002), De Strijd om de Macht: Politieke campagnes, idealen en intriges, (The Battle for Power: Political campaigns, ideals and intrigues), Amsterdam: Prometheus, page 343. See also A. Rawnsley’s (2000) book with a similar title, Servants of the People: The inside story of New Labour, London: Penguin Books.

5      See: http://www.constitution.ru/en/10003000-05.htm.

6      Servants of the people are those who, whether paid or unpaid, hold office in politics, (semi-)government, or the public sector.

7      Applying a common definition of power, as presented for instance in A. Heywood (2007), Politics, Hampshire: Palgrave.

8      Aristotle (2000), Politics, translated by B. Jowett, New York: Dover.

9      The title of this book, The Servant of the People, is at odds with The Prince, the title of the much-read book on politics and government written by the Italian Niccolò Machiavelli between 1513 and 1515. Where Machiavelli advises monarchs to sacrifice integrity to acquire power, this book recommends the opposite, that SPs act with integrity in order to obtain power, and that greater power requires greater integrity. Advice to the monarch in Machiavelli’s time, 500 years ago, cannot be seen as directly applicable today. Societies in general have become more democratic, bringing more participation by citizens  and taking power from government; social and moral values have changed, leading to higher expectations of SPs; and societies have become more transparent (partly due to the role of the media), making SPs’ behavior more visible, so that they cannot afford as many mistakes. Machiavelli wrote his book in a time when war and schism were issues of the day, a unique situation, meaning that his advice cannot be applied to situations of peace and unity. Furthermore, Machiavelli does not state that a monarch should be self-serving. It is therefore erroneous to think that it is Machiavellian to abuse power for the sake of self- interest. See N. Machiavelli (1992), The Prince. New York: Dover Publications Inc..

10    Integrity is a rich, multifaceted concept. This multifaceted nature should therefore be left intact as far as possible in this book. This may not always make the presentation of this book as clear or convenient as it would otherwise be, but this is preferable to oversimplification, which would fail to convey integrity properly. Integrity is a legal, social, moral, philosophical and psychological concept, so this book examines the approaches corresponding to these disciplines. Furthermore, integrity is presented as both a positive and a normative concept (see part X in particular). This book focuses on the integrity of the SP as an official. For this reason integrity is primarily placed at the level of the individual. In this book, however, and particularly in part XV, other levels are also discussed, including those of the organization and society.

11    See http://www.todayonline.com/singapore/good-politics-about-integrity-prime-ministers-office.

12    D.M. Cox and M.P. Levine, (2003). Integrity and the Fragile Self, Hants: Ashgate, page 103.

13    See for instance http://www.charnwood.gov.uk/pages/theroleofthemayor.

14    See, for example, Martin Hollis who claims, “This difference between private and public persons could be expressed by saying that private individuals acquire new moral duties with office, but it is clearer to say that office holders have moral duties which private persons do not.” This quote is taken from S. Mendus (2009), Politics and Morality, Cambridge: Polity Press, page 43.

15    That is why professional integrity is somewhat different from personal integrity. Note, though, that the difference does not necessarily mean that they are in conflict.

16    These questions are also important for determining why someone aspires to or takes on a particular job. Ted Kennedy’s aspirations to become president of America took a fatal turn when a journalist asked him why he wanted to become president and he could not come up with a convincing answer. Mike Bloomberg had <