Ethical citizen

Rafał Stybliński

Ethics in democracy and politics is undoubtedly important because it is ethical (or not) individuals who make laws or elect their representatives. In this post, I would like to address the moral ideals that should be present in civil society, as well as ways to promote and develop them. The main such method is to include direct democracy, which is an extension or even an alternative to the parliamentary democracy present in our country.

Here I would like to briefly refer to the Scottish Enlightenment, a period in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries characterized by an explosion of intellectual and scientific achievement. ^[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Enlightenment Key thinkers included David Hume and Adam Smith. ^[2]https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epoka_georgia%C5%84ska#Szkockie_o%C5%9Bwiecenie

In her work “Ethical Citizen” Maria Magoska from Jagiellonian University also refers to the validity of the teachings of the Scottish moralists. ^[3]“Etyczny obywatel warunkiem rozwoju społeczeństwa obywatelskiego w Polsce – aktualność nauk szkockich moralistów” w “Close to citizens: Wyzwania dla polskiej demokracji w … Continue reading She describes not only their teachings, but also points to transformations in Poland, concepts of civil society, and the history of Greece and Rome.

She begins by stating that the changes that began in 1989 in Poland did not decisively contribute to the development and dissemination of civic virtues. She points out that civil society paradoxically developed when the individual became more important. You can see the contrast here with the collectivist approach in countries like Singapore, which I mentioned in earlier posts.

Among the three main contemporary concepts of civil society, the author mentions the axiological current: “Civil society in this view means adherence to certain values – tolerance, pluralism, trust, rule of law, secularism in public life, collective solidarity”.

She also refers to the Greek polis and Roman civitas, which produced a model citizen with a high moral standard and a strong sense of duty to the state.

Recalling the teachings of the Scottish moralists, she notes that the Scottish Enlightenment was a watershed period because it was then that the modern concept of civil society was born. The foundation of society was then embedded in the morality of individuals.

The author writes: “Thus, for a society to function well, citizens must possess moral values and be active. Adam Smith treats common benevolence as a social feeling (Smith 1989: 53). Typical of the Scottish Enlightenment is the understanding of civil society as a sphere of reciprocity, exchange and recognition between individuals (Smith 1989: 126). […] The key word is sympathy as a fundamental emotion linked to sensitivity and benevolence towards other persons”.

Despite a certain naïve psychologism, the works of the Scottish moralists contain an important and timely message: “The citizen must always maintain a critical attitude toward the state; they must not trust institutions or the law unreservedly”.

Thus, we see that the development of civic virtue is a necessary factor for the proper functioning of democracy. Examples can be found from ancient Greece and Rome, through the Scottish Enlightenment, to the present day. The role of the individual is extremely important, and collective solidarity is also necessary. The final statement about remaining critical of the state is crucial.

I’d like to expand on this topic a bit because it’s not just ethical individuals and societies that are important. The form of governance is also important. In most democratic countries, including Poland, indirect democracy, or representative democracy, is used. This means that decisions are made by elected representatives of society. ^[4]https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demokracja_po%C5%9Brednia

Such a system has its advantages. On the one hand, citizens are involved in democratic life because they can vote in general elections by nominating their candidates. Also, its use is simpler than direct democracy, as the less frequent holding of elections and subsequent lawmaking by a relatively small group of politicians sitting in the Sejm and Senate, compared to millions of citizens, is easier to manage.

This model of democracy has been and is being used for a long time, but in my opinion it no longer has a raison d’être in its current form today. Organizational issues can be solved by using the widely present technology such as the Internet. Power should be given back to the people because representative democracy leads to many pathologies and ethics goes down the drain.

The existence of political parties requires many settlements and compromises. Participants in political parties do not have completely equal views, but they must present a common position as a party in order to be effective. This means the risk of an individual not fully following his or her own conscience or views. Voting by the general public in a direct democracy for specific bills of rights can solve this imperfection.

The bigger problem, however, is the way they come to power. Politicians, in order to be elected by the people, make many empty promises, which later are not accounted for. If they don’t fulfill their promises, they make more promises, and the earlier ones are often not accounted for.

Also, the way of discussing political issues often refers not to draft legislation, but rather to attacking opponents or referring to the numerous scandals in which they are involved. In this situation, substantive discussion is replaced by arguments ad personam.

Pointing to the moral ideals in civil society, which Maria Magoska has described very well, and the significant problems of representative democracy that contradict these ideals, one must consider an alternative form of government. The reader may notice in my text a multitude of references to direct democracy as an alternative. Together with members of Future Democracy, I believe that this form of government should be promoted as a remedy for the pathologies of the current system.

Our goal is a peaceful transformation that will address the problems that exist today and result in a much more widespread use of democratic instruments that restore the citizen to his or her rightful place in society. We want to achieve this by promoting direct democracy, with technocracy (government by experts) and the application of technological advances (e-democracy) as supporting elements.