Separating Character from Actions?

Can the situation of contributing to the social acceptance of "socialist government" be removed from any consideration for the character of the individual espousing it? 

As a student of history and practitioner of military arts the emphatic answer to “Can the situation alone ever provide the singular grounds for the action of the leader absent any consideration for the character of the individual?” is NO. The character of the individual will always dictate the outcome of any leadership decision - for good or for ill. The officer pictured is a volunteer, actually a reservist, and the majority of his unit was also reservists from the same town (Watts, 2014). The “situation” here is a context of this officer’s own creation and thus cannot be judged as one that he happened to find himself in and behaving against his own nature. According to historians and testimony, these units had high levels of morale and recruits interested in joining in order to participate in these activities (Watts, 2014). The injustices and petty violence began small in the German nation and then when it became socially acceptable or even encouraged the violence against those deemed “enemies of the state” became wholesale. Social context and peer "pressure" or peer acceptance has a great deal of power...power to turn entire nations into socialists whose sole purpose is to reap benefit from the suffering of those they believe they can control or exterminate if control is not possible...simply pay attention to what is happening this very hour in Venezuela (Janetsky, 2019).

In the late 1930s and early 40s in Germany, children and youth were separated from their parents and educated to behave in atrocious manner (hate crimes today) towards those Hitler labeled as evil: Jews, homosexuals, ethnically mixed. During and for many years after the war, good “Christians” of Germany claimed to have been totally ignorant of the atrocities when instead they were actually implicit through inaction. Those who did speak out were singled out by the Brown Shirts for punishment or also sent to extermination camps. When the allies first came upon these camps as the war drew to a close, the Soviet military members raped the women prisoners (very likely because they treated their own prisoners in like manner) and yet when the American military came in they were horrified and secured and cared for them (Ten Boom, Sherrill & Sherrill, 2006). To me this speaks to the “character” of not just the individuals who made up the different militaries but to the “national character” that had been developed over time.  A national character where the individual members are educated on what behavior is acceptable or even encouraged.

The American military has gone to extensive lengths to inculcate specific character values throughout its training and educational programs. Officers swear fealty not to an individual or to the country but to the Constitution and the values it expresses. American officers are taught to question unethical or immoral orders and our codes are based in the concept of “rule of law”. For example when ordered to shoot a woman and child prisoner in the head we have the legal right to refuse that order. During Vietnam, LT William Calley ordered his soldiers to take the lives of a village and was subsequently court-martialed and punished (Calley, 1971). Very recently a Coast Guard officer with ties to White Nationalism was arrested and charged for planning mass murder (Stanglin & Lam, 2019). Nidal Hassan took 13 lives while serving as an active duty Army Officer, apparently with no remorse (Ferran & Meek, 2018) but is now serving time as a murderer.

A psychological component must not be overlooked and those are the foundational concepts and theories of power and affiliation. Several (now considered unethical) experiments tested these theories and found that people were willing to follow the directions from those considered in authority (the electric shock to strangers experiment [Noel, 2014], using prisoners for malaria experiments [Harcourt, 2011]), and that “good” people put in positions of unlimited authority over others will sometimes use that power to harm others or make decisions without questioning the harm it will cause to others (the Stanford Prison Experiment [Palazzo, Krings, & Hoffrage, 2012]). “Situationism places the locus of control largely outside the individual. It notes the power of organizational culture and climate.” (Reed, 2012). The currently accepted Army value and concept of “loyalty” is one that has been recently challenged as a negative influence and very likely plays into the affiliation theory and perhaps even into this “new psychololgy” of leadership (Haslam, Reicher, & Platow, 2011), where the group members are more loyal to themselves and to their peers than to authority or to concepts/values we as humans have determined to be ethical and moral.

The concept of character as an indivisible component of an individual can be traced back to the Aristotle (Palazzo, Krings, & Hoffrage, 2012; Reed, 2012) who taught that if one practiced good character behaviors it could be inculcated into one’s behavior. Character can be taught- for good or for ill. I have experienced it and have had a hand in mentoring others into making better judgments. In college I was mentored by the head bartender on how to skim tips, encouraged to do so by everyone working at the bar...a "culture" of wrongdoing had been created that PUNISHED those who did not follow suit in bad behavior....I fell for it for a time at age 19 because I desperately needed the job and wanted peer acceptance, yet hit a point quickly where my conscience forced me to stop. I was then treated like an "outsider" and "betrayer" in the workplace because I refused to participate in CRIMINAL behavior. I have had the privilege of working with young soldiers and cadets and helping them to learn to listen to their own conscience instead of following group behaviors or being influenced by situational context over one’s knowledge of right and wrong.  

