19. Integrity is judged by individual identity
Integrity is not the same for every SP in the same position because it depends on individual identity.The more SPs commit to something and the more they associate with it, the more readily behavior in conflict with it will be censured.The behavior or even the character of the SP is then seen as hypocritical. To avoid this, SPs should know what commitments determine their identity and should make this visible in their behavior.
The awkward thing about integrity is that expectations and how it is judged differs from person to person. Integrity is not the same for everyone in the same position. After all, integrity depends in part on individual identity. This identity in part determines expectations of integrity by which the person is judged.
Two kinds of commitments are relevant for understanding the relationship between identity and integrity.105 There are commitments people can give up without losing identity (defeasible commitments) and commitments necessary to one’s identity (identity-conferring commitments). This second type makes people who they are. Examples include people throwing themselves into helping the weak in society or improving the environment. When we breach these commitments we are no longer the people we or others thought we were. These defining commitments therefore form a framework for integrity. We create an expectation that we will stand up for something. Behavior that cannot be reconciled with these commitments lacks integrity: it is inconsistent with our identity. In contrast to defeasible commitments, it damages our very being, the image of who we are or profess to be. As a consequence we give the impression of being less committed than suggested or assumed, and are seen as hypocritical: we profess commitment but fail to act accordingly, making it seem as if we have been selective or opportunistic. This is really no commitment at all, and the identity behind it lacks integrity.
Accusations of hypocrisy were leveled at a minister who turned out to be having an extramarital affair after years standing up for the family as the cornerstone of society, at a United Nations special envoy who had always argued for combating poverty when it emerged that she had been receiving double reimbursements for years, at a minister who campaigned to reduce differences in income while substantially boosting personal income from various jobs on the side, and at an alderman who stood up for the world’s outcasts as a socialist but who frequently visited illegal prostitutes (thereby abusing outcasts), eliciting the following newspaper quip: “A socialist should stand up for the oppressed in society. In any case he should not lie on top of them.”106
Al Gore, too, was accused of hypocrisy after having served as US vice president, when he went on to campaign fanatically against global warming. He claimed to be an enthusiastic advocate of a better environment, making this a part of his identity. He came under fire when it was discovered that he was a large-scale energy consumer in private. What he campaigned for was incongruent with his actions, thereby damaging his integrity and credibility, along with that of his message.107
The way French president François Hollande was judged for his behavior reveals the same mechanism of judgment. Hollande had promised in his election campaign to be a normal president. He put this into practice by making one of his first actions a reduction in his own salary, by travelling by train as much as possible, and by owning a modest apartment. When it emerged that his car had been travelling at 140km an hour in a 70km limit this was seen as inexcusable due to his promise. When it was revealed that he had a mistress this also weighed heavily against him because he had promised that, in contrast with his predecessors, he would behave normally and refrain from burdening the people with rumors about women.108
Things worked out differently for French socialist president François Mitterrand. When the media revealed the existence of an illegitimate daughter he responded with, “Et alors?”, so what? Even the fact that he had housed his mistress and illegitimate daughter in an official residence did not affect his position. In French society at the time it was generally acceptable for public figures to maintain extramarital relationships. This advanced their standing because it created an impression of charm, power, and the ability to conquer the hearts not only of women but also of voters in general, and political opponents.109
When it comes to integrity it is therefore important that SPs ensure their behavior is consistent with their identity-conferring commitments. SPs should also know what their identity is and how it is formed. In part that identity is shaped by the groups they belong to. For politicians, for example, it is important to establish the identifying elements of their party’s agenda and statutes and what these mean for their own behavior. It is therefore a