Summer Reading: The Righteous Mind V: Relationships in a WEIRD Culture
You may not have realized it, but if you are reading this, you are
most likely WEIRD, that is, a member of a culture that is Western,
educated, industrialized, rich, and democratic. The features of WEIRDness
can be summed up in the following sentence from Jonathan Haidt's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Righteous-Mind-Divided-Politics-Religion/dp/03073…; target="”_blank”"><i>The
Righteous Mind</a></i>: <i>Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and
Religion</i> (Pantheon, 2012): "The WEIRDer you are, the more you
see a world full of separate objects, rather than relationships."<br>
<br>
This sentence lit up a lot of bulbs for me. It explained why
government ethics, which is (or, at least, should be) all about relationships and the
obligations they create, is so difficult for WEIRDos to understand.
It's not that we don't have relationships and that we don't
recognize that relationships lead to obligations. It's that we don't
have much of a vocabulary for relationships, while we have a strong
vocabulary for individual rights, including the right to engage in
business with whomever we please and the right of our spouses,
partners, and clients to do the same. Rights and freedom are central
to our concepts of both government and the market. But rights and
freedom say nothing about relationships.<br>
<br>
In non-WEIRD cultures, there is a strong vocabulary for
relationships and obligations. The problem isn't recognizing
conflicts among one's obligations, it is determining which ones to
give precedence to. Family, business, tribe, and religion usually
win out over government obligations. In fact, government jobs and
contracts are usually given on the basis of family, business,
and tribal ties. Having a strong relationship-oriented vocabulary does not mean that people will embrace government ethics. But they will understand it better.<br>
<br>
In a WEIRD culture such as the U.S., government jobs and contracts
too often are given on the same basis, but the obligations and
conflicts among them are not recognized. It's just the way business
is done. It's the bounty of success. You make it and you help those
who have helped you. You've been given the job or elected to the office, and it's up to you to make the big decisions.<br>
<br>
In a WEIRD culture, the beneficiaries of government actions are often
members of officials' family, business associates, or members of
their ethnic or racial group, but many of them are not. It's more of
an individual thing, with individual relationships more important
than group relationships (except for political party).<br>
<br>
The effect being WEIRD has can be seen in <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/dealing-potential-conflicts-involved-…; target="”_blank”">the
way Robert Spagnoletti reacted to talk of his conflicts</a> after
he was nominated by the D.C. mayor to be chair of the city's new
ethics board. He dealt with each conflict as an isolated incident
rather than presenting himself as an individual with many
relationships with officials, present, past, and
future. In his testimony before a council committee, he said, "I
would recuse myself from Board consideration of any matter involving
the specific government employee or official with whom the firm is
negotiating or requesting relief." This isolates each conflict
situation in terms of person and time.<br>
<br>
But that's not really how conflicts work, because they are based on
relationships, and relationships are ongoing series of contacts and
mutual favors, direct and indirect. Negotiations with an assistant
agency director will affect one's relationship with the director and
with others in the agency. An ethics proceeding, and even an
advisory opinion, will affect one's relationship with the official
who is the respondent, or who requests the advice, as well as others
in the agency. A matter handled by one's partner or associate also
affects one's relationship with the officials involved in the
matter.<br>
<br>
Every individual sits in the midst of a web of relationships, where
direct and indirect, past, present, and future, all matter equally.
And this is the way even WEIRD people view the world (even without the vocabulary) and how they determine
whether government officials are using their offices to help
themselves and those with whom they have special relationships.<br>
<br>
It isn't important how one man views conflicts of interest. What is
important is that the council, the city's attorney general, and the press accepted this view. They
did not insist that relationships must be discussed instead of
isolated conflicts. And my statements about this did not matter in
the least. Everyone involved was just too WEIRD.<br>
<br>
Continue with <a href="http://www.cityethics.org/content/summer-reading-righteous-mind-vi-fair… next post on this book.</a><br>
<br>
Robert Wechsler<br>
Director of Research-Retired, City Ethics<br>
<br>
---