Situationism is never the sole basis for leadership behavior but instead an academic and research construct for trying to understand complex human decision making. Decision making can never be removed from the situation yet the decision made (if it is to be ethical) must be made by men and women of good character and never against one’s individual conscience. The highest measure of any decision must be weighed against all aspects of the potential harm it will cause other people: physical, psychological, spiritual, and emotional. One must then consider the potential harm it could cause the organization. The next level must be weighed against the potential consequences of the decision. The next level against potential harm to the environment, animals, etc. Then the final and least important layer is to determine the potential risk to one’s own influence, reputation, and ability to affect change after the decision is made. 

Finally, looking at the photo struck me as tantamount to the not so distant past images on the news of ISIS leaders directing and participating in (gleefully I might add) wholesale slaughter of women and children standing in large graves in the sand. Now we have Venezuelan National guardsmen firing on people trying to HELP stop suffering and starvation. These too, like many of the Nazi party, are volunteers and participants welcoming the opportunity to be a part of something larger than themselves-willing to see those they slaughter and mutilate not as fellow humans but as insects and “cancers” to be killed. 

The news is filled with democratic party contenders who openly espouse socialist policies for this nation...when honest discourse is not possible physical violence is resorted to to "shut up" any opposition (Andone & Moon, 2019: Krayden, 2019: Zaimov, 2018). The context is of their own making, their character determines and is defined by their actions. Socialism is a FAILED CONCEPT, historically and recently and those nations that experimented did (or continue to experiment with it, do) so on the dead bodies of their own people...anyone that could not be controlled or were inconvienient (like babies or homeless children).

No one is immune from the desire to be accepted or honored or respected..but character-Good character...cannot be separated from the actions of the individual. One CANNOT espouse socialism and still be a person of "good" character. Those two concepts have never and will never run parallel much less congruently.

NOTE: This article is purely an expression of the author's research and analysis and does not reflect upon any organization or affiliation.

References

Andone, D.& Moon, S. (2019). Conservative activist allegedly attacked on UC Berkeley campus. CNN Website. Retrieved from https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/22/us/conservative-activist-assault-uc-berkeley/index.html {love the "allegedly" when the photo shows "definitvely"}

Ferran, L. & Meek, J.G. (2018). US Army officer-turned-terrorist thought Fort Hood attack would save mother's soul, letters show. ABC News Website. Retrieved from https://abcnews.go.com/US/us-army-officer-turned-terrorist-thought-attack-save/story?id=58585738

Harcourt, B. E. (2011). Making willing bodies: The university of chicago human experiments at stateville penitentiary. Social Research, 78(2), 443-478,687. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/909058982?accountid=11662

Janetsky, M. (2019). National Guard fires tear gas amid Venezuela border tension. USA Today website. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/02/23/venezuela-border-soldiers-unleash-tear-gas-over-humanitarian-aid/2962205002/

Krayden, D. (2019). Report: Video catches man beating a Christian bloody outside abortion clinic. The Daily Caller website. Retrieved from https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/17/video-pro-life-advocate-attacked-abortion-clinic-report/

Last statement of Lt. William Calley to his court martial. (2017). Last Statement of Lt. William Calley to His Court Martial, 206. Retrieved from https://lib-proxy.jsu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f5h&AN=21213161&site=eds-live

Noel, C. Z. J., & Hathorn, L. G. (2014). Teaching ethics makes a difference. Journal of Academic and Business Ethics, 8, 1-31. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1554602857?accountid=11662

Palazzo, G., Krings, F., & Hoffrage, U. (2012). Ethical blindness. Journal of Business Ethics, 109(3), 323-338. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10551-011-1130-4

Reed, G. E. (2012). Character vs. situational imperatives as the primary driver of unethical conduct: Implications for the study of leadership. Journal of Leadership, Accountability and Ethics, 9(4), 21-29. Retrieved from https://search.proquest.com/docview/1450019451?accountid=11662

Smith, A. (2014). Wrestling with and ethical decision making model. unpublished.

Smith, A. (2015). Character versus situation. unpublished.

Stanglin, D. & Lam K. (2019). Federal judge orders Coast Guard officer linked to alleged terror plot held for 14 days. USA Today Website. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2019/02/21/coast-guard-officer-white-nationalist-terror-attack/2940774002/

Ten Boom, C., Sherrill, E. & Sherrill, J. (2006).  The hiding place. Chosen Books, Grand Rapids, MI.

Watts, R. (2014). Personal discussion.

Zaimov, S. (2018). 65-Y-O Pro-Life Activist Punched in Face, Beaten While Praying at Planned Parenthood Abortion Clinic. The Christian Post Website. Retrieved from https://www.christianpost.com/news/65-year-old-pro-life-activist-punched-face-beaten-praying-planned-parenthood-abortion-clinic.html